IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jpamgt/v8y1989i3p411-431.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Congressional committees as users of analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Carol H. Weiss

Abstract

Structural arrangements in the Congress work against the use of analysis, but newer developments, such as growth in staff professionalism and activity of the congressional support agencies, tend to promote it. Interviews with committee staff show that they are aware of much analysis, use it primarily for political advantage, but that they also take it seriously as warning of problems and as guidance on particular issues. Staff value information more when they know and trust its source and understand its political motivations. The use of analysis to reconceptualize problems is not much in evidence, perhaps because such “enlightenment” takes place elsewhere and filters into the Congress through informal channels.

Suggested Citation

  • Carol H. Weiss, 1989. "Congressional committees as users of analysis," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(3), pages 411-431.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:8:y:1989:i:3:p:411-431
    DOI: 10.2307/3324932
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.2307/3324932
    File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.2307/3324932?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
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Collantes, Gustavo O, 2006. "The California Zero-Emission Vehicle Mandate: A Study of the Policy Process, 1990-2004," Institute of Transportation Studies, Working Paper Series qt9030893m, Institute of Transportation Studies, UC Davis.
    2. Pannell, David J., 2004. "Effectively communicating economics to policy makers," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 48(3), pages 1-21.
    3. Allison Gruner Gandhi & Erin Murphy-Graham & Anthony Petrosino & Sara Schwartz Chrismer & Carol H. Weiss, 2007. "The Devil Is in the Details," Evaluation Review, , vol. 31(1), pages 43-74, February.
    4. E. Sam Overman & Anthony G. Cahill, 1994. "Information, market government, and health policy: A study of health data organizations in the states," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(3), pages 435-453.
    5. David L. Weimer, 2002. "JPAM reaches majority," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(3), pages 355-358.
    6. Jonathan Lewallen & Sean M. Theriault & Bryan D. Jones, 2016. "Congressional dysfunction: An information processing perspective," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 10(2), pages 179-190, June.
    7. Lundin, Martin & Öberg, PerOla, 2012. "Towards reason: political disputes, public attention and the use of expert knowledge in policymaking," Working Paper Series 2012:4, IFAU - Institute for Evaluation of Labour Market and Education Policy.
    8. Martin Lundin & PerOla Öberg, 2014. "Expert knowledge use and deliberation in local policy making," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 47(1), pages 25-49, March.
    9. Nancy Shulock, 1999. "The paradox of policy analysis: If it is not used, why do we produce so much of it?," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(2), pages 226-244.
    10. Pirmin Bundi & Philipp Trein, 2022. "Evaluation use and learning in public policy," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 55(2), pages 283-309, June.
    11. Emily McKenzie & Stephen Posner & Patricia Tillmann & Joanna R Bernhardt & Kirsten Howard & Amy Rosenthal, 2014. "Understanding the Use of Ecosystem Service Knowledge in Decision Making: Lessons from International Experiences of Spatial Planning," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 32(2), pages 320-340, April.
    12. Bundi, Pirmin, 2018. "Parliamentarians’ strategies for policy evaluations," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 130-138.
    13. Eberli, Daniela, 2018. "Tracing the use of evaluations in legislative processes in Swiss cantonal parliaments," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 139-147.
    14. Walker, Tom & Ryan, Jim & Kelley, Tim, 2010. "Impact Assessment of Policy-Oriented International Agricultural Research: Evidence and Insights from Case Studies," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 38(10), pages 1453-1461, October.
    15. Sager, Fritz, 2018. "Policy evaluation and democracy: Do they fit?," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 125-129.

    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:wly:jpamgt:v:8:y:1989:i:3:p:411-431. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/34787/home .

    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.