Background:
There are limited studies focused on examining specific types of evidence, like surveys beyond the US and territories with unicameral legislatures and unique contexts.
Aims and objectives:
To measure the extent of survey research being used as evidence in policymaking in Hong Kong.
Methods:
Through document analysis, this study screened and examined Hong Kong Legislative Council documents utilised to enact 569 bills from 2000 to 2022.
Findings:
About 25% of bills utilised surveys as evidence, with differences across 18 policy areas. Health services recorded the highest percentage of survey use in legislation. In the Hong Kong legislature, surveys are primarily used to understand policy issues better. Mode of data collection, sample size, response rates, and representativeness of surveys are not commonly discussed in legislative documents.
Discussion and conclusion:
The study findings reaffirm previous research on the limited utilisation of survey evidence in policymaking in Hong Kong, an Asian context with a unicameral legislation and colonial history. The importance of survey evidence was highlighted in policy areas that directly impact the public, such as healthcare. The findings also highlight the important role of politics in investigating the use of surveys as research evidence for policymaking.
This commentary responds to Gade in ‘When is it justified to claim that a practice or policy is evidence-based? Reflections on evidence and preferences’ (Evidence & Policy, XX(XX): 1–10, DOI:
In this practice paper, a number of ‘first impressions’ from practical volunteering in community food projects are explored through academic and grey literature: the complexity of decision making; valorising the symptoms rather than the causes of problems; shunting risk; and the marketisation of both volunteering and community food projects. Volunteers, as policy takers, can only soften rather than resolve these issues. The state’s view of the advantages of using volunteers corresponds to the main difficulties of volunteering, for volunteers.
How funding is distributed is an important question in philanthropy. But limited work has asked this question about philanthropy originating on the continent of Africa. This article explores the effective distribution of grants by a community-based South African non-profit organisation through the lens of transaction cost economics. Instead of needs-based indicators, this study finds that internet access is the main indicator of funding, with areas with lower internet access receiving fewer funds than those with higher internet access. This indicates that funding by community-based non-profits may not always be reaching the areas with the highest amount of need, but areas with lower search costs. Overall, community-based organisations may deal with issues similar to international organisations in reaching local non-profit organisations and disenfranchised communities. Targeted outreach, specifically to areas with lower access to the internet, can help to ameliorate these differences.
Background:
Randomised trials have been on the rise in social policy over the last decade and a half, particularly in areas working with young people and vulnerable adults. Informed consent is an important principle for ethics committees governing research conducted by universities.
Aims and objectives:
We consider the arguments for and against opt-in consent by parents, and opt-out assent, when it comes to trials taking place, particularly in schools.
Methods:
We review what is known about this from a methodological standpoint.
Findings:
We find that extant evidence suggests that requiring opt-in consent, rather than assent, to participation, risks reducing the ethical standards of trials by minimising participation; and by potentially risking disclosure of sensitive information about a child’s life to their parents. Moreover, there are important equity considerations, with more vulnerable groups likely to be excluded from research findings under an opt-in framework.
Discussion and conclusion:
We conclude that the ethical argument for assent rather than consent is compelling under some circumstances, and should be considered on a case-by-case basis. Precautions must always be taken to safeguard participants.
There has been an unprecedented global increase in digital volunteering since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic. Nevertheless, in many countries, including Central and Eastern Europe, online volunteering is under-researched and large-scale tools, such as volunteering crowdsourcing platforms, are only beginning to emerge in response to crises. This article presents practical lessons for engaging and retaining online volunteers, drawn from an evaluation of the only Polish crowdsourcing platform dedicated to e-volunteering: TuDu.org.pl.
This commentary responds to points raised by Sanders et al in ‘Consent, assent and randomised evaluations’ (Evidence & Policy, 19(4): 603–605, 10.1332/174426421X16842419724551).
Background:
Despite decades of concern, health inequalities persist and collaborations to address them at a local level are yet to prove effective. One potential way of improving actions to address health inequalities is to pay greater attention to the way the problems and solutions are framed.
Aims and objectives:
The aims of the study were to: 1) review existing advice and guidance on how to frame the wider determinants of health, health inequalities and how to address them in policy; 2) critically appraise this guidance with reference to a study of local action to address the wider determinants of health and health inequalities in England; and 3) offer insight into the future of framing these issues at the local level.
Methods:
An exploratory qualitative study of local actors’ activities and experiences that relate to framing health inequalities. Analysis is drawn from 14 in-depth, qualitative interviews with people working in health- and other-sector partnerships.
Findings:
Local actors engaged in systemic framing of the wider determinants, health inequalities and what to do about them across localities, albeit in a non-routinised or uniform way. Evidence and data were a key part of telling the story. Owing in part to resource constraint, local practitioners tended to work with people who quickly ‘got it’ (the structural, systemic nature of health inequalities) and focused their efforts on working in these partnerships; this was a reflection of the relational process of ‘co-framing’. Other tactics were used to try and persuade unconvinced colleagues or elected members. There were multiple challenges, however, to framing consistency, coherency and comprehensiveness of coverage, and using a systemic frame was no guarantee of cross-sectoral collaborative working.
Discussion and conclusion:
Re-framing health inequalities is challenging and relational for local practitioners. Local tactics that include tailoring, co-framing and building strong local examples offer promise.
