What evidence should social policymakers use?
Policymakers seeking empirical evidence on social policy interventions often find themselves confronted with a mountain of academic studies that are potentially relevant to the question. Without some systematic way to sort through the evidence, there is a risk that analysts will become mired in the research, or simply cherry-pick those studies that support their prior beliefs. An alternative approach is to test each study against a hierarchy of research methods. This article discusses two hierarchies — one used by US medical researchers, and another used by UK social policymakers — and suggests one possible hierarchy for Australia. Naturally, such a hierarchy should not be the only tool used to assess research, and should be used in conjunction with other factors, such as the ranking of the journal in which a study is published. But used carefully, a hierarchy can help policymakers sort through a daunting body of research, and may also inform governments’ decisions on how to evaluate social policy interventions.
Volume (Year): (2009)
Issue (Month): 1 (March)
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: |
Phone: +61 2 6263 2111
Fax: +61 2 6273 2614
Web page: http://www.treasury.gov.au
More information through EDIRC
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:tsy:journl:journl_tsy_er_2009_1_3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (The Treasury (Commonwealth of Australia))
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.