Opening and Improving Policy Development to Increase Public Trust: Transparency of Evidence-based Regulation in the Debate on EU Better Regulation Agenda

2020 ◽  
pp. 169-196
Author(s):  
Egle Basyte Ferrari ◽  
Eckehard Rosenbaum ◽  
Giulia Listorti ◽  
Nicole Ostlaender
Keyword(s):  
Policy Development ◽  
Public Trust ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Better Regulation

Collaboration Consequences: New Public Management and Police-Academic Partnerships

2021 ◽  
pp. 193672442098437
Author(s):  
Carrie B. Sanders ◽  
Debra Langan
Keyword(s):  
Policy Development ◽  
Public Management ◽  
Management Practices ◽  
New Public Management ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Organizational Contexts ◽  
Police Services ◽  
New Public ◽  
Academic Partnerships ◽  
Institutional Strategies

With increasing pressure on public organizations to demonstrate accountability, police services and public universities are being tasked with demonstrating how their institutional strategies are effective and economically efficient. In this paper, we draw on our own research collaborations with two different Canadian police services (Bluewater and Greenfield) on a similar community crime prevention strategy, Situation Tables. We illustrate how new public management practices are embedded in the political, economic, and organizational contexts that have inspired police-academic partnerships and invigorated the evidence-based policing movement in Canada. Our analysis illustrates how our partnerships were influenced by the performance strand of new public management that prioritizes the quantification of measures of outputs over qualitative evaluations of impact. We argue that these practices, if not interrogated, can jeopardize the integrity of evidence-based practice and policy development. Academic freedom must be retained when partnering with the police to ensure an examination of the implications of police practices.

scholarly journals The challenge of bringing evidence in decision-making for public health emergencies: can preparedness reach out to HTA?

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
C E Chronaki ◽  
A Miglietta
Keyword(s):  
Public Health ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
Policy Development ◽  
Digital Health ◽  
Resource Planning ◽  
Public Health Emergency ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Public Health Emergencies ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Evidence Based Decision Making

Abstract Evidence-based decision-making is central to public health. Implementing evidence-informed actions is most challenging during a public health emergency as in an epidemic, when time is limited, scientific uncertainties and political pressures tend to be high, and reliable data is typically lacking. The process of including data for preparedness and training for evidence-based decision making in public health emergencies is not systematic and is complicated by many barriers as the absence of common digital tools and approaches for resource planning and update of response plans. Health Technology Assessment (HTA) is used with the aim to improve the quality and efficiency of public health interventions and to make healthcare systems more sustainable. Many of today's public health crises are also cross-border, and countries need to collaborate in a systematic and standardized way in order to enhance interoperability to share data and to plan coordinated response. Digital health tools have an important role to play in this setting, facilitating use of knowledge about the population that can potentially affected by the crisis within and across regional and national borders. To strengthen the impact of scientific evidence on decision-making for public health emergency preparedness and response, it is necessary to better define and align mechanisms through which interdisciplinary evidence feeds into decision-making processes during public health emergencies and the context in which these mechanisms operate. Activities and policy development in the HTA network could inform this process. The objective of this presentation is to identify barriers for evidence-based decision making during public health emergencies and discuss how standardization in digital health and HTA processes may help overcome these barriers leading to more effective coordinated and evidence-based public health emergency response.

scholarly journals Evaluation, Science and Pragmatism

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicholas Huntington
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Political Party ◽  
Policy Development ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Doctoral Research ◽  
Aotearoa New Zealand ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
Research Uptake ◽  
Policy Work ◽  
Good Policy

In Aotearoa New Zealand, as elsewhere, the evidence-based policy movement has been one of the most visible recent influences on how policies are described, discussed and debated. It is now commonly taken for granted that good policy work involves using evidence, and that it is important to increase the influence of data and research uptake during policy development. Promoting evidence-based policy has even been used as the raison d’être for the founding of a political party. However, the voices and perspectives of practitioners themselves are often missing from conversations about evidence’s role in policy work. Drawing on my doctoral research, this article presents three stances that frame how policy workers approach evidence in their practice.

scholarly journals Evidence-based Nomenclature and Taxonomy of Research Impact Indicators

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 33-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mudassar Arsalan ◽  
Omar Mubin ◽  
Abdullah Al Mahmud
Keyword(s):  
Policy Development ◽  
Research Impact ◽  
Development Economic ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Novel Approach ◽  
Scientific Disciplines ◽  
Research Impact Assessment ◽  
Impact Indicators ◽  
Environment Sustainability ◽  
The Impact

AbstractPurposeThis study aims to classify research impact indicators based on their characteristics and scope. A concept of evidence-based nomenclature of research impact (RI) indicator has been introduced for generalization and transformation of scope.Design/methodology/approchLiterature was collected related to the research impact assessment. It was categorized in conceptual and applied case studies. One hundred and nineteen indicators were selected to prepare classification and nomenclature. The nomenclature was developed based on the principle—“every indicator is a contextual-function to explain the impact”. Every indicator was disintegrated into three parts, i.e. Function, Domain, and Target Areas.FindingsThe main functions of research impact indicators express improvement (63%), recognition (23%), and creation/development (14%). The focus of research impact indicators in literature is more towards the academic domain (59%) whereas the environment/sustainability domain is least considered (4%). As a result, research impact related to the research aspects is felt the most (29%). Other target areas include system and services, methods and procedures, networking, planning, policy development, economic aspects and commercialisation, etc.Research limitationsThis research applied to 119 research impact indicators. However, the inclusion of additional indicators may change the result.Practical implicationsThe plausible effect of nomenclature is a better organization of indicators with appropriate tags of functions, domains, and target areas. This approach also provides a framework of indicator generalization and transformation. Therefore, similar indicators can be applied in other fields and target areas with modifications.Originality/valueThe development of nomenclature for research impact indicators is a novel approach in scientometrics. It is developed on the same line as presented in other scientific disciplines, where fundamental objects need to classify on common standards such as biology and chemistry.

Can Citizen Science Seriously Contribute to Policy Development?

2020 ◽  
pp. 1726-1741
Author(s):  
Colin Chapman ◽  
Crona Hodges
Keyword(s):  
Citizen Science ◽  
Policy Development ◽  
Policy Making ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Design Strategies ◽  
Quality Of Data ◽  
Evidence Based Policy ◽  
Data Gaps

This chapter considers the potential for citizen science to contribute to policy development. A background to evidence-based policy making is given, and the requirement for data to be robust, reliable and, increasingly, cost-effective is noted. The potential for the use of ‘co-design' strategies with stakeholders, to add value to their engagement as well as provide more meaningful data that can contribute to policy development, is presented and discussed. Barriers to uptake can be institutional and the quality of data used in evidence-based policy making will always need to be fully assured. Data must be appropriate to the decision making process at hand and there is potential for citizen science to fill important, existing data-gaps.

scholarly journals Uses and Potential Abuses of “Negative Claims” in the EU: The Urgent Need for Better Regulation

2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 469-490 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ignacio Carreño ◽  
Paolo Vergano
Keyword(s):  
Palm Oil ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Gluten Free ◽  
Member States ◽  
Nutrition Claims ◽  
Eu Member States ◽  
Better Regulation ◽  
Additional Costs ◽  
The Eu

“Negative claims” can be defined as claims indicating that certain ingredients, nutrients or substances are not present in a foodstuff. Legitimate uses of regulated negative claims in the EU include some nutrition claims and “gluten-free” claims. Some EU Member States have legislated on “GM-free” claims. The article describes in more detail some cases (i.e., BPA-free, MSG-free, Aspartame-free and palm oil-free), where negative claims are used with an implied message that whatever is used instead of the often “demonised” substance is safer, healthier or greener. The article argues that EU and EU Member States’ legislators and regulators should ensure that consumers are not misled by astute marketing techniques that have no informative agendas, but simply aim at denigrating certain products in order to promote “free-from” products. This issue is particularly timely and important given the imminent application of the EU's Food Information Regulation and the additional costs that it will impose on the industry in the name of providing complete, reliable and evidence-based information to consumers.

What the United States Can Learn from the European Commission's Better Regulation Initiative

2015 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 380-381
Author(s):  
James Broughel
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
European Union ◽  
Economic Analysis ◽  
Stakeholder Participation ◽  
Regulatory Reform ◽  
The United States ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Leadership Roles ◽  
Better Regulation ◽  
The Eu

In May of 2015, the European Commission released a package outlining the vision for its Better Regulation initiative, a program aimed at improving outcomes of European Union (EU) regulation. The move represents a step forward for regulatory reform in the EU, and signals a potential shift in world leadership roles among countries promoting evidence-based policy. The United States (US), once at the forefront of regulatory science and analysis, may now be lagging behind. If Better Regulation is implemented as its ambitious designers envision, this could signal a new role for the EU in advancing 21st century policymaking.Better Regulation seeks to improve the EU regulatory process in several ways. The initiative allows for more meaningful citizen and stakeholder participation at all stages of the policymaking process; it seeks to institutionalize the use of economic analysis throughout the lifecycle of a policy; and it sets up a process for reviewing the existing stock of regulations to ensure old rules do not become excessively burdensome or obsolete. All this is done in a manner intended to inform legislators as they periodically review funding levels for new and existing programs.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document