Evidence & Policy

A journal of research, debate and practice

Evidence & Policy is the first peer-reviewed journal dedicated to comprehensive and critical assessment of the relationship between researchers and the evidence they produce and the concerns of policy makers and practitioners. Read more about Evidence & Policy.

Impact Factor (2022): 2.1                           Frequency: February, May, August and November

Restricted access

Aims and scope 
Journal metrics
Abstracting and indexing

Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
Average lead times 
Carol Weiss Prize
Testimonials 
Contact us

Aims and scope 

Evidence & Policy is the first peer-reviewed journal dedicated to comprehensive and critical assessment of the relationship between researchers and the evidence they produce and the concerns of policy makers and practitioners.

International in scope and interdisciplinary in focus, it addresses the needs of those who develop public policies, provide public services, or provide the research base for evaluation and development across a wide range of social and public policy issues (e.g. criminal justice, employment and welfare, education, environmental protection, finance, health, housing, international development, social care and transport), and those who are working to connect the two (such as knowledge brokers).

As well as more traditional research articles, the journal includes review and method articles, contemporary debate pieces and articles from practice.

Journal metrics

2022 Impact Factor: 2.1 (2yr)
Ranking: 47/110 in Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary (Q2);

2022 Journal Citation Indicator: 1.4 
Ranking: 33/265 in Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary (Q1);

2022 Scopus Cite Score: 4.7
Ranking: 49/502 in Social Science, miscellaneous (90th percentile)

2021 SJR: 0.84
Ranking: 21/177 in Social Science (miscellaneous) (Q1)

Abstracting and indexing 

Evidence & Policy is abstracted and/or indexed in:

Current Contents/Social and Behavioural Sciences
CSA Sociological abstracts
Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)
European Reference Index for the Humanities and Social Sciences (ERIH PLUS)
International Bibliography of Social Sciences (IBSS)
International Political Science Abstracts (IPSA)
Journal Citation Reports - Social Science Edition
ProQuest Central
ProQuest Criminal Justice Collection
ProQuest Criminology Collection
ProQuest Politics Collection
ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection
Scopus
Social Care Online (SCIE)
Social Policy & Practice
Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI)
Zetoc (through the British Library)

Equity, Diversity and Inclusion

Our Equity, Diversity and Inclusion statement outlines the ways in which we seek to ensure that equity, diversity and inclusion are integral to all aspects of our publishing, and how we might encourage and drive positive change. 

Back to top

Average lead times

The current average turnaround times for Evidence & Policy:

10 days from submission to initial decision
59 days for initial post-review decision
32 days from acceptance to online publication

Carol Weiss Prize

To mark the tenth anniversary of Evidence & Policy, the journal launched a prize that recognises outstanding early career contributors to the journal. The prize was created in memory of Professor Carol Weiss, the first North American Editor of Evidence & Policy and a pioneer in the field, and it will be awarded every two years.

We are delighted to announce that the winners of the 2023 Carol Weiss Prize are Brian W. Gac, Hanna Yakubi and Dorie E. Apollonio, for their Research Article:

Issues arising from the study design, conduct, and promotion of clinical trials funded by opioid manufacturers: a review of internal pharmaceutical industry documents

Learn more about the Carol Weiss Prize.

Testimonials 

"Evidence & Policy is the journal that helps me to keep up to date with the latest thinking and research in this field .”
Sandra Nutley, Professor of Public Policy and Management, School of Management, University of St Andrews, UK

"It is crucial to understand how the use of solid evidence can improve policy advice, and improve professional service delivery practices. Evidence & Policy stepped boldly into this emerging field a decade ago, and helped define the issues, advance understandings, and improve professional practices.  I look forward to the next 10 years, and beyond, as it helps to shape the future of the field." 
Professor Brian Head FASSA, ARC Professorial Fellow, Institute for Social Science Research & School of Political Science, The University of Queensland, Australia

Contact us

Editorial enquiries:

Editorial team: evidenceandpolicy@ucl.ac.uk

Open access, subscriptions and free trials:

Policy Press: pp-journals@bristol.ac.uk

Read our instructions for authors for guidance on how to prepare your submissions. The instructions include the following: 

What are we looking for?
How to submit an article
Editorial review process

Ethical guidelines
Copyright
Style
Alt-text
References
English language editing service
Open Access
Self-archiving and institutional repositories
How to maximise the impact of your article
Contact us

Visit our journal author tool kit for resources and advice to support you through the publication process and beyond.

What are we looking for?

Evidence & Policy publishes original and outstanding scholarship addressing the relationship between evidence and policy or practice. We currently publish five types of paper: (1) research articles (5-7000 words); (2) review articles (5-7000 words); (3) methods articles (5-7000 words); (4) debate articles (3-5000 words); and (5) practice articles (up to 3000 words). We welcome papers from any disciplinary perspective, and geo-political context, and from authors based in any world region. Authors based in low- and middle-income settings can benefit from Policy Press’s reduced Open Access rates and waivers.

Contributions are welcome from a wide range of disciplines and policy areas, and papers that adopt an interdisciplinary or transdisciplinary approach are especially welcome. All contributions should offer new insights or describe research or practice that develops the transdisciplinary field of knowledge about the relationship between evidence, policy and practice. Papers that solely present evidence to inform policy or which focus on single case studies in ways that do not build on the wealth of existing knowledge will not be considered. Instead, we seek articles to present nuanced and well-informed characterisations of teh state of the field. Manuscripts should not be published or be under consideration for publication elsewhere. The editors welcome pre-submission inquiries about the suitability of manuscripts for Evidence & Policy; such inquiries should include an abstract (see below) for the prospective manuscript. 

The scope of the journal is expanded upon in the Editorials published in 14:215:4, and 18:1.

1. Research articles describe an original piece of primary research that has relevance to the relationship between evidence and policy or practice. Shorter papers of up to 5000 words are encouraged, but the maximum limit is 7000 words, including figures and tables. Each research article must include the following sections:

  • Abstract: up to 250 words, written in complete sentences.
  • Background: explaining the nature and importance of the research question being addressed and usually including a summary of what is known about the issue already (via a concise literature review or references to published literature reviews on the topic), and outlining relevant theoretical or epistemological stances.
  • Methods: whether using quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods, this should include enough information on methods of data collection and analysis for readers to understand exactly what was done and why and be assured of methodological rigour. The choice of methods should be justified.
  • Findings: the results should be presented clearly, with visualisations where required. 
  • Discussion and conclusions: should describe the key findings, the strengths and weaknesses of the work, how the key findings relate to other relevant studies, and the contribution made to key debates in the transdisciplinary field of knowledge about the relationship between evidence, policy and practice. It should also include any policy, practice or research implications and/or recommendations.
  • Authors should give serious consideration to the use of reporting guidelines (see https://www.equator-network.org/). If there are relevant guidelines which have not been used, please explain why in the comments to the editor during the submission process. Research articles reporting data collected using a survey must clearly report the survey response rate and/or provide evidence of the sample’s representativeness of the target population. Evidence and Policy generally does not consider research articles reporting on data from convenience samples.

2. Review articles take stock of research on the relationship between evidence and policy or practice, or on methodological approaches to conducting research on this relationship. Authors should clearly articulate the contribution the review has made to our understanding of the research theme under review and to advancing the science of evidence use. Reviews that incorporate a wider range of sources from more than one field of inquiry are more likely to fulfil this brief than reviews that focus more tightly on one programme, profession, or setting. Review articles may take the form of either systematic reviews or scoping reviews, and should follow the relevant Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses, or PRISMA, guidelines (see http://www.prisma-statement.org/ and http://www.prisma-statement.org/Extensions/ScopingReviews).

Shorter papers of up to 5000 words are encouraged, but the maximum limit is 7000 words, including figures and tables. It is not required that all reviewed items to be cited; optionally authors may provide a complete list of reviewed items as supplementary material that does not count against the word limit. Each review article must have the following sections:

  • Abstract: up to 250 words, written in complete sentence.
  • Background: explaining the nature and importance of the research question being addressed and usually including a summary of what is known about the issue already (via a concise literature review or references to published literature reviews on the topic) and outlining any relevant theoretical or epistemological stances.
  • Methods: this should include enough information on methods of data collection and analysis for readers to understand exactly what was done and why, and should follow the PRISMA guidelines.
  • Findings: the results should be presented clearly, with visualisations where required.
  • Discussion and conclusions: should describe the key findings, the strengths and weaknesses of the work, how the key findings relate to other relevant studies, and the contribution made to key debates in the transdisciplinary field of knowledge about the relationship between evidence, policy and practice. It should also include any policy, practice or research implications and/or recommendations.

3.  Method articles describe quantitative, qualitative, or mixed methods that are uniquely useful for investigating the intersection of evidence with policy or practice. Papers introducing new or innovative methods/measures should contain evidence of their utility and validity, and should discuss their relationship to similar existing methods/measures. Papers demonstrating existing methods should adopt a tutorial style and should include detailed examples. If the method involves materials (e.g., computer code, survey items, interview protocol), these materials must be provided with the submission.

Shorter papers of up to 5000 words are encouraged, but the maximum limit is 7000 words, including figures and tables. Method articles must include an abstract, and may include the following additional sections as necessary:

  • Abstract: up to 250 words, written in complete sentence, with the following headings: (1) Background, (2) Aims and objectives, (3) Methods, (4) Findings, (5) Discussion and conclusion.
  • Background: explaining the nature and importance of the research question being addressed and usually including a summary of what is known about the issue already (via a concise literature review or references to published literature reviews on the topic), and outlining any relevant theoretical or epistemological stances
  • Methods: this should include enough information on methods of data collection and analysis for readers to understand exactly what was done and why. The choice of methods should be justified.
  • Findings: the results should be presented clearly, with visualisations where required. 
  • Discussion and conclusions: should describe the key findings, the strengths and weaknesses of the work, how the key findings relate to other relevant studies, and the contribution made to key debates in the transdisciplinary field of knowledge about the relationship between evidence, policy and practice. It should also include any policy, practice or research implications and/or recommendations.

4. Debate articles are opinion pieces on an issue relevant to the relationship between evidence and policy or practice. Debate articles should take a position on a point of controversy about evidence use or related issues in academia, policy or practice, and construct a supporting argument. For example, they could focus on the use of a particular methodology, bring in concepts from new fields to the evidence/policy debate, or discuss the implications of a change in policy on evidence generation, funding or use. The editors may choose to invite brief commentaries to be published alongside debate articles. Debate articles are externally peer reviewed, while commentaries are only internally reviewed.

Shorter papers of up to 3,000 words are encouraged, but the maximum limit is 5,000, including figures and tables. All debate articles must include an abstract of up to 250 words, but other wise may be organised using subheaders as necessary:

  • Abstract of up to 250 words, written in complete sentences.
  • Background: explaining the nature and importance of the issue being addressed and describing previous work in the area (if any), with relevant references.
  • Discussion, conclusions and implications of the piece.

5. Practice papers are a description and assessment of a project or process by which evidence was or could be applied to policy and practice, from the point of view of a practitioner. Practice articles are not externally peer reviewed, but are reviewed internally by the editors. Shorter papers of up to 3000 words and no more than 10 references are preferred. All practice articles must include at least one non-academic practitioner as an author. This sections included in practice papers are flexible, and prospective authors are encouraged to contact the editors for guidance prior to submission.

Back to top

How to submit an article

All submissions should be made online at the Evidence & Policy Editorial Manager website: http://www.editorialmanager.com/evidpol/default.aspx, in Word or Rich Text Format (not pdf). New users should first create an account, specify their areas of interest and provide full contact details.

Preparing your anonymised manuscript

Your initial submission must consist of the following separate files:

  • A cover page including: the article title, author name(s) and affiliations (institution affiliation and country only, no department details required), the article abstract (up to 250 words), up to four key words/short phrases and the article word count including references. A cover page template is available to download here.
  • A fully anonymised manuscript which does not include any of the information included in the cover page. It should not include any acknowledgments, funding details or conflicts of interest that would identify the author(s). Citations to an author’s own prior published work should not be blinded, anonymised, or redacted. Instead, in the anonymized submission, sentences citating an author’s own work should be written in the third person; for example “Prior studies (e.g., YourName, 2022) have shown…”, not “I (e.g. YourName, 2022) have shown…”.
  • If you have any figures and tables, please upload them as separate files at the end of the manuscript. Figures and Tables may be embedded in the manuscript where they should appear, but also providing these files separately ensures they are of sufficiently high resolution for production. 
  • In order to improve our accessibility for people with visual impairments, we are now required to ask authors to provide a brief description known as alt text to describe any visual content such as photos, illustrations or figures. It will not be visible in the article but is embedded into the images so a PDF reader can read out the descriptions. Guidance on how to write this is available here: Bristol University Press | Alt-text guidance for authors.

You may also upload an optional cover letter with your submission. In the cover letter you may request that a specific editor or associate editor handle your submission, and you may recommend potential peer reviewers. If you recommend peer reviewers, these individuals should not include colleagues at your institution, advisors or advisees, or recent collaborators.

During the submission process you will be required to confirm that all authors have:

  • Read and approved the final manuscript.
  • Agreed to be personally accountable for their own contributions.
  • Agreed to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated, resolved, and the resolution documented in the literature.

During the submission process, you will also be required to:

  • Declare any conflicts of interest.
  • Confirm the manuscript is not submitted or published elsewhere.
  • Confirm the manuscript conforms to the journal house style.
  • Provide a contributor statement describing each author’s contribution to the manuscript.
  • If the manuscript presents or draws on empirical data: Provide a research ethics statement and a data availability statement.

For help submitting an article via Editorial Manager, please view our online tutorial.

 

Once a submission has been conditionally accepted, you will be invited to submit a final, non-anonymised version.

Checklist: what to include in your final, accepted non-anonymised manuscript:

  1. A cover page (separate file) including: the article title, author name(s) and affiliations (institution affiliation and country only, no department details required), the article abstract (up to 250 words), up to 4 key words and the word count.
  2. Research Ethics Statement: if your article does not present or draw directly on data/findings from empirical research the following text should be added to the final manuscript: "The author(s) of this paper has/have declared that research ethics approval was not required since the paper does not present or draw directly on data/findings from empirical research."
    If the paper you are submitting draws on any empirical research, please include a statement to explain how you approached research ethics. If any formal research ethics approval was sought, please name the organisation from which approval was sought and provide the date on which research ethics was approved. If the paper draws on empirical research that did not require research ethics approval, please also explain why this was the case.

  3. Funding details: list any funding including the grant numbers you have received for the research covered in your article as follows: "This work was supported by the [Funding Agency] under Grant [number xxxx]."

  4. Contributor Statement: please include a brief statement, with each author’s initials being used to refer to their contribution. 

  5. Conflict of interest statement: please declare any possible conflicts of interest, or state "The Author(s) declare(s) that there is no conflict of interest" if there are none. Find out more about declaring conflicts of interest in the Bristol Universty Press/ Policy Press Ethical Guidelines.

  6. Acknowledgements: acknowledge those who have provided you with any substantial assistance or advice with collecting data, developing your ideas, editing or any other comments to develop your argument or text.

  7. Figures and Tables: should be included as separate files at the end of the manuscript. Please indicate where these should be placed in the text by inserting: ‘Figure X here’ and provide numbers, titles and sources where appropriate. For advice about less common file formats please contact dave.j.worth@bristol.ac.uk.

  8. Alt text: In order to improve our accessibility for people with visual impairments, we are now required to ask authors to provide a brief description known as alt text to describe any visual content such as photos, illustrations or figures. It will not be visible in the article but is embedded into the images so a PDF reader can read out the descriptions. Guidance on how to write this is available here: Bristol University Press | Alt-text guidance for authors.
  9. Supplemental data: We recommend that any supplemental data are hosted in a data repository (such as figshare) for maximum exposure, and are cited as a reference in the article.

  10. Journal Contributor Publishing Agreement: Please upload a scanned copy of the completed and signed agreement with your final non-anonymised manuscript. The Journal Contributor Publishing Agreement can be downloaded here

Back to top

Author contribution statement

The author contribution statement should identify each author’s contributions to the manuscript. We recommend using the Contributor Roles Taxonomy (CRediT), and identifying authors by initials, when preparing this statement. For example, in a manuscript authored by John Doe and Jane Smith, the statement might appear as: “Conceptualization: JD; Formal Analysis: JD & JS; Writing – original draft: JS; Writing – review & editing: JD & JS.” For more details on CRediT, please see https://casrai.org/credit/.

Data availability statement

Given its focus on facilitating evidence use, and to promote transparency and openness in research, Evidence & Policy expects that authors share their data and materials via a public repository. When you submit a manuscript to Evidence & Policy, you will be asked to enter a Data Availability Statement. Your data availability statement should (1) provide a link to all the data and materials, or (2) explain that data and materials will be shared if the manuscript is accepted for publication, or (3) explain why data and materials cannot be shared. Sharing data and materials, or providing an adequate explanation why they cannot be shared, is a condition of publication for articles in Evidence & Policy

In this policy, "data" refers to the actual qualitative or quantitative data upon which an empirical study's claimed are based. In some cases data cannot be shared because doing so would violate ethical or legal requirements. In such cases, it is acceptable not to share data, however the data availability statement must explain why they cannot be shared.

In this policy, "materials" refers to the materials used to collect the data (e.g. surveys, interview guides) and the materials used to analyze the data (e.g., computer code, qualitative codebooks). Generally materials are not subject to ethical or legal restrictions and therefore can usually be shared. In the case that materials cannot be shared, the data availability statement must explain why they cannot be shared.

These are some examples of appropriate data availability statements:

  • “Data and materials are available at <LINK TO PUBLIC REPOSITORY>”
  • "Data and materials will be shared via a public repository pending acceptance."
  • "Data cannot be shared to preserve respondents' confidentiality, however materials are available at <LINK TO PUBLIC REPOSITORY>"
  • "Data cannot be shared to preserve respondents' confidentiality, however materials will be shared via a public repository pending acceptance."

These are some examples of inappropriate data availability statements:

  • "Data and materials are not shared."
  • "Data and materials are available from the author on request."
  • "Data and materials are available at <AUTHOR'S WEBSITE>."
  • "Data and materials will be shared following an embargo."

You can find a brief guide to sharing data and materials using the Open Science Foundation repository at https://osf.io/9mu7r. If you have questions about Evidence and Policy’s sharing expectations, or would like help sharing your data and materials, please contact the editorial office before finalizing your submission.

If you have any questions or concerns about the data availability statement or would like assistance sharing your data, please contact editor Dr. Zachary Neal by email at zpneal@msu.edu.

Citation equity

It is often important for research to cite certain “foundational” or “classic” sources. We encourage authors to consider opportunities to also draw on work by early career scholars, scholars from marginalized populations, and scholars from world regions that are underrepresented in the literature and pay attention to gender balance in citations. Please note that references do not count toward a submission’s word limit, so space limitations should not preclude citation equity.

Editorial review process

Initial decisions are made within two weeks and the first post-review decisions and feedback are given within 12 weeks.

All submissions (except for practice articles and commentaries) will be subject to anonymous peer-review processes by referees currently working in the appropriate field. The editors aim to provide quick decisions and to ensure that submission to publication takes the minimum possible time. The final decision on publication rests with the Editors in Chief. Accepted papers will be published online ahead of print after copy editing and typesetting; all papers will appear in hard copy issues, but the timing of publication is at the discretion of the editors.

When papers are accepted for publication, authors are encouraged to submit a lay or non-technical summary of their piece for publication in the Evidence & Policy blog. For more information, please see our blog guidelines.

Portable Peer Review

Evidence & Policy is piloting a new portable peer review policy aimed at reducing inefficiencies in the publication process, and lessening some of the burdens placed on reviewers and authors by the cycle of repeated submissions to different journals.

If your manuscript has been externally reviewed and rejected by another journal, and you believe you have addressed the reviewers' concerns, you may be able to benefit from Evidence & Policy's portable peer review policy. Under portable peer review, the editors will internally review the manuscript in light of the prior journal's reviews and your revisions. Following internal review, at their sole discretion the editors may accept the manuscript, request further revisions, seek additional reviews, or reject the manuscript. Portable peer review does not necessarily increase the likelihood of acceptance, however it can reduce the time to decision by providing the editors with additional information.

If you would like to be considered for portable peer review, you must provide with your submission:

  • When submitting your manuscript through the Editorial Manager portal, on the "Enter Comments" screen indicate that you would like your submission to be considered for portable peer review.
  • A PDF copy of the original journal's decision email that includes: (a) the name of the journal, (b) the editor's decision, and (c) the reviewers' comments. If the email identified the names of the reviewers, these must be redacted.
  • An anonymous letter summarising revisions made to the manuscript in response to the prior journal's peer revewier and editor comments.

The provided materials will be used by the editors to evaluate the manuscript. If additional reviews are sought the editors may share your anonymous summary of revisions, but will not share any details about the prior review (e.g. the journal's name, the reviewers' comments) with the additional reviewers.

For additional details on the background and rationale for portable peer review, see the Evidence & Policy blog.

Back to top

Ethical guidelines

At Policy Press we are committed to upholding the highest standards of review and publication ethics in our journals. Policy Press is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE), and will take appropriate action in cases of possible misconduct in line with COPE guidance.

Find out more about our ethical guidelines.

Back to top

Copyright and permissions

Evidence & Policy is published by Policy Press. Articles are considered for publication on the understanding that on acceptance the author(s) grant(s) Policy Press the exclusive right and licence to publish the article. Copyright remains with the author(s) or other original copyright owners and we will acknowledge this in the copyright line that appears on the published article. 

Authors will be asked to sign a Journals Contributor Agreement to this effect, which should be submitted online along with the final manuscript. All authors should agree to the agreement. For jointly authored articles the corresponding author may sign on behalf of the co-authors provided that they have obtained the co-authors' consent. The Journals Contributor Agreement can be downloaded here.

Where copyright is not owned by the author(s), the corresponding author is responsible for obtaining the consent of the copyright holder. This includes figures, tables and excerpts. Evidence of this permission should be provided to Policy Press. General information on rights and permissions can be found here.

To request permission to reproduce any part of articles published in Evidence & Policy, please email Policy Press: bup-info@bristol.ac.uk

For information on what is permissible use for different versions of your article please see our policy on self archiving and institutional repositories

Back to top

Style

  • British English spelling and punctuation is preferred.
  • Dates should be in the form "10 June 2022".
  • Numbers 1-9 should be spelled out, use numerals for 10 and above.
  • Non-discriminatory language is mandatory. See our guidelines to sensitive language (appendix C of document).
  • Explanatory notes should be kept to a minimum. If it is necessary to use them, they must be numbered consecutively in the text and listed at the end of the article. Please do not embed notes in the text.
  • Please do not embed bibliographic references in the text, footnotes, live links or macros; the final submitted file should be clear of track changes and ready for print.
  • Tables and charts should be separated from the text and submitted in a Word or Excel file, with their placement in the text clearly indicated by inserting: ‘Table X here’. Each table should have a short, descriptive title. Please provide numbers, titles and sources (where appropriate).
  • Figures, diagrams and maps should be separated from the text and, ideally, submitted in an Encapsulated PostScript (.eps) file. Figures created in Word or Excel are acceptable in those file formats. If the figures, diagrams and maps are in other formats (i.e. have been pasted into a Word file rather than created in it) please contact dave.j.worth@bristol.ac.uk for advice. Please indicate where figures should be placed in the text, by inserting: ‘Figure X here’  and give a short, descriptive title. Provide numbers, titles and sources (where appropriate).
  • In-text citations: give the author’s surname followed by year of publication in brackets, e.g. (Smith 1999) or (Smith et al. 1999).
  • List all references in full at the end of the article and remove any references not cited in the text.
  • Spell out all acronyms in the first instance.

Further guidance may be found in the Policy Press editorial guidelines

Back to top

 

Alt-text

In order to improve our accessibility for people with visual impairments, we are now required to ask authors to provide a brief description known as alt text to describe any visual content such as photos, illustrations or figures. It will not be visible in the article but is embedded into the images so a PDF reader can read out the descriptions. See our guidance on writing alt-text.

Back to the top

References

Download the Endnote output style for Bristol University Press and Policy Press Journals.

A custom version of the Harvard system of referencing is used:

Example of book reference:
Dorling, D. (2010) Injustice: Why social inequality persists, Bristol: Policy Press.

Example of journal reference:
Guckert, M., Mastropieri, M.A., Scruggs, T.E. (2016) 'Personalizing research: Special educators’ awareness of evidence-based practice', Exceptionality, 24(2): 63-78.

Example of chapter within edited / multi-authored publication: 

Levitas, R. (2011) 'Utopia calling: Eradicating child poverty in the United Kingdom and beyond', in A. Minujin and S. Nandy (eds), Global Child Poverty and Well-being: Measurement, concepts, policy and action, Bristol: Policy Press. pp 449–73. 

Example of website reference:
Womensaid (2016) What is domestic abuse? https://www.womensaid.org.uk/information-support/what-is-domestic-abuse/.

Back to top

 

Management Board

Zachary Neal Editor in Chief; Michigan State University, US

Will Allen Associate Editor; University of Oxford, UK 
Peter Van der Graaf Associate Editor; Northumbria University, UK
Mariah Kornbluh Associate Editor; University of Oregon, US
Daniel Mallinson Associate Editor; PennState University, US
Gedion Onyango Associate Editor; University of Nairobi, Kenya

Justin Parkhurst Chair of the Management Board, London School of Economics, UK
Caroline Oliver Chair of the Editorial Advisory Board, University College London, UK
Michaelagh Broadbent Editorial Officer; University College London, UK

 

Editorial Advisory Board 

The editorial team at Evidence & Policy is supported by a distinguished international advisory board, including: 

Amy Anderson, University of North Texas, USA
Patrick Bailey, University College London, 
Paul Cairney, University of Stirling, UK
Asiyati Lorraine Chiweza, University of Malawi, Malawi

Johan Christensen, Leiden University, Netherlands
Helen Dempster, Center for Global Development, USA
Simon Haeder, Texas A&M University, USA
Mark Hardy, University of York, UK
Sosanya Jones, Howard University, USA
Jesper Dahl Kelstrup, Roskilde University, Denmark
Anita Kothari, Western University, Canada
Michael Kpessa-Whyte, University of Ghana, Ghana
Adam Seth Levine, Johns Hopkins University
Cynthia Lum, George Mason University, USA
Jordi Molas-Gallart, INGENIO, Universitat Politècnica de València, Spain
Jennifer Watling Neal, Michigan State University, USA
Aoife O’Higgins, University of Oxford, UK
Frank Ohemeng, Concordia University, Canada
Mark Pearson, University of Hull, UK
Jonathan Purtle, New York University, US
Carol Rivas, University College London, UK

Valerie Shapiro, University of California, Berkeley, USA
Kat Smith, University of Strathclyde, UK
Jack B. Spaapen, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Netherlands

Jennifer Wilking, California State University, USA

Recommend the journal to your librarian

Your opinion matters to your librarian. Faculty recommendations are one of the main factors in a library’s decision to take out a journal subscription. If you want your library to subscribe to  Evidence & Policy, contact your librarian and recommend the journal. You can support your recommendation by including details of research projects and teaching modules that would benefit from a subscription.  

Set up a free trial

All of our journals can be trialled for three months by institutions.
Set up a free trial for your institution.

Institutional subscriptions

We offer a range of subscription models for all of our journals. See the subscribe to our journals page to learn more. 

View our subscription rates

Subscribe to a journal collection or package and save on list prices. Learn more about our packages and collections

Personal subscriptions

Order a personal print subscription of Evidence & Policy

2022 Impact Factor: 2.1 (2yr), 2.3 (5yr)
Ranking: 47/110 in Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary (Q2)

2022 Journal Citation Indicator: 1.41
Ranking: 32/265 in Social Sciences, Interdisciplinary (Q2)

2022 Scopus CiteScore 4.7.
Ranking: 49/502 in Social Sciences (miscellaneous) – 90th percentile

2021 SJR: 0.615
Ranking: 134/643 in Social Sciences (miscellaneous) (Q1)