Evidence-based policy making and social science

Author(s):  
Gerry Stoker ◽  
Mark Evans
Author(s):  
Gerry Stoker ◽  
Mark Evans

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.


Author(s):  
Gerry Stoker ◽  
Mark Evans

This chapter reflects on the realities of the policy world. Shortage of time, limited evidence or experience, the importance of value judgements and the power of vested interests all suggest that evidence based policy making is more easily rhetorically demanded than delivered. This chapter will conclude that social science has riches in its capacity to analyse evidence that as of yet are under-used in policy making. There are new forms of discovery just waiting to be discovered.


2011 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 20-43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Geyer

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.


2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Grimmelmann

Chapter in:Big Data, Big Challenges for Evidence-Based Policy Making 211 (Kumar Jayasuria & Kathryn Ritcheske eds., West Academic 2015) (page proof PDF)


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document