Towards an ‘Ethics of Evidence’: Unsettling knowledge inequalities in urban development practice

Globally, ‘evidence-based’ approaches within urban development policy and planning are on the rise. However, terms such as data, evidence, research, information, and knowledge are often used interchangeably, which can obscure epistemological differences on the understandings of knowledge. Taking cues from Southern scholars, this article unpacks the epistemological underpinnings which shape how knowledge—and therefore evidence—are understood. To do so, this article focuses on three concepts which have a strong influence on global evidence discourse: objectivity, rigour, and value for money, unsettling their rationalities and manifestations in contemporary urban development practice. This paper argues that the turn towards evidence—while fundamental to addressing global challenges—also embodies many of the characteristics of a ‘boundary concept’, with sufficient interpretive flexibility to foster collaboration across a range of diverse stakeholders, but with risks attached to its conceptual fuzziness. This article concludes by calling for an ‘ethics of evidence’, which challenges the uneven geographies of knowledge, and draws out the implications for an approach to evidence which engages with how urban developmental challenges are understood, measured, and managed.