Samenvatting
Volgens het evidence-based principe horen beleidsmakers bij het nemen van beslissingen gebruik te maken van de best beschikbare ‘evidence’. Op basis van theoretische modellen inzake kennisgebruik presenteert dit artikel een casestudy inzake het Belgische drugsbeleid, met tevens aandacht voor de invloed van de media op de interactie tussen wetenschap en beleid. De deelresultaten van dit doctoraatsonderzoek tonen aan dat de relatie tussen wetenschap en beleid rationeel noch exclusief is. Ideaaltypisch en rationeel kennisgebruik dat een ‘evidence-based’ beleidsvorming veronderstelt, is beperkt. Wetenschappelijke kennis is eerder in staat om het beleid te informeren, dan om het te maken. Conceptueel en vooral politiek-symbolisch gebruik van wetenschappelijke kennis komen frequent voor. De media hebben een belangrijke invloed op deze interactie. Hoewel de media een waardevol kanaal zijn waarlangs wetenschappelijke kennis ingang vindt bij beleidsmakers, moeten wetenschappers steeds rekening houden met mogelijke vertekeningen van de weergave van de onderzoeksresultaten en het verhoogde risico op politiek-symbolisch kennisgebruik.
Abstract
According to the ‘evidence-based’ principle, policy makers should make use of the best available evidence in their decision making. By means of theoretical models of knowledge utilisation, we provide a case study of the development of the Belgian drug policy, taking into account the particular contribution of the media on the interaction between science and policy. Partial results of a current PhD study have shown that the relationship between science and policy is neither rational nor exclusive. The idea of rational, direct utilisation of scientific knowledge is assumed to be somewhat naive and too idealised. Scientific knowledge can inform policy rather than constitute a foundation for policy makers. Conceptual use and political-symbolic use are more often found. The media are a valuable linking mechanism between science and policy. Even though the media are an instrument by means of which policy makers may receive scientific knowledge, scientists need to be aware that media coverage of scientific knowledge is often inaccurate or distorted and thus may also support the political-symbolic utilisation of scientific knowledge.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Notes
De wet van 4 april 2003 tot wijziging van de wet van 24 februari 1921 betreffende het verhandelen van giftstoffen, slaapmiddelen en verdovende middelen, ontsmettingsstoffen en antiseptica, en de wet van 3 mei 2003 tot wijziging van de wet van 21 februari 1921 betreffende het verhandelen van giftstoffen, slaapmiddelen en verdovende middelen, psychotrope stoffen, ontsmettingsstoffen en antiseptica en van de stoffen die kunnen gebruikt worden voor de illegale vervaardiging van verdovende middelen en psychotrope stoffen.
Literatuur
Burchell, G., & Foucault, M. (1991). The Foucault effect: studies in governmentality. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
Carvalho, A. (2007). Ideological cultures and media discourses on scientific knowledge. Public Understanding of Science, 16 , 223–243.
Davies, P., Francis, P., & Jupp, V. (2011). Doing criminological research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
De Ruyver, B., Vermeulen, G., Franck, P., & Van Daele, L. (1992). Kansarmoede, druggebruik, criminaliteit. Gent: Universiteit Gent.
De Ruyver, B., Casselman, J., Meuwissen, K., Bullens, F., & Van Impe, K. (2000). Het Belgisch drugbeleid anno 2000: een stand van zaken drie jaar na de aanbevelingen van de Parlementaire Werkgroep Drugs. Gent: Onderzoeksgroep Drugbeleid, Strafrechtelijk beleid en Internationale criminaliteit.
Devroe, E., Deschamps, L., & Hannes, K. (2008). Evidence-based beleidsvoering in de kijker: twee Belgische initiatieven. Panopticon, 6, 59–66.
Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: textual analysis for social research. London: Routledge.
Hajer, M. (1995). The politics of environmental discourse: ecological modernization and the policy process. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Hall, W. (2010). What would evidence-informed drug policies look like? Addiction, 105, 1135–1136.
Hoppe, R. (2005). Rethinking the science-policy nexus: from knowledge utilization and science technology studies to types of boundary arrangements. Poiesis and Praxis: International Journal of Technology Assessment and Ethics of Science, 3, 199–215.
Kaminski, D. (1998). La directive du 17 avril 1998. La troisième voie … entre la loi et le débat. Les Cahiers de Prospective Jeunesse, 3, 3–6.
Kingdon, J. W. (2002). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. London: Longmans.
Lancaster, K., Hughes, C. E., Spicer, B., Matthew-Simmons, F., & Dillon, P. (2011). Illicit drugs and the media: models of media effects for use in drug policy research. Drug and Alcohol Review, 30, 397–402.
Lenton, S. (2004). Pot, politics and the press: reflections on cannabis law reform in Western Australia. Drug and Alcohol Review, 23, 223–233.
Lindquist, E. A. (2001). Discerning policy influence: framework for a strategic evaluation of IDRC-supported research. Ottawa: IDRC Evaluation Unit.
MacGregor, S. (2013). Barriers to the influence of evidence on policy: are politicians the problem? Drugs: Education, Prevention, and Policy, 20, 225–233.
McArthur, M. (1999). Pushing the drug debate: The media’s role in policy reform. Australian Journal of Sociual Issues, 34, 149–165.
McCombs, M. E., & Reynolds, A. (2009). How the news shapes our civic agenda. In J. Bryant & M. B. Oliver (red.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (p. 1–16). New York: Routledge.
McCombs, M. E., & Shaw, D. L. (1972). The agenda-setting function of mass media. Public Opinion Quarterly, 36, 176–187.
Monaghan, M. (2011). Evidence versus politics. Exploiting research in UK drug policy making? Bristol: Policy Press.
Nutley, S., Walter, I., & Davies, H. T. O. (2003). From knowing to doing. A framework for understanding the evidence-into-practice agenda. Evaluation, 9, 125–148.
Ottoson, J. M., & Hawe, P. (red.). (2009). Knowledge utilization, diffusion, implementation, transfer and translation: implications for evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ritter, A. (2009). How do drug policy makers access research evidence? International Journal of Drug Policy, 20, 70–75.
Ritter, A., & Bammer, G. (2010). Models of policy-making and their relevance for drug research. Drug and Alcohol Review, 29, 353–357.
Ritter, A., & Lancaster, K. (2013). Measuring research influence on drug policy: a case example of two epidemiological monitoring systems. International Journal of Drug Policy, 24, 30–37.
Sabatier, P. A. (1998). The advocacy coalition framework: revisions and relevance for Europe. Journal of European Public Policy, 5, 98–130.
Scheufele, D. A., & Tewksbury, D. (2007). Framing, agenda setting and priming: the evolution of three media effects models. Journal of Communication, 57, 9–20.
Stevens, A. (2007). Survival of the ideas that fit: an evolutionary analogy for the use of evidence in policy. Social Policy and Society, 6, 25–35.
Tieberghien, J., & Decorte, T. (2013). Understanding the science-policy nexus in Belgium: an analysis of the drug policy debate (1996–2003). Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy, 20, 241–248.
Tieberghien, J. (2014). The role of the media in the science-policy nexus: some critical reflections based on an analysis of the Belgian drug policy debate (1996–2003). International Journal of Drug Policy, 25, 276–228.
Vercaigne, C., & Walgrave, L. (1995). Jeugd tussen (sub)cultuur en business: een onderzoek naar mega-dancings, house en de last van recreatie. Leuven: Acco.
Vuillaume, D. (2008). Changing scientific perspectives on cannabis use. In D. Korf (red.), Cannabis in Europe: dynamics in perception, policy and markets (pp. 15–29). Lengerich: Pabst.
Weiss, C. H. (1979). The many meanings of research utilization. Public Administration Review, 39, 426–431.
Weiss, C., & Singer, E. (1988). Reporting of social science in the national media. New York: Russell Sage.
Weiss, C. H., Murphy-Graham, E., Petrosino, A., & Gandhi, A. G. (2008). The fairy godmother and her warts making the dream of evidence-based policy come true. American Journal of Evaluation, 29, 29–47.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Tieberghien, J. ‘Evidence-based’ drugsbeleid en het belang van de media. VERSLAVING 11, 30–40 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12501-015-0001-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12501-015-0001-6