IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/wbecrv/v31y2017i2p553-569..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Providing Policy Makers with Timely Advice: The Timeliness-Rigor Trade-off

Author

Listed:
  • Clive Bell
  • Lyn Squire

Abstract

Policy makers bemoan the lack of research findings to guide urgent decisions, whereas researchers' professional code puts rigor first. This article argues that provisional assessments, produced early in the research cycle, can bridge the gap. Numerous case studies point to the importance of early interaction with policy makers and the delivery of brief, policy-focused papers; but preliminary analyses may be flawed and so increase the chances of a wrong decision. This article demonstrates analytically that a preliminary assessment, supported by the offer of more refined research, provides an option that is superior, on average, to the current practice of submitting a final report at the end of the research cycle. Where practical implementation is concerned, it calls for donor-funded subsidies to promote the use of provisional assessments and for a rapid, independent, professional review process to ensure their quality. While the research-policy exchange in developing countries is a complex, context-specific phenomenon, the proposal offered here holds out some promise of improving decisions in the public sphere under a wide range of circumstances.

Suggested Citation

  • Clive Bell & Lyn Squire, 2017. "Providing Policy Makers with Timely Advice: The Timeliness-Rigor Trade-off," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 31(2), pages 553-569.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:wbecrv:v:31:y:2017:i:2:p:553-569.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/wber/lhw005
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lant Pritchett & Salimah Samji & Jeffrey Hammer, 2012. "It’s All About MeE: Using Structured Experiential Learning (‘e’) to Crawl the Design Space," CID Working Papers 249, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    2. repec:pri:rpdevs:hammer_its_all_about_me is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Lant Pritchett, Justin Sandefur, 2013. "Context Matters for Size: Why External Validity Claims and Development Practice Don't Mix-Working Paper 336," Working Papers 336, Center for Global Development.
    4. Lant Pritchett & Salimah Samji & Jeffrey Hammer, 2012. "It’s All About MeE: Using Structured Experiential Learning (‘e’) to Crawl the Design Space," CID Working Papers 249, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    5. Rebecca L. Thornton & Laurel E. Hatt & Erica M. Field & Mursaleena Islam & Freddy Solís Diaz & Martha Azucena González, 2010. "Social security health insurance for the informal sector in Nicaragua: a randomized evaluation," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(S1), pages 181-206, September.
    6. Andrew M. Jones & Lyn Squire & Ranjeeta Thomas, 2010. "Evaluating innovative health programs," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(S1), pages 1-4, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Florent Bédécarrats & Isabelle Guérin & François Roubaud, 2019. "All that Glitters is not Gold. The Political Economy of Randomized Evaluations in Development," Development and Change, International Institute of Social Studies, vol. 50(3), pages 735-762, May.
    2. Michael Woolcock, 2013. "Using Case Studies to Explore the External Validity of ‘Complex’ Development Interventions," CID Working Papers 270, Center for International Development at Harvard University.
    3. Cornick, Jorge & Trejos, Alberto, 2016. "Building Public Capabilities for Productive Development Policies: Costa Rican Case Studies," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 8017, Inter-American Development Bank.
    4. Woolcock, Michael, 2013. "Using Case Studies to Explore the External Validity of 'Complex' Development Interventions," Working Paper Series rwp13-048, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    5. Matthijs Janssen, 2016. "What bangs for your bucks? Assessing the design and impact of transformative policy," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 16-05, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Dec 2016.
    6. Lant Pritchett, Justin Sandefur, 2013. "Context Matters for Size: Why External Validity Claims and Development Practice Don't Mix-Working Paper 336," Working Papers 336, Center for Global Development.
    7. Jorge Cornick & Alberto Trejos, 2016. "Building Public Capabilities for Productive Development Policies: Costa Rican Case Studies," IDB Publications (Working Papers) 96956, Inter-American Development Bank.
    8. Janssen, Matthijs J., 2019. "What bangs for your buck? Assessing the design and impact of Dutch transformative policy," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 78-94.
    9. Mebratie, Anagaw D. & Sparrow, Robert & Yilma, Zelalem & Alemu, Getnet & Bedi, Arjun S., 2015. "Enrollment in Ethiopia’s Community-Based Health Insurance Scheme," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 58-76.
    10. Renuka Sane & Susan Thomas, 2020. "From Participation To Repurchase: Low Income Households And Micro‐insurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 87(3), pages 783-814, September.
    11. Powell-Jackson, Timothy & Mazumdar, Sumit & Mills, Anne, 2015. "Financial incentives in health: New evidence from India's Janani Suraksha Yojana," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 154-169.
    12. Florent Bédécarrats & Isabelle Guérin & François Roubaud, 2015. "The gold standard for randomized evaluations: from discussion of method to political economy," Working Papers DT/2015/01, DIAL (Développement, Institutions et Mondialisation).
    13. BONAN Jacopo & DAGNELIE Olivier & LEMAY-BOUCHER Philippe & TENIKUE Michel, 2012. "Is it all about Money? A Randomized Evaluations of the Impact of Insurance Literacy and Marketing Treatments on the Demand for Health Microinsurance in Senegal," LISER Working Paper Series 2012-03, Luxembourg Institute of Socio-Economic Research (LISER).
    14. Osei Afriyie, Doris & Masiye, Felix & Tediosi, Fabrizio & Fink, Günther, 2023. "Confidence in the health system and health insurance enrollment among the informal sector population in Lusaka, Zambia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 321(C).
    15. Giesbert, Lena & Steiner, Susan, 2011. "Perceptions of (Micro)Insurance in Southern Ghana: The Role of Information and Peer Effects," GIGA Working Papers 183, GIGA German Institute of Global and Area Studies.
    16. Clara Delavallade, 2017. "Quality Health Care and Willingness to Pay for Health Insurance Retention: A Randomized Experiment in Kolkata Slums," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(5), pages 619-638, May.
    17. Karthik Muralidharan & Venkatesh Sundararaman, 2013. "Contract Teachers: Experimental Evidence from India," NBER Working Papers 19440, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Florent Bedecarrats & Isabelle Guérin & François Roubaud, 2017. "L'étalon-or des évaluations randomisées : du discours de la méthode à l'économie politique," Working Papers ird-01445209, HAL.
    19. Lin, Lin & Zai, Xianhua, 2022. "The Power of Public Insurance With Limited Benefits: Evidence from China's New Cooperative Medical Scheme," GLO Discussion Paper Series 1180, Global Labor Organization (GLO).
    20. Bernal, Noelia & Carpio, Miguel A. & Klein, Tobias J., 2017. "The effects of access to health insurance: Evidence from a regression discontinuity design in Peru," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 122-136.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D61 - Microeconomics - - Welfare Economics - - - Allocative Efficiency; Cost-Benefit Analysis
    • H43 - Public Economics - - Publicly Provided Goods - - - Project Evaluation; Social Discount Rate
    • O20 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - General
    • O21 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Planning Models; Planning Policy
    • O22 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Project Analysis

    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:wbecrv:v:31:y:2017:i:2:p:553-569.. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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://edirc.repec.org/data/wrldbus.html .

    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.