IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v5y2015i3p2158244015604193.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Mobilization of Scientific Evidence by Public Policy Analysts

Author

Listed:
  • Pierre-Olivier Bédard

Abstract

Research on knowledge mobilization in policy making has been largely focused on identifying relevant factors having an effect on the uptake of evidence by actors and organizations. However, evidence on the magnitude of those effects remains limited and existing methods allowing for this have been scarcely used in this field. In this article, we first provide a rationale for greater investigation of substantive effect sizes, using methods such as mediation analysis and conditional probabilities. Using cross-sectional data from Québec (Canada) government policy analysts, we test an absorptive capacity model and describe direct, specific indirect, and total effects estimated from a path analysis. The results show that some factors have considerable effects, such as physical access and individual field of training, whereas some mediated relations are worth considering. Finally, we discuss some practical implications with regard to policy making and policy analysis but also the methodological standards of empirical research in this field.

Suggested Citation

  • Pierre-Olivier Bédard, 2015. "The Mobilization of Scientific Evidence by Public Policy Analysts," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(3), pages 21582440156, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:5:y:2015:i:3:p:2158244015604193
    DOI: 10.1177/2158244015604193
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2158244015604193
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2158244015604193?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Adam Wellstead & Richard Stedman, 2010. "Policy Capacity and Incapacity in Canada's Federal Government," Public Management Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(6), pages 893-910, November.
    2. Michael Howlett, 2011. "Public Managers as the Missing Variable in Policy Studies: An Empirical Investigation Using Canadian Data," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 28(3), pages 247-263, May.
    3. Lois Orton & Ffion Lloyd-Williams & David Taylor-Robinson & Martin O'Flaherty & Simon Capewell, 2011. "The Use of Research Evidence in Public Health Decision Making Processes: Systematic Review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(7), pages 1-10, July.
    4. Pierre-Olivier Bédard & Mathieu Ouimet, 2012. "Cognizance and Consultation of Randomized Controlled Trials among Ministerial Policy Analysts," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 29(5), pages 625-644, September.
    5. Ian Sanderson, 2009. "Intelligent Policy Making for a Complex World: Pragmatism, Evidence and Learning," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57(4), pages 699-719, December.
    6. Michael J. Hanmer & Kerem Ozan Kalkan, 2013. "Behind the Curve: Clarifying the Best Approach to Calculating Predicted Probabilities and Marginal Effects from Limited Dependent Variable Models," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 57(1), pages 263-277, January.
    7. Kothari, Anita & Birch, Stephen & Charles, Cathy, 2005. ""Interaction" and research utilisation in health policies and programs: does it work?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 117-125, January.
    8. Hal Colebatch, 2006. "What work makes policy?," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 39(4), pages 309-321, December.
    9. Ian Sanderson, 2009. "Intelligent Policy Making for a Complex World: Pragmatism, Evidence and Learning," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 57, pages 699-719, December.
    10. Michael Howlett, 2009. "Policy Advice in Multi-Level Governance Systems: Sub-National Policy Analysts and Analysis," International Review of Public Administration, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(3), pages 1-16, January.
    11. Ruixin Guo & Hongtu Zhu & Sy-Miin Chow & Joseph G. Ibrahim, 2012. "Bayesian Lasso for Semiparametric Structural Equation Models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 68(2), pages 567-577, June.
    12. Herron, Michael C., 1999. "Postestimation Uncertainty in Limited Dependent Variable Models," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 83-98, January.
    13. Dan Durning & Will Osuna, 1994. "Policy analysts' roles and value orientations: An empirical investigation using Q methodology," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 13(4), pages 629-657.
    14. Landry, Rejean & Amara, Nabil & Lamari, Moktar, 2001. "Utilization of social science research knowledge in Canada," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 333-349, February.
    15. Michael Wood, 2013. "Making Statistical Methods More Useful," SAGE Open, , vol. 3(1), pages 21582440134, February.
    16. King, Gary & Zeng, Langche, 2006. "The Dangers of Extreme Counterfactuals," Political Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 131-159, April.
    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. Claire A Dunlop, 2014. "The Possible Experts: How Epistemic Communities Negotiate Barriers to Knowledge Use in Ecosystems Services Policy," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 32(2), pages 208-228, April.
    2. O’Connor John, 2022. "Strengthening the science–policy interface in Ireland," Administration, Sciendo, vol. 70(4), pages 29-52, December.
    3. Crabolu, Gloria & Font, Xavier & Eker, Sibel, 2023. "Evaluating policy complexity with Causal Loop Diagrams," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    4. Ansell, Christopher K. & Bartenberger, Martin, 2016. "Varieties of experimentalism," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 64-73.
    5. Arnošt Veselý, 2017. "Policy advice as policy work: a conceptual framework for multi-level analysis," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(1), pages 139-154, March.
    6. Srinivasa Vittal Katikireddi & Shona Hilton & Chris Bonell & Lyndal Bond, 2014. "Understanding the Development of Minimum Unit Pricing of Alcohol in Scotland: A Qualitative Study of the Policy Process," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(3), pages 1-10, March.
    7. 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.
    8. Christian Dagenais & Marie Malo & Émilie Robert & Mathieu Ouimet & Diane Berthelette & Valéry Ridde, 2013. "Knowledge Transfer on Complex Social Interventions in Public Health: A Scoping Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(12), pages 1-9, December.
    9. Walton, Mat, 2014. "Applying complexity theory: A review to inform evaluation design," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 119-126.
    10. Greenhalgh, Trisha & Engebretsen, Eivind, 2022. "The science-policy relationship in times of crisis: An urgent call for a pragmatist turn," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 306(C).
    11. Stucki, Iris, 2018. "Evidence-based arguments in direct democracy: The case of smoking bans in Switzerland," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 148-156.
    12. Deas, L. & Mattu, L. & Gnich, W., 2013. "Intelligent policy making? Key actors' perspectives on the development and implementation of an early years' initiative in Scotland's public health arena," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 1-8.
    13. Gates, Emily F., 2016. "Making sense of the emerging conversation in evaluation about systems thinking and complexity science," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 62-73.
    14. Nguyen, Sun V. & Langston, Nancy & Wellstead, Adam & Howlett, Michael, 2020. "Mining the evidence: Public comments and evidence-based policymaking in the controversial Minnesota PolyMet mining project," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    15. William Ascher, 2021. "Coping with intelligence deficits in poverty-alleviation policies in low-income countries," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(2), pages 345-370, June.
    16. Willis, Cameron David & Corrigan, Crystal & Stockton, Lisa & Greene, Julie Kathryn & Riley, Barbara Lyn, 2017. "Exploring the unanticipated effects of multi-sectoral partnerships in chronic disease prevention," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(2), pages 158-168.
    17. Belinda McFadgen & Dave Huitema, 2018. "Experimentation at the interface of science and policy: a multi-case analysis of how policy experiments influence political decision-makers," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 51(2), pages 161-187, June.
    18. Giliberto Capano & Jun Jie Woo, 2017. "Resilience and robustness in policy design: a critical appraisal," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 50(3), pages 399-426, September.
    19. Palinkas, Lawrence A. & Saldana, Lisa & Chou, Chih-Ping & Chamberlain, Patricia, 2017. "Use of research evidence and implementation of evidence-based practices in youth-serving systems," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 242-247.
    20. Haynes, Abby S. & Derrick, Gjemma E. & Chapman, Simon & Redman, Sally & Hall, Wayne D. & Gillespie, James & Sturk, Heidi, 2011. "From "our world" to the "real world": Exploring the views and behaviour of policy-influential Australian public health researchers," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 72(7), pages 1047-1055, April.

    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:sae:sagope:v:5:y:2015:i:3:p:2158244015604193. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.