Global problems and global science

2005 ◽  
Vol 59 (1) ◽  
pp. 99-119
Author(s):  
Robert M. May
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
Embryonic Stem ◽  
Spongiform Encephalopathy ◽  
Science And Society ◽  
Global Science ◽  
Gm Foods ◽  
Science Advice ◽  
Global Problems ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Scientific Facts

Motivated by recent debates and policy decisions in the UK about bovine spongiform encephalopathy, genetically modified (GM) foods, embryonic stem cell research and other topics, my 2002 Anniversary Address dealt with ‘Science and Society’. Although some of the discussion was general––for instance, the changing nature of the landscape of scientific facts, ideas and uncertainties as a subject moves from the early stages of discovery and exploration toward full understanding—most of the focus was on specific issues in the UK. In particular, I dwelt on protocols for handling science advice in policy making, drawing on UK examples, and indicating some of the shadows that fall between tidy principles and the messy problems that arise in their implementation.

Of numbers, narratives and challenges: Data as evidence in 21st century policy-making

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 1043-1055
Author(s):  
Gaby Umbach
Keyword(s):  
21St Century ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Evidence Use ◽  
The Third ◽  
Use Of Data ◽  
Science Advice ◽  
Governance Tools ◽  
The Impact

This article1 offers reflections on the use of data as evidence in 21st century policy-making. It discusses the concept of evidence-informed policy-making (EIPM) as well as the governance and knowledge effects of data as evidence. With this focus, it interlinks the analysis of statistics and politics. The paper first introduces the concept of EIPM and the impact of evidence use. Here it focusses on science and knowledge as resources in policy-making, on the institutionalisation of science advice and on the translation of information and knowledge into evidence. The second part of the article reflects on data as evidence. This part concentrates on abstract and concrete functions of data as governance tools in policy-making, on data as a robust form of evidence and on the effects of data on knowledge and governance. The third part highlights challenges for data as evidence in policy-making, among them, politicisation, transparency, and diversity as well as objectivity and contestation. Finally, the last part draws conclusions on the production and use of data as evidence in EIPM. Throughout the second part of the reflections, reference is made to Walter Radermacher’s 2019 matrix of actors and activities related to data, facts, and policy published in this journal.

A lack of foresight? Jurisdictional uncertainties in the regulatory interface between the HFEA, the UK Stem Cell Bank and beyond

Legal Studies ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 511-535 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ryan Morgan
Keyword(s):  
Embryonic Stem ◽  
Embryo Research ◽  
Es Cell ◽  
Statutory Interpretation ◽  
Cell Bank ◽  
Human Fertilisation ◽  
Department Of Health ◽  
Regulatory Architecture ◽  
Policy Objectives ◽  
The Uk

Much of the legal attention surrounding human embryonic stem (ES) cell research within the UK has, to date, focused on cloning techniques. Whilst this is both understandable and appropriate given litigation on this topic, there has been less focus on other areas. This paper identifies and analyses areas of incoherence and deficiency within the regulatory architecture governing human ES cell derivation and research within the UK. This is not merely a theoretical exercise, as there are indications that many of the policy objectives currently being pursued in this area have, at best, a shaky jurisdictional basis. It is all too easy to recall that lobby groups have challenged the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Act 1990, the legislative foundation for embryo research and most infertility treatment, on the basis of jurisdictional uncertainty and statutory interpretation. Whilst many pro-life campaigners are opposed to ES cell research on ethical grounds, the arguments utilised thus far in relation to litigation have been entirely legal, involving issues of statutory interpretation and whether the regulator, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), or the Department of Health have acted ultra vires the 1990 Act. This paper will reveal that there are a number of further areas which might be open to attack on this basis.

The Competitiveness of Former Coalfields: Manufacturing Managers' Perceptions of Competitiveness Strengths and Weaknesses in South Yorkshire

2003 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 135-158
Author(s):  
Nick J. Bowes
Keyword(s):  
Policy Making ◽  
Mining Area ◽  
Regional Competitiveness ◽  
Adjustment Problems ◽  
Economic Adjustment ◽  
Mining Communities ◽  
Economic Competitiveness ◽  
Determining Factors ◽  
The Uk

The last decade has seen a wide recognition of the chronic economic adjustment problems of the former coalfields of the UK. Arguably, the finest example of such an ex-mining area has been South Yorkshire. Common perceptions are of old mining communities that are lacking the key requisite characteristics to be sufficiently able to generate new and alternative forms of employment. That is, ex-coalfields are widely seen as possessing a poor set of the determining factors of economic competitiveness. This paper uses a study of manufacturing managers' perceptions of the determinants of competitiveness in the former mining area of South Yorkshire in order to shed new light on an established debate. It also takes an established methodology for assessing regional competitiveness and develops it into a more focused and valuable tool in feeding into the policy-making agenda. On the basis of the findings, some of the current policies aimed at the revitalisation of the economy of South Yorkshire's former coalfield are discussed, and a number of additions are suggested.

scholarly journals Can Indicators Bridge the Gap between Science and Policy? An Exploration into the (Non)Use and (Non)Influence of Indicators in EU and UK Policy Making

2014 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 316-343 ◽  
Author(s):  
Léa Sébastien ◽  
Tom Bauler ◽  
Markku Lehtonen
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Case Studies ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Science And Policy ◽  
Development Indicators ◽  
Energy Indicators ◽  
The Uk ◽  
Evidence For Policy ◽  
The Eu

This article examines the various roles that indicators, as boundary objects, can play as a science-based evidence for policy processes. It presents two case studies from the EU-funded POINT project that analyzed the use and influence of two highly different types of indicators: composite indicators of sustainable development at the EU level and energy indicators in the UK. In both cases indicators failed as direct input to policy making, yet they generated various types of conceptual and political use and influence. The composite sustainable development indicators served as “framework indicators”, helping to advocate a specific vision of sustainable development, whereas the energy indicators produced various types of indirect influence, including through the process of indicator elaboration. Our case studies demonstrate the relatively limited importance of the characteristics and quality of indicators in determining the role of indicators, as compared with the crucial importance of “user factors” (characteristics of policy actors) and “policy factors” (policy context).

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 An overview of behavioral economics in Dutch policy making. the next step: how to nudge policy makers

2016 ◽  
Vol 10 (2-3) ◽  
pp. 27-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natasha Els Stroeker
Keyword(s):  
Behavioral Economics ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Behavioral Science ◽  
Dutch Government ◽  
Science Knowledge ◽  
Policy Makers ◽  
Structural Integration ◽  
Dutch Policy ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Uk

This article describes the beginning of the influence of behavioral economics on the Dutch government. This started in the period that the UK started with its Behavioral Insights Team (BIT UK). The article presents explanation of the concept “nudging” and the way this is integrated in Dutch policy. Also leading publications and examples of how behavioral economics is used in policy making are presented. The advice of the government in 2014 on how to ensure a structural integration of behavioral science knowledge in policy is part of the next step. The next step contains two main parts: 1. How to nudge policy makers and 2. Embedding nudges in policy making on four aspects: positioning, projects, performance and professionality.

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document