IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/policy/v48y2015i3p383-393.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Beyond the two communities: a reply to Mead’s “why government often ignores research”

Author

Listed:
  • Joshua Newman
  • Brian Head

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Joshua Newman & Brian Head, 2015. "Beyond the two communities: a reply to Mead’s “why government often ignores research”," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(3), pages 383-393, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:policy:v:48:y:2015:i:3:p:383-393
    DOI: 10.1007/s11077-015-9226-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s11077-015-9226-9
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11077-015-9226-9?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. Charles McClintock & Staci Lowe, 2007. "And the question is? Knowledge growth in welfare policy research," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 40(1), pages 35-54, March.
    2. Lawrence Mead, 2015. "Only connect: Why government often ignores research," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(2), pages 257-272, June.
    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. Falk Daviter, 2015. "The political use of knowledge in the policy process," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(4), pages 491-505, December.
    2. Garrett Ward Richards, 2019. "The Science–Policy Relationship Hierarchy (SPRHi) model of co-production: how climate science organizations have influenced the policy process in Canadian case studies," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(1), pages 67-95, March.
    3. Jessica H. Phoenix & Lucy G. Atkinson & Hannah Baker, 2019. "Creating and communicating social research for policymakers in government," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 5(1), pages 1-11, December.

    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. Garrett Ward Richards, 2019. "The Science–Policy Relationship Hierarchy (SPRHi) model of co-production: how climate science organizations have influenced the policy process in Canadian case studies," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(1), pages 67-95, March.
    2. Falk Daviter, 2015. "The political use of knowledge in the policy process," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 48(4), pages 491-505, December.
    3. Hyensup Shim & Kiyoon Shin, 2021. "Empirical Analysis of Evidence-Based Policymaking in R&D Programmes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(1), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Stijn Voorst & Ellen Mastenbroek, 2019. "Evaluations as a decent knowledge base? Describing and explaining the quality of the European Commission’s ex-post legislative evaluations," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 52(4), pages 625-644, December.

    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:kap:policy:v:48:y:2015:i:3:p:383-393. 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: http://www.springer.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.