IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v43y2016i2p157-168..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The magician’s hat: Evidence and openness in policy making

Author

Listed:
  • Mike Porteous

Abstract

This paper focuses on evidence and openness in policy making, drawing primarily on hands-on experience in innovation and industrial policy in the UK. We suggest that much of the current debates use unhelpful juxtapositions and are insufficiently focused on what is happening in the darkness of the policy making ‘magician’s hat’. We use a post-positivist perspective to tease open key features of openness and evidence in policy making, showing similar and intertwined social processes at work in the supposedly distinct worlds of political, administrative officialdom and expertise. From there we map out a range of external influences on policy making, putting evidence, expert knowledge and other inputs into context. We then focus on knowledge generation and what we term the breadth and depth of policy definition to introduce a novel typology of policy making. This helps us to identify the different forms that openness and the use of evidence and expertise take.

Suggested Citation

  • Mike Porteous, 2016. "The magician’s hat: Evidence and openness in policy making," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 43(2), pages 157-168.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:43:y:2016:i:2:p:157-168.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scv024
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:43:y:2016:i:2:p:157-168.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.