How are evidence and policy conceptualised, and how do they connect? A qualitative systematic review of public policy literature
Background:
While current public policy scholarship can take advantage of a decades-long accumulated knowledge base on the relationship between evidence and policy, it is hard to keep the overview across different literatures. Over time, the ever more differentiated branches of public policy research have developed their own perspectives, languages, and conceptualisations of ‘evidence’ and ‘policy’, as well as their connections.
Aims and objectives:
Existing reviews have stressed that studies often do not provide clear definitions of ‘policy’ or ‘evidence’, and have outlined the importance of investigating underlying conceptualisations in the literature. Against this backdrop, this article investigates how present-day public policy scholarship approaches the concepts of ‘evidence’, ‘policy’, and their connections.
Methods:
We conducted a qualitative systematic review following the PRISMA method. Using a keyword search, we identified relevant articles (n=85) in eleven Q1 and Q2 policy journals included in Web of Science in the period 2015 to 2019.
Findings:
The synthesis confirms that ‘evidence’ and ‘policy’ are often not clearly defined, yet different trends regarding understandings can be identified. There are two approaches taken on the evidence and policy connection: a ‘use of evidence’ or a ‘use for policy’ perspective.
Discussion and conclusions:
Research on evidence and policy would benefit from more explicit conceptual discussions. This review may provide a heuristic for explicating conceptual choices when working with the notions of ‘evidence’, ‘policy’, and their connections. It also suggests several avenues that are worth exploring in future research.
-
* References for the articles included in the review are provided as supplementary data, which is available online at: https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.17294207
-
Acciai, C. and Capano, G. (2021) Policy instruments at work: a meta‐analysis of their applications, Public Administration, 99(1): 118–36. doi: 10.1111/padm.12673
-
Bacchi, C. (2000) Policy as discourse: what does it mean? Where does it get us? Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 21(1): 45–57. doi: 10.1080/01596300050005493
-
Boswell, C. (2009) The Political Uses of Expert Knowledge. Immigration Policy and Social Research, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Cairney, P. (2016) The Politics of Evidence-based Policy Making, London: Palgrave Macmillan.
-
Cairney, P. (2020) Understanding Public Policy. Theories and Issues, 2nd edn, New York: Red Globe Press.
-
Cairney, P. and Oliver, K. (2020) How should academics engage in policymaking to achieve impact? Political Studies Review, 18(2): 228–44. doi: 10.1177/1478929918807714
-
Caplan, N. (1979) The Two-communities theory and knowledge utilization, American Behavioral Scientist, 22(3): 459–70. doi: 10.1177/000276427902200308
-
Christensen, J. (2021) Expert knowledge and policymaking: a multi-disciplinary research agenda, Policy & Politics, 49(3): 455–71, doi: 10.1332/030557320X15898190680037.
-
Colebatch, H. (1998) Policy, Buckingham: Open University Press.
-
Craft, J. and Howlett, M. (2013) The dual dynamics of policy advisory systems: The impact of externalization and politicization on policy advice. Policy and Society, 32(3): 187–97.
-
Dunlop, C.A. and Radaelli, C.M. (2020) Policy learning in comparative policy analysis, Journal of Comparative Policy Analysis: Research and Practice, doi: 10.1080/13876988.2020.1762077.
-
Dye, T. (1972) Understanding Public Policy, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
-
Eagly, A.H. and Chaiken, S. (2007) The advantages of an inclusive definition of attitude, Social Cognition, 25(5): 582–602. doi: 10.1521/soco.2007.25.5.582
-
Flyvbjerg, B. (2001) Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How it Can Succeed Again, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
Freeman, R. (2010) Epistemological bricolage: how practitioners make sense of learning, Administration and Society, 39(4): 476–96. doi: 10.1177/0095399707301857
-
French, R.D. (2019) Is it time to give up on Evidence-based policy? Four answers, Policy & Politics, 47(1): 151–68.
-
Gerring, J. (1999) What makes a concept good? A criterial framework for understanding concept formation in the social sciences, Polity, 31(3): 357–93. doi: 10.2307/3235246
-
Gieryn, T.F. (1983) Boundary-work and the demarcation of science from non-science: strains and interests in professional ideologies of scientists, American Sociological Review, 48(6): 781–95. doi: 10.2307/2095325
-
Halligan, J. (1995) Policy advice and the public service, in B.G. Peters and D.J. Savoie (eds) Governance in a Changing Environment, Québec: Canadian Centre for Management Development, pp 138–72.
-
Howlett, M. and Tosun, J. (2018) Policy styles: a new approach, in M. Howlett and J. Tosun (eds) Policy Styles and Policy-Making. Exploring the Linkages, Abingdon: Routledge.
-
Innvaer, S., Vist, G., Trommald, M. and Oxman, A. (2002) Health policy-makers’ perceptions of their use of evidence: a systematic review, Journal of Health Services Research and Policy, 7(4): 239–44. doi: 10.1258/135581902320432778
-
Knill, C. and Tosun, J. (2020) Public Policy: A New Introduction, 2nd edn, New York: Red Globe Press.
-
Landry, R., Amara, N. and Lamari, M. (2001) Utilization of social science research knowledge in Canada, Research Policy, 30(2): 333–49. doi: 10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00081-0
-
Lindquist, E.A. (1990) The third community, policy inquiry, and social scientists, in S. Brooks and A. Gagnon (eds) Social Scientists, Policy, and the State, New York: Praeger, pp 21–51.
-
Liverani, M., Hawkins, B. and Parkhurst, J.O. (2013) Political and institutional influences on the use of evidence in public health policy: a systematic review, PLoS ONE, 8(10): e77404. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0077404
-
MacKillop, E., Quarmby, S. and Downe, J. (2020) Does knowledge brokering facilitate evidence-based policy? A review of existing knowledge and an agenda for future research, Policy & Politics, 48(2): 335–53.
-
Merton, R.K. (1967) On sociological theories of the middle range, in R.K. Merton, On Theoretical Sociology, New York: Free Press, pp 39–72.
-
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D.G. and Prisma Group (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement, PLoS Medicine, 6(7): e1000097. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
-
Moyson, S., Raaphorst, N., Groeneveld, S. and Van de Walle, S. (2017) Organizational socialization in public administration research: a systematic review and directions for future research, American Review of Public Administration, 48(6), doi: 10.1177/0275074017696160.
-
Neal, J.W., Neal, Z. and Brutzman, B. (2021) Defining brokers, intermediaries, and boundary spanners: a systematic review, Evidence & Policy, doi: 10.1332/174426420X16083745764324.
-
Newman, L., Rowley, J., Vander Hoorn, S., Wijesooriya, N.S., Unemo, M. and Low, N. (2015) Global estimates of the prevalence and incidence of four curable sexually transmitted infections in 2012 based on systematic review and global reporting, PLos One, 10(12): e0143304.
-
Nutley, S., Walter, I. and Davies, H.T. (2009) Promoting evidence-based practice: models and mechanisms from cross-sector review, Research on Social Work Practice, 19(5): 552–59. doi: 10.1177/1049731509335496
-
Oliver, K. and Boaz, A. (2019) Transforming evidence for policy and practice: creating space for new conversations, Palgrave Communications, 5(60): 1–10. doi: 10.1057/s41599-018-0199-0
-
Oliver, K. and Cairney, P. (2019) The dos and don’ts of influencing policy: a systematic review of advice to academics, Palgrave Communications, 5(21): 1–11.
-
Oliver, K., Innvaer, S., Lorenc, T., Woodman, J. and Thomas, J. (2014) A systematic review of barriers to and facilitators of the use of evidence by policymakers, BMC Health Services Research, 14(2): 1–12. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-1
-
Pattyn, V., Blum, S., Fobé, E., Pekar-Milicevic, M. and Brans, M. (2019) Academic policy advice in Consensus-seeking countries: the cases of Belgium and Germany, International Review of Administrative Science, online first, doi: 10.1177/0020852319878780.
-
PytlikZillig, L.M. and Kimbrough, C. (2016) Consensus on conceptualizations and definitions of trust: are we there yet? in E. Shockley, T.M. Neal, L.M. PytlikZillig and B.H. Bornstein (eds) Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Trust, Berlin: Springer, pp 17–47.
-
Riche, C., Aubin, D. and Moyson, S. (2021) Too much of a good thing? A systematic review about the conditions of learning in governance networks, European Policy Analysis, 7(1): 147–64. doi: 10.1002/epa2.1080
-
Strassheim, H. and Kettunen, P. (2014) When does evidence-based policy turn into policy-based evidence? Configurations, contexts and mechanisms, Evidence & Policy, 10(2): 259–77.
-
Strydom, W.F., Funke, N., Nienaber, S., Nortje, K. and Steyn, M. (2010) Evidence-based policymaking: a review, South African Journal of Science, 106(5–6): 17–24. doi: 10.4102/sajs.v106i5/6.249
-
Tenbensel, T. (2008) The role of evidence in policy: how the mix matters, Paper presented at the Twelfth Annual Conference of the Research Society for Public Management, Brisbane.
-
Tosun, J. and Workman, S. (2017) Struggle and triumph in fusing policy process and comparative research, in C.M. Weible and P.A. Sabatier (eds) Theories of the Policy Process, 4th edn, Boulder, CO: Westview Press, pp 329–62.
-
van der Heijden, J. and Kuhlmann, J. (2017) Studying incremental institutional change: a systematic and critical meta-review of the literature from 2005 to 2015, Policy Studies Journal, 45(3): 535–54. doi: 10.1111/psj.12191
-
Verweij, S. and Trell, E.M. (2019) Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) in spatial planning research and related disciplines: a systematic literature review of applications, Journal of Planning Literature, 34(3): 300–317. doi: 10.1177/0885412219841490
-
Weiss, C.H. (1979) The many meanings of research utilization, Public Administration Review, 39(5): 426–31. doi: 10.2307/3109916
-
Wildavsky, A.B. (1979) Speaking Truth to Power the Art and Craft of Policy Analysis, 2nd edn, Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
| May 2022 onwards | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Abstract Views | 84 | 84 | 84 |
| Full Text Views | 63 | 63 | 9 |
| PDF Downloads | 60 | 60 | 13 |
We are a leading social science publisher
committed to making a difference.
Bristol University Press and
Policy Press
bristoluniversitypress.co.uk