Social Science and the Evidence-based Policy Movement

2002 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 215-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ken Young ◽  
Deborah Ashby ◽  
Annette Boaz ◽  
Lesley Grayson
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Gold Standard ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Policy Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Policy Debate ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Effective Contribution

There is a growing interest in ‘evidence-based policy making’ in the UK. However, there remains some confusion about what evidence-based policy making actually means. This paper outlines some of the models used to understand how evidence is thought to shape or inform policy in order to explore the assumptions underlying ‘evidence-based policy making.’ By way of example, it considers the process of evidence seeking and in particular the systematic review as a presumed ‘gold standard’ of the EBP movement. It highlights some of the opportunities and challenges represented in this approach for policy research. The final part of the paper outlines some questions of capacity that need to be addressed if the social sciences are to make a more effective contribution to policy debate in Britain.

Can Complexity Move UK Policy beyond ‘Evidence-Based Policy Making’ and the ‘Audit Culture’? Applying a ‘Complexity Cascade’ to Education and Health Policy

2011 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Geyer
Keyword(s):  
Health Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Policy Response ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Visual Metaphor ◽  
Negative Effects ◽  
Audit Culture ◽  
Education And Health ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
The Uk

For much of the twentieth century UK public policy has been based on a strong centralist, rationalist and managerialist framework. This orientation was significantly amplified by New Labour in the 1990s and 2000s, leading to the development of ‘evidence-based policy making’ (EBPM) and the ‘audit culture’ – a trend that looks set to continue under the current government. Substantial criticisms have been raised against the targeting/audit strategies of the audit culture and other forms of EBPM, particularly in complex policy areas. This article accepts these criticisms and argues that in order to move beyond these problems one must not only look at the basic foundation of policy strategies, but also develop practical alternatives to those strategies. To that end, the article examines one of the most basic and common tools of the targeting/audit culture, the aggregate linear X-Y graph, and shows that when it has been applied to UK education policy, it leads to: (1) an extrapolation tendency; (2) a fluctuating ‘crisis–success' policy response process; and (3) an intensifying targeting/auditing trend. To move beyond these problems, one needs a visual metaphor which combines an ability to see the direction of policy travel with an aspect of continual openness that undermines the extrapolation tendency, crisis–success policy response and targeting/auditing trend. Using a general complexity approach, and building on the work of Geyer and Rihani, this article will attempt to show that a ‘complexity cascade’ tool can be used to overcome these weaknesses and avoid their negative effects in both education and health policy in the UK.

scholarly journals The new evidence-based policy: public participation between ‘hard evidence’ and democracy in practice

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-227
Author(s):  
Helen Pallett
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Science Policy ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Ethnographic Study ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Advantages And Disadvantages ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
Hard Evidence ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Uk

Background:Debates about evidence-based policy (EBP) were revived in the UK in the 2010s in the context of civil service reform and changing practices of policy making, including institutionalisation of public participation in science policy making. Aims and objectives:This paper aims to explore this revival of interest in EBP in the context of the Government-funded public participation programme Sciencewise, which supports and promotes public dialogues in science policy making. It is based on in-depth ethnographic study of the programme during 2013, considering the impacts on Sciencewise practices and working understandings of engaging in the EBP debate. There is a particular focus on the advantages and disadvantages of categorising public participation as a source of evidence-based policy as opposed to presenting participation as a democratic act which is separate from discussions of EBP. Key conclusions:At different times Sciencewise actors moved between these stances in order to gain credibility and attention for their work, and to situate the outcomes of public participation processes in a broader policy context. In some instances the presentation of outputs from public participation processes as legitimate evidence for policy gave them greater influence and enriched broader discussions about the meaning and practice of open policy. However, it also frequently led to their dismissal on methodological grounds, inhibiting serious engagement with their outputs and challenging internal frameworks for evaluation and learning.

Introduction: Themed Section on Evidence-Based Policy as a concept for Modernising Governance and Social Science Research

2002 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 213-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miriam E David
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Social Science Research ◽  
Science Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Political Systems ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
The Social ◽  
Technological Developments

The concept of evidence-based policy and practice has many origins but its relation to the growth of the social sciences is arguably the most important. The uses of the social sciences for both understanding and transforming social policies and political systems has come to be assumed – complex and problematic though these may be. The concept is also closely linked with the concepts of globalisation, technological developments, and the ‘knowledge economy’. Thus the notions of ‘evidence’ and social science research have often been elided with political movements for social and economic change. In other contexts, these notions have been contextualised, so that ‘evidence’ and research are not deemed to be the same. Indeed, it is possible to argue that the notion of legal ‘evidence’ illustrates just how ideological it can be, how it can be used to marshal particular arguments and sustain a specific case rather than present it in a dispassionate manner.

Evidence-based policy making and social science

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerry Stoker ◽  
Mark Evans
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Social Science ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Science And Policy ◽  
Best Friends ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Will

This chapter looks at the tensions between the making of public policy and the offering of evidence from social science. Social science and policymaking are not natural ‘best’ friends. Policymakers express frustration that social science often appears to have little of relevance to say and social scientists will regularly complain that policymakers are not interested in using their evidence. Yet the two groups appear, almost against the will of the participants in them, to be thrown together. Policymakers are told to evidence their policies and social scientists are urged to step up to provide that evidence. The aim of this chapter is to help improve that situation by identifying some of the main blockages on either side of the social science and policy making fence and see how they can be addressed.

scholarly journals Use of evidence in policy making in South Africa: An exploratory study of attitudes of senior government officials

2015 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gemma Paine Cronin ◽  
Mastoera Sadan
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Policy Development ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Policy Cycle ◽  
Government Officials ◽  
Evidence Use ◽  
High Resource ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
The Uk

This paper outlines a 2011 study commissioned by the Presidency’s Programme to Support Pro-Poor Policy Development (PSPPD) which promotes evidence-based policy making (EBPM) in South Africa. EBPM refers to norms, initiatives and methods aimed at improving evidence-based policy in countries from which South Africa traditionally borrows public service reforms, particularly the UK and Canada. The study provides a descriptive snapshot of attitudes to evidence-use in policy making. All 54 senior government officials interviewed felt that evidence-use is too limited to ensure relevant, effective policy responses. This includes policies on which complex results depend and those with long-term and high-resource implications. Although all respondents regarded EBPM as self-evidently desirable, there were different views on practical application. Examples provided suggest that, where evidence was used, it was very often related to a borrowed international policy without a prior evidencedrivenanalysis of successes and failures or its relevance and feasibility in terms of local issuesand context. Policy makers generally know they should be making optimal use of availableevidence, but highlighted systemic barriers beyond the influence of individual managersto resolve. The study suggests that improved use of evidence throughout the policy cycle,particularly in analysing problems and needs, is a requirement for learning through evidencebased policy development. It suggests that political and administrative leadership will need to agree on norms, ways of dealing with the barriers to effective use of evidence and on the role of each throughout the policy cycle in ensuring appropriate evidence is available and used.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document