scholarly journals Resetting Benefits: Benchmarks for adequate minimum incomes

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 58-64
Author(s):  
Greg Waite

New Zealand’s successful management of the Covid-19 pandemic has emphasised the value of evidence-based policy. Government policy on income support payments is also changing significantly in response to the Welfare Expert Advisory Group’s 2019 report. This article examines the report’s recommendations in the context of international and local research, considers whether benefit increases in the 2021 Budget deliver on those recommendations, and discusses the impact of high housing costs on welfare reform options.

Author(s):  
Peter Raynor

Social scientists have often had difficulty evaluating the impact of probation services, partly because expectations and political circumstances change and partly because appropriate methodologies have been slow to develop. This chapter outlines the history of evaluative research on probation. It describes the limitations of early probation research which led to erroneous conclusions that ‘nothing works’, and goes on to show how more recent research has been based on a fuller understanding of practitioner inputs through research on programmes, skills and implementation. This is starting to lead to a better understanding of which practices are effective (‘What Works’). The chapter advocates a mixed qualitative and quantitative methodology for evaluative research which combines understanding, measurement and comparison. Finally, it points to some risks to evidence-based policy which arise from current populism and post-truth politics.


2002 ◽  
Vol 7 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 40-45 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kees Van Gool ◽  
Emily Lancsar ◽  
Rosalie Viney ◽  
Jane Hall ◽  
Philip Haywood

Without adequate information it is difficult to determine the success or failure of health policies. This paper assesses the adequacy of Australia&s health information for evidence-based policy. Three policy areas are analysed: the impact of changing the public and private health financing mix; waiting lists and waiting times; and pooling of funds. In each, the issue is analysed to identify the key policy questions, the available data and existing analyses are examined, and gaps in data availability and analysis are assessed. There is variability in the extent and usefulness of current health information. In terms of the impact of changing the financing mix, there is good information on the distribution of finance, but much less available on comparative use or efficiency of public and private hospitals. There is comprehensive information available on waiting lists and waiting times but little analysis of the implications of this for equity of access or the costs and benefits of reducing waiting times. There is insufficient information for the development of the capitation based formulae required for the introduction of the pooling of funds, nor enough information to assess the extent and impact of current cost-shifting which might be addressed by pooling funds. While the concept of evidence-based medicine has been embraced with regard to specific treatment decisions, there has not been a parallel investment in the use of evidence to drive policy decisions.


Author(s):  
A. I. Soloviev

External and internalchallenges, risks and crisis phenomena operatingin the world and national states requirethe ruling regimes to flexibly restructurethe configuration of relations betweenpower and society. One of the toolsof such communication is the methods of“evidence-based policy”, which involve addressingthe population on the basis of expertand scientific recommendations whendeveloping goals that allow people not onlyto judge their legality, but also to challengeand correct their content. At the same time,in a number of transitional and authoritarianstates, preference is given to the “policy ofevidence” that demonstrates the priorities ofpolitically expedient actions of the authoritiesaimed not at partnership with society, but at mobilizing the support of the populationfor the implementation of the goalsof government policy. In this context, thearticle shows the objective and subjectivelimitations of the use of scientific andexpert data in the public sphere by a numberof post-Soviet states, the peculiarities ofthe correlation of “evidence-based policy”and “policy of evidence” in the activities ofthe ruling regimes, and assesses their prospectsin the short term in modern Russiansociety.


Author(s):  
Claudia Petrescu ◽  
Mihaela Lambru

Background: The importance of using evidence to inform the policymaking process has been well established in the literature and practice. In Western countries evidence-based policy (EBP) is already accepted and implemented in many policy areas, including disability policy. In Central and Eastern Europe (CEE) the interest in EBP (evidence-based policy) is new and limited, hampered in many aspects by the regional specificity of the public administration and welfare services reform.Aims and objectives: The present article aims to explore the development of evidence-based disability employment policy in Romania, in a specific area of work integration: sheltered workshops.Methods: The article draws on the findings of extensive research on sheltered workshops that included multiple research methods, such as public policy analysis, social documents analysis, and secondary data analysis of quantitative and qualitative data.Findings: A number of issues concerning the implementation of evidence-based disability policy in Romania have been identified. Some of these issues are related to the administrative and policy capacity of the government. Others are linked to the limitation of the advocacy capacity of Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) active in the disability area, or to the weak presence of the academic/research community in the disability policy forum.Discussion and conclusions: There is a limited knowledge of how evidence-based disability policy is developed in CEE countries. This article will emphasise the role of the sheltered workshops in shaping the policy solutions in the area of work integration for persons with disabilities. The article will contribute to better understanding of the disability policy reform, looking closely at how the evidence is built and used within the disability policy process.<br />Key messages<br /><ul><li>The paper explores pathways of evidence use to support decisions on disability policy in Romania.</li><br /><li>The disability reform in Romania is influenced by Welfare State and Public Administration reform, EU integration process, EU Disability Action Plans (DAPs) and the signing of the UN Convention of Persons with Disabilities.</li><br /><li>The social economy framework has influenced the employment opportunities for persons with disabilities. The sheltered workshops have become an important actor in promoting work integration for people with disability. Also the sheltered workshops have an important role in modernising evidence-based disability employment policy</li><br /><li>The lack of statistical data and relevant knowledge about what works, and the impact on the integration of people with disabilities, is impeding the development of both disability rights and disability services, and has determined the adoption of policy decisions that have profoundly affected work integration in this area.</li></ul>


2002 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 267-272 ◽  
Author(s):  
Angela Packwood

The drive in the late 1990s for an evidence-based approach to both policy and practice throughout public services has been encoded in a range of articles, operationalised in funded organisations, and implemented through government policy. This paper intends to review some of those articles, organizations and education policies to give an overview of the way in which the approach has been constructed and to make problematic some of the underlying assumptions.


2021 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-94
Author(s):  
Deepshikha Chhetri ◽  
Fernando Zacarias

Evidence-informed policy action has improved the health of populations for decades; however, in many contexts, there is limited evidence that it does, mostly because of shortcomings in the process of policy-making. Evidence-based policy-making assists in making decisions about projects and programmes at every stage by using evidence to inform the policy process, rather than directly targeting the objectives of the policy. Although health policy in itself is defined distinctively by experts, it encompasses aspects of ‘public policy in health’ and ‘health in all policies’. By focussing on factors like laws and regulations, and by gaining political commitment for a specific goal, health policies and the resulting programmes can be changed and improved to enhance the health of communities. This process first involves the identification and description of the problem and the evidence-based interventions to solve it. While planning policy, the major actors involved should be identified but all stakeholders should participate in this process. Policy change requires a pragmatic shift in the rules to allow new ways of doing things, deriving programmes with stronger measures, or revising standards for a positive health outcome. These changes involve a very complex process as policymakers need to think of various factors which influence their decision-making, such as evidence of feasibility, stakeholders’ priorities, health impact, socio-political considerations and their effect on the process, and efforts of advocacy groups. A mechanism needs to be developed to evaluate the impact of current policies and every effort should be made to include evidence and research findings in the formulation of new and improved policies, for better health service delivery and to improve the health of the people.


2019 ◽  
Vol 101 (4) ◽  
pp. 561-574 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernt Bratsberg ◽  
Øystein Hernæs ◽  
Simen Markussen ◽  
Oddbjørn Raaum ◽  
Knut Røed

We evaluate the impact on youth crime of a welfare reform that tightened activation requirements for social assistance clients. The evaluation strategy exploits administrative individual data in combination with geographically differentiated implementation of the reform. We find that the reform reduced crime among teenage boys from economically disadvantaged families. Stronger reform effects on weekday versus weekend crime, reduced school dropout, and favorable long-run outcomes in terms of crime and educational attainment point to both incapacitation and human capital accumulation as key mechanisms. Despite lowered social assistance take-up, we uncover no indication that loss of income support pushed youth into crime.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document