2 Evidence-based policy: principles and requirements (original) (raw)

Reconsidering evidence-based policy: Key issues and challenges

Policy and Society, 2010

The evidence-based policy (EBP) movement has sought to promote rigorous analysis of service programs and policy options in order to improve the quality of decision-making. Rigorous research findings are seen as useful and necessary inputs for policymakers in their ongoing consideration of policy development and program review. This article provides a critical overview of the research literature on evidence-based policy in the context of government policy-making and program improvement. Particular attention is given to the rational expectation that improved policy analysis will flow from a better evidence base, with consequent improvements in the service delivery and problem-solving capacities of government agencies. This expectation is contrasted with the practical limitations on rational processes typical in the real world of political decision-making, which is characterised by bargaining, entrenched commitments, and the interplay of diverse stakeholder values and interests. Key issues for consideration include the forms of evidence that are of greatest relevance or utility for decision-makers, and the most productive forms of interaction between the producers and the users of research and evaluation findings.

Three Lenses of Evidence‐Based Policy

Australian Journal of Public Administration, 2008

This article discusses recent trends to incorporate the results of systematic research (or 'evidence') into policy development, program evaluation and program improvement. This process is consistent with the New Public Management (NPM) emphasis on efficiency and effectiveness. Analysis of evidence helps to answer the questions 'what works? and 'what happens if we change these settings?' Secondly, some of the well known challenges and limitations for 'evidence-based' policy are outlined. Policy decisions emerge from politics, judgement and debate, rather than being deduced from empirical analysis. Policy debate and analysis involves an interplay between facts, norms and desired actions, in which 'evidence' is diverse and contestable. Thirdly, the article outlines a distinction between technical and negotiated approaches to problem-solving. The latter is a prominent feature of policy domains rich in 'network' approaches, partnering and community engagement. Networks and partnerships bring to the negotiation table a diversity of stakeholder 'evidence', ie,

9 Learning from the evidence about evidence-based policy

Roundtable Proceedings, 2010

From the long history of efforts to improve policy by drawing systematically on evidence about effectiveness, a number of recommendations can be made. The approach to evidence-based policy needs to be matched to each particular situation, especially in terms of whether the intervention has complicated or complex aspects. The quality of evidence about effectiveness should be judged not by whether it has used a particular methodology, but whether it has systematically checked internal and external validity, including paying attention to differential effects. The availability of evidence can be improved through supporting the different processes of knowledge transfer, knowledge translation and ongoing knowledge generation. Transparent processes of generating and using evidence are needed, including access to data to allow reviews of its quality and of the conclusions drawn.

Evidence-Based Policy: Promises and Challenges

homepage.mac.com

Evidence-based policy is gaining support in many areas of government and in public affairs more generally. In this paper we outline what evidence-based policy is, then we discuss its strengths and weaknesses. In particular, we argue that it faces a serious challenge to provide a plausible account of evidence. This account needs to be at least in the spirit of the hierarchy of evidence subscribed to by evidence-based medicine (from which evidence-based policy derives its name and inspiration). Yet evidence-based policy's hierarchy needs to be tailored to the kinds of evidence relevant and available to the policy arena. The evidence required for policy decisions does not easily lend itself to randomized controlled trials (the 'gold standard' in evidence-based medicine), nor, for that matter, being listed in a single all-purpose hierarchy.

Book review: Evidence-Based Policy: A Practical Guide to Doing It Better

Criminology and Criminal Justice, 2013

Over the last twenty or so years, it has become standard to require policy makers to base their recommendations on evidence. That is now uncontroversial to the point of triviality-of course, policy should be based on the facts. But are the methods that policy makers rely on to gather and analyse evidence the right ones? Evidence-Based Policy contends that the dominant methods which are in use now-methods that imitate standard practices in medicine like randomised control trials-do not work. Michael Bassey believes policymakers should engage in the kind of critical and analytical processes advocated by this book before rolling out social changes.

BH 2016 Toward more evidence informed policymaking PAR76 3

Th e quality of public decision making depends signifi cantly on the quality of analysis and advice provided through public organizations. Champions of " evidence-informed " policy making claim that rigorous evaluation practices can signifi cantly improve attainment of cost-eff ective outcomes. After decades of experience, performance information is more sophisticated, but evaluation practices and capabilities vary enormously. Public agencies gather and process vast amounts of information, but there has been little analysis of how this information is actually utilized for policy and program improvement. Th is article examines how government agencies use evidence about policy and program eff ectiveness, with attention to four themes: (1) the prospects for improving " evidence-informed " policy making , (2) the diversity of practices concerning evidence utilization and evaluation across types of public agencies and policy arenas, (3) recent attempts to " institutionalize " evaluation as a core feature of policy development and budget approval, and (4) the relationships between public agencies and nongovernmental sources of expertise. Practitioner Points • Although most practitioners claim to support the use of evidence relevant to their roles, their use of the best available evidence is patchy. • Commitment to funding and using evidence from evaluations is essential. • Political and ideological factors often undermine evidence-informed practices. • Interaction and brokering across organizational boundaries are crucial.

A Theory of Evidence for Evidence-Based Policy

Evidence, Inference and Enquiry. OUP/British Academy

WE AIM HERE to outline a theory of evidence for use. More specifically we lay foundations for a guide for the use of evidence in predicting policy effectiveness in situ, a more comprehensive guide than current standard offerings, such as the Maryland rules in criminology, the weight of evidence scheme of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), or the US 'What Works Clearinghouse'. The guide itself is meant to be well-grounded but at the same time to give practicable advice, that is, advice that can be used by policy-makers not expert in the natural and social sciences, assuming they are well-intentioned and have a reasonable but limited amount of time and resources available for searching out evidence and deliberating.

Evidence-Based Policy: Data’s Use in Supporting Public Policy Process

Interdisciplinary Social Studies, 2022

Background: Reforming the bureaucracy has become essential to transforming the nation's way of life. With it, modifications are made to the government administration system to improve its effectiveness and efficiency. Improving the caliber of policies is one of the key goals of bureaucratic reform. Aim: Therefore, through this article, the author aims to provide an overview of the meaning of data/evidence in the public policy process. Method: The writing of this article used the literature review method by utilizing secondary data or sources in the form of journals, books, documentation, the internet and various libraries that are relevant to the issues and topics of this article. Findings: The researcher concluded that the contribution of the EBP approach in the bureaucracy and policy of public institutions in each policy cycle can be a breakthrough in the birth of innovative policies. The use of research data is an important aspect in the success of government bureaucratic policies. Moreover, superior research as a source of data can identify problems more precisely and help governments design the most effective and innovative policy options.

Disagreement about Evidence-Based Policy

Routledge Handbook of The Philosophy of Disagreement , 2023

Evidence based-policy (EBP) is a popular research paradigm in the applied social sciences and within government agencies. Informally, EBP represents an explicit commitment to applying scientific methods to public affairs, in contrast to ideologically-driven or merely intuitive “common-sense” approaches to public policy. More specifically, the EBP paradigm places great weight on the results of experimental research designs, especially randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and systematic literature reviews that place evidential weight on experimental results. One hope is that such research designs and approaches to analysing the scientific literature are sufficiently robust that they can settle what really ‘works’ in public policy. Can EBP succeed in displacing reliance on domain-specific expertise? On our account, this is seldom, if ever, the case. The key reason for this is that underlying this approach is generally an appeal to argument by induction, which always requires further assumptions to underwrite its validity, and if not induction, some other argument form that also requires assumptions that are very often not validated for the case at hand.

Building Evidence for Evidence-Based Policy Making

Criminology & Public Policy, 2012

D u k e U n i v e r s i t y W ith declining high-school graduation rates and comparatively high rates of adolescent violence and problem behavior in this country, we are in a moment of great need for effective federal and state policy to prevent juvenile delinquency. Leading intellectuals in the field, including Ron Haskins (Haskins and , Jon , and Steve Barnett, have recently called for adoption of a technocracy: They have asked policy makers to use the science of prevention to guide policy making and funding. Haskins and Baron (2011) wrote persuasive essays arguing that if policy and funding decisions were made based on evidence of what works, then we would experience better population-level outcomes in education, crime, and child well-being; furthermore, we would save costs and solve the deficit crisis.