IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v3y2017i1d10.1057_s41599-017-0013-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How can we demonstrate the public value of evidence-based policy making when government ministers declare that the people ‘have had enough of experts’?

Author

Listed:
  • Leighton Andrews

    (Cardiff University)

Abstract

Recent political campaigns on both sides of the Atlantic have led some to argue that we live in the age of ‘post-factual’ or ‘post-truth’ politics, suggesting evidence has a limited role in debate and public policy. How can we demonstrate the public value of evidence-informed debate under those circumstances? Survey evidence on public attitudes to expertise offers some hope that the tone of much of this debate is unduly pessimistic. While policy-making always develops in an environment where evidence is contested, this paper will argue that understanding of the routines through which Ministers work and assimilate evidence is actually under-researched. Not only are Ministers open to evidence, but there is an institutional grounding for evidence-based policy in government. Meanwhile, the creation of devolved institutions has created new sites in the UK for evidence-based policy-making, despite the political tensions between UK and devolved governments. Drawing on academic and think tank insights, and experience as a Welsh Government Minister between 2007 and 2016, this paper argues for three key approaches for the academic community to adopt: understanding the temporal focus of ministers, building trust amongst ministers and those who advise them in the evidence-promoting capacity of the academic policy community, and shaping the wider authorising environment, including the media that contributes to the framing of key policy debates.

Suggested Citation

  • Leighton Andrews, 2017. "How can we demonstrate the public value of evidence-based policy making when government ministers declare that the people ‘have had enough of experts’?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 3(1), pages 1-9, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:3:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-017-0013-4
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-017-0013-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-017-0013-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-017-0013-4?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. R. A. W. Rhodes, 2012. "Theory, Method and British Political Life History," Political Studies Review, Political Studies Association, vol. 10(2), pages 161-176, May.
    2. Philip Davies, 2012. "The State of Evidence-Based Policy Evaluation and its Role in Policy Formation," National Institute Economic Review, National Institute of Economic and Social Research, vol. 219(1), pages 41-52, January.
    3. Maloney, William A. & Jordan, Grant & McLaughlin, Andrew M., 1994. "Interest Groups and Public Policy: The Insider/Outsider Model Revisited," Journal of Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(1), pages 17-38, January.
    4. Jean Hartley, 2011. "Learning in the whirlwind: politicians and leadership development," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(5), pages 331-338, September.
    5. Stephen Brookes & Keith Grint, 2010. "A New Public Leadership Challenge?," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Stephen Brookes & Keith Grint (ed.), The New Public Leadership Challenge, chapter 1, pages 1-15, Palgrave Macmillan.
    6. Matthew Taylor, 2011. "Think tanks, public policy and academia," Public Money & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(1), pages 10-11, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ruth Mayne & Duncan Green & Irene Guijt & Martin Walsh & Richard English & Paul Cairney, 2018. "Using evidence to influence policy: Oxfam’s experience," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-10, December.
    2. Noam Obermeister, 2020. "Tapping into science advisers’ learning," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-9, December.
    3. Margaret Dalziel, 2018. "Why are there (almost) no randomised controlled trial-based evaluations of business support programmes?," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-9, December.
    4. Lindsay A Walker & Natalia S Lawrence & Chris D Chambers & Marsha Wood & Julie Barnett & Hannah Durrant & Lindsey Pike & Gerard O’Grady & Sven Bestmann & Andrew P Kythreotis, 2019. "Supporting evidence-informed policy and scrutiny: A consultation of UK research professionals," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-19, March.

    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. Francesca Colli & Johan Adriaensen, 2020. "Lobbying the state or the market? A framework to study civil society organizations’ strategic behavior," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 14(3), pages 501-513, July.
    2. Aydın Balyer & Erkan Tabancalı, 2019. "The Roles of Interest and Pressure Groups in Developing Sustainable Educational Policies in Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(24), pages 1-15, December.
    3. Jayeon Lindellee & Roberto Scaramuzzino, 2020. "Can EU Civil Society Elites Burst the Brussels Bubble? Civil Society Leaders’ Career Trajectories," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(3), pages 86-96.
    4. Brian G. Fitzgerald & Travis O'Doherty & Richard Moles & Bernadette O'Regan, 2015. "Quantitative Evaluation of Settlement Sustainability Policy (QESSP); Forward Planning for 26 Irish Settlements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-21, February.
    5. Francois Steyn & Kosheek Sewchurran, 2021. "Towards a Grainier Understanding of How to Encourage Morally Responsible Leadership Through the Development of Phronesis: A Typology of Managerial Phronesis," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 170(4), pages 673-695, May.
    6. Jacqueline Sohn, 2018. "Navigating the politics of evidence-informed policymaking: strategies of influential policy actors in Ontario," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 4(1), pages 1-12, December.
    7. Peckham, Allie & Morton-Chang, Frances & Williams, A. Paul & Miller, Fiona A., 2018. "Rebalancing health systems toward community-based care: The role of subsectoral politics," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(11), pages 1260-1265.
    8. Bert Fraussen & Darren Halpin, 2017. "Think tanks and strategic policy-making: the contribution of think tanks to policy advisory systems," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(1), pages 105-124, March.
    9. Derrill D. Watson, 2017. "The political economy of food price policy during the global food price crisis of 2006-2008," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(3), pages 497-509, June.
    10. Christian Adam & Yves Steinebach & Christoph Knill, 2018. "Neglected challenges to evidence-based policy-making: the problem of policy accumulation," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(3), pages 269-290, September.
    11. Coban, Mehmet Kerem, 2020. "Diffuse interest groups and regulatory policy change: Financial consumer protection in Turkey," OSF Preprints f6t5y, Center for Open Science.
    12. Amy Sanders, 2023. "Examining How Equalities Nonprofit Organizations Approach Policy Influencing to Achieve Substantive Representation in Sub-State Government Policymaking," Societies, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-27, February.
    13. C.M. Harrison & R.J.C. Munton & K. Collins, 2004. "Experimental Discursive Spaces: Policy Processes, Public Participation and the Greater London Authority," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(4), pages 903-917, April.
    14. Derrill D. Watson, 2013. "Political Economy Synthesis: the Food Policy Crisis," WIDER Working Paper Series wp-2013-050, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    15. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John List & Claire Mackevicius & Min Sok Lee & Dana Suskind, 2019. "How Can Experiments Play a Greater Role in Public Policy? 12 Proposals from an Economic Model of Scaling," Artefactual Field Experiments 00679, The Field Experiments Website.
    16. Marie Hutchinson & John Daly & Kim Usher & Debra Jackson, 2015. "Editorial: Leadership when there are no easy answers: applying leader moral courage to wicked problems," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(21-22), pages 3021-3023, November.
    17. Carr, Michelle & Beck, Matthias, 2022. "Accounting practices and professional power dynamics during a crisis," The British Accounting Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(3).
    18. Adrià Albareda & Caelesta Braun & Bert Fraussen, 2023. "Explaining why public officials perceive interest groups as influential: on the role of policy capacities and policy insiderness," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 56(2), pages 191-209, June.
    19. Kristin L. Olofsson, 2022. "Winners and losers: Conflict management through strategic policy engagement," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 39(1), pages 73-89, January.
    20. Mehedi Masud & Md. Rakib Hossain, 2021. "Interpreting lived experiences: The dilemmas of public sector leaders," Public Administration & Development, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 41(4), pages 180-190, October.

    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:pal:palcom:v:3:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-017-0013-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    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.