Abstract
Although there are countless examples of science informing policy over the nineteenth and twentieth century, theory relating to how this process happens has evolved significantly in recent years. Today there are three dominant schools of thought which consider how evidence can be used to inform policy outcomes; political science, decision-making theory, and policy studies. Political science emphasises the design of evidence, through classical models of social enquiry, as fundamental to ensuring political impact (Green 2005). Decision-science or decision-making theory emphasises the processes of deliberation and contestation through which decisions are reached thereby highlighting potential entry points at which evidence can be presented (Goldie et al. 2006). Meanwhile policy studies emphasises the process of policy formulation, with models ranging from decade-long cycles, to messy non-linear processes of coalitions weighing-up evidence inputs, beliefs, and political influences to design and advocate for interventions (Sabatier 1988; Cairney 2013). The most expansive literature on evidence to policy-uptake stems from the field of policy studies referred to as Evidence-Based or Evidence-Informed Policy (EBP / EIP), which has borrowed heavily from the evidence-based practice movement which started in medical research.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
Russell cites J. M. Keynes’s Treatise on Probability (1921) which explains that ‘having experienced A and B together frequently, we now react to A as we originally reacted to B. To make this seem rational, we say that A is a “sign” of B, and that B must really be present though out of sight. This is the principle of induction, upon which almost all science is based. And a great deal of philosophy is an attempt to make the principle seem reasonable. Whenever, owing to past experience, we react to A in the manner in which we originally reacted to B, we may say that A is a “datum” and B is “inferred”. In this sense, animals practice inference. It is clear, also, that much inference of this sort is fallacious: the conjunction of A and B in past experience may have been accidental’ (Russell, 1926a).
- 3.
‘Since the first United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in 1992 – known as the Earth Summit – it was recognised that achieving sustainable development would require the active participation of all sectors of society and all types of people. Agenda 21, adopted at the Earth Summit, drew upon this sentiment and formalised nine sectors of society as the main channels through which broad participation would be facilitated in UN activities related to sustainable development. These are officially called ‘Major Groups’ and include the following sectors: ‘Women, Children and Youth, Indigenous Peoples, Non-Governmental Organisations, Local Authorities, Workers and Trade Unions, Business and Industry, Scientific and Technological Community, and Farmers.’ UN (2020) https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/majorgroups/about (Last accessed 7 May 2020).
- 4.
As noted by behavioural economists Gilad, Kaish and Loeb as early as 1984.
- 5.
As noted by Algers (2014), ‘During public meetings, members of NGOs have access to representatives of states and members of secretariats in corridors, in meeting rooms, and in various eating and drinking facilities at these headquarters… NGOs with formal consultative status, and also many others, have access to “diplomats” in these parliamentary headquarters that is not equaled in the capitals of the state system’ (Alger, 2014; 112).
- 6.
Previously referred to as ‘knowledge intermediaries’ (Jones et al., 2013).
References
Alger, C. F. (2014). Pioneer in the Study of the Political Process and on NGO Participation in the United Nations, Springer: NYC. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00509-6
Allan, B. (2018). Scientific cosmology and international orders, Cambridge studies in international relations. Cambridge University Press.
Bache, I., & Flinders, M. (2004). Multi-level Governance. Oxford University Press.
Baron, J., & Haskins, R. (2018). A brief history of evidence-based policy. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 678(1), 40–50.
Biesta, G. (2007). Why “what works” Won’t work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research. Educational Theory, 57(1), 1–22.
Bonell, C., Meiksin, R., Mays, N., Petticrew, M., & McKee, M. (2018). Defending evidence informed policy making from ideological attack. The BMJ, 362, k3827.
Bornstein, D. (2012) Social change’s age of enlightenment, opinion, New York Times, Available at: https://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/10/17/social-changes-age-of-enlightenment/. Last accessed 17 May 2020.
Bowen, S., & Zwi, A. B. (2005). Pathways to “evidence-informed” policy and practice: A framework for action. PLoS Medicine, 2(7), e166.
Broadbent, E. (2012). Politics of research-based evidence in African policy debates, synthesis of case study findings, evidence based policy in development. London.
Brolan, C. E., & Hill, P. S. (2016). Universal health Coverage’s evolving location in the post-2015 development agenda: Key informant perspectives within multilateral and related agencies during the first phase of post-2015 negotiations. Health Policy and Planning, 31(4), 514–526.
Bullard, E., Lovell, B., & Deacon, G. (1975). The effect of world war II on the development of knowledge in the physical sciences [and Discussion], Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 342(1631), 519–536.
Buse, K., Mays, N., & Walt, G. (2012). Making health policy (2nd ed.). Open University Press.
Cairney, P. (2011). Understanding public policy: Theories and issues. Macmillan International Higher Education.
Cairney, P. (2013). Policy concepts in 1000 words: The policy cycle and its stages. Paul Cairney: Politics and Public Policy Website: https://paulcairney.wordpress.com/2013/11/11/policy-concepts-in-1000-words-the-policy-cycle-and-its-stages/. Last accessed 17 May 2020.
Cairney, P. (2016). The Politics of Evidence-Based Policy Making, Palgrave Pivot: London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-51781-4
Cairney, P., Kwiatkowski, R. (2017). How to communicate effectively with policymakers: combine insights from psychology and policy studies. Palgrave Commun 3, 37. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-017-0046-8
Cairney, P., & Oliver, K. (2017). Evidence-based policymaking is not like evidence-based medicine, so how far should you go to bridge the divide between evidence and policy? Health Research Policy and Systems, 15(1), 35.
Cartwright, N., & Hardie, J. (2012). Evidence-based policy: A practical guide to doing it better. Oxford University Press.
Center for the Study of Social Policy. (2017). Better evidence for decision-makers. Author.
Chalmers, I. (2005). If evidence-informed policy works in practice, does it matter if it doesn’t work in theory? Evidence and Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 1(2), 227–242.
Chupein, T., & Glennerster, R. (2018). Evidence-informed policy from an international perspective. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 678(1), 62–70.
Cloete, F. (2009). Evidence-based policy analysis in South Africa: Critical assessment of the emerging government-wide monitoring and evaluation system. Journal of Public Administration, 44(2), 293–311.
Cook, F. (2001). Evidence-based policy making in a democracy: Exploring the role of policy research in conjunction with politics and public opinion. Paper prepared for delivery of 2001 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco, 30 Aug – 2 Sept.
Council on Foreign Relations (2022). Funding the United Nations: How Much Does the U.S. Pay? Online Editorial.
Crimmins, E. M., & Finch, C. E. (2006). Infection, inflammation, height, and longevity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103(2), 498–503.
Culyer, A. J., & Lomas, J. (2006). Deliberative processes and evidence-informed decision making in healthcare: Do they work and how might we know? Evidence and Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 2(3), 357–371.
Davies, H. T. O., Nutley, S. M. and Smith, P. C. (eds) (2000) What works? Evidence-based policy and practice in public services, Bristol: Policy Press.
Demeritt, D. (2001). The construction of global warming and the politics of science. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 91(2), 307–337.
Demeritt, D. (2006). Science studies, climate change and the prospects for constructivist critique. Economy and Society, 35(3), 453–479.
DiMaggio, P. (1998). The new institutionalisms: Avenues of collaboration. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics., 154(4), 696–705.
Douglas, H. E. (2009). Science, policy, and the value-free ideal. University of Pittsburgh Press.
Druss, B., Glasziou, P., Kernick, D. P., Gerhardus, A., Wilson, T., Ben-Schlomo, Y., Moayyeri, A., Soltani, A., & Twisselmann, B. (2005). Evidence-based medicine: Does it make a difference? British Medical Journal, 330(7482), 92–94.
Easton, D. (1957). An approach to the analysis of political systems. World Politics, 9(3), 383–400.
Epstein, I. (2009). Promoting harmony where there is commonly conflict: Evidence-informed practice as an integrative strategy. Social Work in Healthcare, 48, 216–231.
European Commission. (2015). Strengthening evidence based policy making through scientific advice reviewing existing practice and setting up a European science advice mechanism. White Paper, Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/research/sam/pdf/strengthening_evidence_based_policy_making.pdf. Last accessed 5th June 2020.
Farr, J., Hacker, J. S., & Kazee, N. (2006). The policy scientist of democracy: The discipline of Harold D. Lasswell. American Political Science Review, 100, 579–587.
Fforde, A. (2019). Yes, but what about the authority of policy analysts? A commentary and discussion of Perl et al., ‘Policy-making and truthiness: Can existing models cope with politicized evidence and willful ignorance in a post-fact world?’. Policy Sciences, 52, 153–169.
Foucault, M. (1975). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Penguin. (1991 edition).
Gambrill, E. (2008). Evidence-based (informed) macro practice: Process and philosophy. Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 5(3–4), 423–452.
Gambrill, E. (2012). Social work practice: A critical Thinker’s guide (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Gauch, H. G. (2003). Scientific method in practice. Cambridge University Press.
Gilad, B., Kaish, S., & Loeb, P. D. (1984). From economic behavior to behavioral economics: The behavioral uprising in economics. Journal of Behavioral Economics, 13(2), 3–24.
Goldie, S., Goldhaber-Fieber, J., & Garnett, G. (2006). Chapter 18: Public health policy for cervical cancer prevention: The role of decision science, economic evaluation, and mathematical modeling. Vaccine, 24(3), S155–S163.
Green, D. (2005). On evidence-based political science. Daedalus, 134(3), 96–100.
Haas, P. M. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organisation, 46(1), 1–35.
Haas, E. (1990). When Knowledge Is Power: Three Models of Change in International Organizations, University of California Press.
Haas, E. B. (2018). When knowledge is power: Three models of change in international Organisations. University of California Press.
Hallsworth, M., Parker, S., & Rutter, J. (2011). Policy making in the real world: Evidence and analysis (Vol. 2, p. 10). Institute for Government.
Hammersely, M. (2013). The myth of research-based policy and practice. Sage.
Hammersley, M. (2005a). Is the evidence-based practice movement doing more good than harm? Reflections on Iain Chalmers’ case for research-based policy making and practice. Evidence and Policy, 1(1), 85–100.
Hammersley, M. (2005b). The myth of research-based practice: The critical case of educational inquiry. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(4), 317–330.
Head, B. W. (2016). Toward more “evidence-informed” policy making? Public Administration Review, 76(3), 472–484.
Henig, J. R. (2009). Politicization of evidence: Lessons for an informed democracy. Educational Policy, 23(1), 137–160.
Hodgson, G. M. (2015). On defining institutions: Rules versus equilibria. Journal of Institutional Economics, 11(3), 497–505.
Hume, D., & Millican, P. F. (2007). An enquiry concerning human understanding. Oxford University Press.
Jappie, N. B. (2019). The role of university leadership in advocating social justice in south African higher education. In R. Jeffries (Ed.), Diversity, equity, and inclusivity in contemporary higher education (pp. 243–260). Hershey PA.
Jenkins-Smith, H., & Sabatier, P. (1993). The study of public policy processes. In P. Sabatier & C. Jones (Eds.), (1984) An introduction to public policy. Wadsworth.
Jones, H. (2009). Policymaking as discourse: A review of recent knowledge-to-policy literature, a joint IKM emergent (ODI Working Paper o. 5). ODI.
Jones, H., Jones, N., Shaxston, L., & Walker, D. (2013). Knowledge, policy and power in international development: A practical framework for improving policy, background note. ODI.
Joshi, M. (2016) Major Groups Engagement in the UNFF: Achievements, Challenges and Opportunities. Background paper prepared for the MGPoF for Major Groups Consultation in preparation for the UNFF 2017-2030 Strategic Plan Development, UN: New York.
Kay, A. (2011). Evidence-based policy-making: The elusive search for rational public administration. Australian Journal of Public Administration., 70, 236–245.
Klotz, A. (1995). Norms in international relations. The struggle against apartheid. Cornell University Press.
Lewis P. (2013) Policy thinking, fast and slow: a social intuitionist perspective on public policy processes, American Political Science Association 2013 Annual Meeting. Available at: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2300479. Last accessed 5 May 2022.
Lichem, W. (2015) The United Nations and Science, The UN Chronicle, https://unchronicle.un.org/article/united-nations-and-sciences. Last accessed 17 May 2020.
Lowndes, V. (2010). The institutional approach in theory and methods in political science. In V. Lowndes & M. Roberts (Eds.), Why institutions matter. Palgrave Macmillan.
Mahony, M., & Hulme, M. (2018). Epistemic geographies of climate change: Science, space and politics. Progress in Human Geography, 42(3), 395–424.
March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1984). The New Institutionalism: Organizational Factors in Political Life. The American Political Science Review, 78(3), 734–749. https://doi.org/10.2307/1961840
Marston, G., & Watts, R. (2003). Tampering with the evidence: A critical appraisal of evidence-based policymaking. The drawing board. An Australian Review of Public Affairs, 3(3), 143–163.
Mayhew, S. (2009). A dictionary of geography. Oxford University Press.
Melnyk, B. M., & Newhouse, R. (2014). Evidence-based practice versus evidence-informed practice: A debate that could stall forward momentum in improving healthcare quality, safety, patient outcomes, and costs. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 11(6), 347–349.
Mokyr, J. (2016). A culture of growth: The origins of the modern economy. Princeton.
Nevo, I., & Slonim-Nevo, V. (2011). The myth of evidence-based practice: Towards evidence-informed practice. The British Journal of Social Work, 41(6), 1176–1197.
Newman, J. (2017). Debating the politics of evidence-based policy. Public Administration, 95(4), 1107–1112.
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press.
Nutley, S., Davies H., & Walter, I. (2002). Evidence based policy and practice: Cross sector lessons from the UK, Keynote paper for the Social Policy Research and Evaluation Conference, Wellington, New Zealand, 2-3 July.
OECD. (2020). World Cities Tool, Available at: http://www.worldcitiestool.org/. Last accessed 3 Nov 2020.
Oliver, K. A., & de Vocht, F. (2017). Defining ‘evidence’ in public health: A survey of policymakers’ uses and preferences. European Journal of Public Health, 27(2), 112–117.
Parkhurst, J. O., & Abeysinghe, S. (2016). What constitutes “good” evidence for public health and social policymaking? From hierarchies to appropriateness. Social Epistemology, 30(5–6), 665–679.
Parkhurt, J. (2017). The politics of evidence: From evidence-based policy to the good governance of evidence. Routledge Studies in Governance and Public Policy.
Pemberton, H. R. (2010). “What matters is what works”: Labour’s journey from “national superannuation” to “personal accounts”. British Politics, 5, 41–64.
Perl, A., Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (2018). Policymaking and truthiness: Can existing policy models cope with politicised evidence and willful ignorance in a “post-fact” world? Policy Sciences, 51(4), 581–600.
Picard, L. (2009). The great exhibition. The British Museum, Available at: https://www.bl.uk/victorian-britain/articles/the-great-exhibition. Last accessed 15 May 2022.
Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. The American Political Science Review, 94(2), 251–267.
Pierson, P. (2004). Politics in time. History, institutions, and social analysis. Princeton University Press.
Pitkin, H. (1967). The concept of representation. University of Press.
Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. Basic Books. Popper, K. (1934) in Ivancevich, V. and T. Ivancevich (2008) Quantum leap: From Dirac and Feynman, across the universe to human body and mind, World Scientific Publishing
Prior, M., Sood, G., & Khanna, K. (2015). You cannot be serious: The impact of accuracy incentives on partisan bias in reports of economic perceptions. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 10(4), 489–518.
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.
Rixen, T., & Viola, L. A. (2016). Historical institutionalism and international relations: Towards explaining change and stability in international institutions. In T. Rixen, L. A. Viola, & M. Zurn (Eds.), Historical institutionalism and international relations: Explaining institutional development in world politics (pp. 3–35). Oxford University Press.
Rossiter, M. (1985). Science and public policy since world war II, Historical writings on American science (pp. 273–294). University of Chicago Press.
Russell, B. (1926a). Theory of knowledge, Encyclopaedia Britannica (Vol. 2, 13th ed., pp. 642–645). The Encyclopaedia Britannica Company Ltd.
Russell, B. (1926b). A history of Western philosophy, (7th ed., republished 1976) Simon and Schuster.
Sabatier, P. A. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences, 21(2), 129–168.
Sabatier, P., & Jenkins-Smith, H. (1993). The advocacy coalition framework: Assessment, revisions and implications for scholars and practitioners. In P. Sabatier & H. Jenkins-Smith (Eds.), Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach. Boulder, CO.
Sackett, D. L., Rosenberg, W. M., Muir Gray, J. A., Haynes, R. B., & Richardson, W. S. (1996). Evidence based medicine: What it is and what it Isn’t: It’s about integrating individual clinical expertise and the best external evidence. British Medical Journal, 312(7023), 71–72.
Saunders, M. (2013). Scientific Evidence; What is it and how can we trust it? Comment. SBS News. Available at: https://www.sbs.com.au/news/comment-scientific-evidence-what-is-it-and-how-can-we-trust-it. Last accessed 8 June 2020.
Schorr, L., & Gopal, S. (2016). Broadening the Evidence Base Without “Defining Evidence Down.” Stanford Social Innovation Review. https://doi.org/10.48558/X68F-5596
Scollon, R. & Scollon, S.W.. (2004). Nexus Analysis: Discourse and the Emerging Internet. Nexus Analysis: Discourse and the Emerging Internet. 1-198. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203694343
Shapin, S. (1988). The house of experiment in seventeenth century England. Isis, 79(3), 373.
Shepsle, K. A. (2008). Rational choice institutionalism. In S. Binder, R. Rhodes, B. Rockman, & K. Shepsle (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political institutions. Oxford University Press.
Shlonsky, A., & Mildon, R. (2014). Methodological pluralism in the age of evidence-informed practice and policy. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health., 42(13 Suppl), 18–27.
Simons, H. (2010). Evidence-based practice: Panacea or over promise? Research Paper in Education, 18(4), 303–311.
Solesbury, W. (2001). Evidence based policy: Whence it came and where It’s going, ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice, Working Paper 1. ESRC.
Stanford (2014) Social institutions. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.
Stanford (2018) Karl Popper. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.
Sutcliffe, S., & Court, J. (2005). Evidence-based policymaking: What is it? How does it work? What relevance for developing countries? ODI Working Paper.
Swidler, A. (1986). Culture in action: Symbols and strategies. American Sociological Review, 51, 273–286.
Tagney, J., & Haines, C. (2009). Using evidence-based practice to address gaps in nursing knowledge. British Journal of Nursing, 18(8), 484–489.
Thelen, K. (2003). How institutions evolve. Insights from comparative historical analysis. In J. Mahoney & D. Rueschemeyer (Eds.), Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences (pp. 208–240). Cambridge University Press.
United States Government. (2017). The promise of evidence-based policymaking: Report of the commission on evidence-based policymaking. Report Presented to the U.S. President.
Ward, M. and Mowat, D. (2012) “Creating an Organisational Culture for Evidence-Informed Decision Making”, Healthcare Management Forum, 25(3), 146-150.
Waqa, G., Mavoa, H., Snowdon, W., Moodie, M., Nadakuitavuki, R., McCabe, M., & Swinburn, B. (2013). Participants’ perceptions of a knowledge-brokering strategy to facilitate evidence-informed policymaking in Fiji. BMC Public Health, 13(1).
Weiss, C. (1977). Research for Policy’s sake: The enlightenment function of social research. Policy Analysis, 3(4), 531–545.
Weiss, C. H. (1979). The many meanings of research utilization. Public Administration Review, 39(5), 426.
Wendt, A. (1995). Constructing International Politics. International Security, 20(1), 71–81. https://doi.org/10.2307/2539217
Wesselink, A., Colebatch, H., & Pearce, W. (2014). Evidence and policy: Discourses, meanings and practices. Policy Sciences, 47(4), 339–344.
What Works Network. (2018). The what works network: Five years on. What Works Network.
Whitehead, A.N. & Russell, B. (1910, 1912, 1913) Principia Mathematica, 3 volumes, Cambridge University Press.
Zhmud, L., & Chernoglazov, A. (2008). The origin of the history of science in classical antiquity. De Gruyter.
UN DESA. (2021). CEPA strategy guidance note on the science policy Interface. UNDESA.
UN Secretary General. (2021). United in Science - Video Message from the United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eli0crdZUxg. Last accessed 4 June 2022.
UNESCO. (2016). The future of scientific advice to the United Nations, a summary report to the secretary-general of the United Nations from the scientific advisory board to the UN. UNESCO.
United Nations. (2015a). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development, A/RES/70/1. United Nations.
United Nations (2022a) Committee on Contributions. General Assembly of the United Nations. Online. Available at: https://www.un.org/en/ga/contributions/honourroll.shtml. Last accessed 6 June 2022.
United Nations. (2022b). Regional groups of member states, department for general assembly and conference management, Online. Available at: https://www.un.org/dgacm/en/content/regional-groups. Last accessed 6 June 2022.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Espey, J. (2023). Scientific Evidence in Policy Processes: Concepts and Histories. In: Science in Negotiation. Sustainable Development Goals Series. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18126-9_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18126-9_2
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-18125-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-18126-9
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)