Suchergebnisse

Background:Government-funded knowledge brokering organisations (KBOs) are an increasingly prevalent yet under-researched area. Working in the space between knowledge and policy, yet framing themselves as different from think tanks and academic research centres, these organisations broker evidence into policy.
Aims and objectives:This article examines how three organisations on different continents develop similar narratives and strategies to attempt to inform policymaking and build legitimacy.
Methods:Using documentary analysis and semi-structured interviews, it shows how the organisations construct their credibility and legitimacy, and make sense of their emergence, activities and relationships with policymakers.
Findings:The study responds to the lack of political focus on many existing studies, examining how KBOs make sense of their origins and roles, articulating notions of evidence, and mobilising different types of legitimacies to do so. The research also addresses an empirical gap surrounding the emergence and activities of KBOs (not individuals), analysing organisations on three different continents.
Discussion and conclusions:KBOs developed similar narratives of origins and functions, despite emerging in different contexts. Furthermore, they build their legitimacy/ies in similar ways. Our research improves our understanding of how a new 'tool' in the evidence-informed policymaking (EIPM) arsenal – KBOs – is being mobilised by different governments in similar ways.

AbstractEvidence plays a growing role in public administration worldwide. We analyze the perceptions of policy actors, using Q methodology and a structured questionnaire, which reveals four types of profiles. Most policy actors did not fit neatly into an Evidence‐Based Policy‐Making (EBPM) group. Instead, they either had a pragmatic view where context and policy issues influence what counts as evidence, an inclusive position which emphasized the importance of considering a range of different types of evidence, or a political perspective where power relations and politics influence what counts as evidence. Our research also illustrates how different actors in the same community can have different perceptions of evidence, and how this can change over time due to experience and career trajectory.

Economics is now central to health policy decision making, within government departments and the National Health Service. We examine how and why a health economics academic unit – the Centre for Health Economics (CHE) at the University of York, England – was created in 1983, funded and commissioned to provide research evidence to the British government, specifically the Department of Health and Social Security (DHSS) and its successors. Building on the knowledge transfer literature, we document the origins of this relationship and the different strategies deployed by successive governments and researchers. This paper demonstrates the value of historical methodologies such as oral history and textual analysis that highlight the limitations of existing knowledge transfer theories, by foregrounding the role of politics via the construction of individual relationships between academics and policy-makers.

The role played by evidence in policymaking is hotly disputed and there is no agreement over how evidence is defined. This article examines whether policy actors have different views of what counts as evidence and which factors influence these perceptions (for example, professional background, length of service, organisation setting, cultures of evidence)? In addressing this question, we contribute to the growing research focus on the context of evidence use. Q methodology – a mixed method approach to study people's attitudes towards a topic – is used in interviewing 67 policy actors and comparing two countries, Scotland and Wales, to find out whether there are different cultures of evidence. In both countries, we identified four distinct profiles of attitudes towards evidence: the evidence-based policymaking (EBPM) Idealist, the Pragmatist, the Inclusive, and the Political. Our research highlights important differences between the two contexts, with a greater leaning towards EBPM views of evidence in Wales, and more pragmatism in defining evidence in Scotland. We illustrate how different cultures of evidence coexist in a same context and highlight their similarities and differences. We also contribute to the understanding of the value of Q methodology research by showing that it can be used to compare two datasets collected in different countries.

The claim that evidence-based policy (EBP) produces better outcomes has gained increasing support over the last three decades. Knowledge brokering (KB) is seen as a way to achieve improved policymaking and governments worldwide are investing significant resources in KB initiatives. It is therefore important to understand the range of these activities and to investigate whether and how they facilitate EBP. This article critically reviews the extant literature on KB. It identifies six important limitations: the existence of multiple definitions of KB; a lack of theory-based empirical analysis; a neglect of knowledge brokering organisations; insufficient research on KB in social policy; limited analysis of impact and effectiveness; and a lack of attention to the role played by politics. The paper proposes an agenda for future research that bridges disciplinary boundaries in order to address these gaps and contribute new insights into the politics of evidence use.

The teaching of political science has a tendency towards traditional classroom-based learning environments. This article describes the development of an innovative model of student learning that takes place outside the bounded nature of the established curriculum through the creation of a Policy Commission. The Policy Commission established an innovative 'community of action' that challenged traditional perceptions of the lone student as a producer of knowledge. This article describes the work of the Policy Commission, which engaged students in the act of 'doing Politics' and discusses the impact that it had on student learning. The article examines the potential of the Policy Commission model to offer a new form of learning.

Abstract
Knowledge-brokering organisations (KBOs) have multiplied in the evidence–policy landscape worldwide, changing how decision-makers are accessing evidence. Yet, we still know little about their emergence and roles. This research helps to understand KBOs and their place in evidence-based policymaking by highlighting the varied work that they do, the relationships they cultivate with policymakers, the complex knowledge-brokering processes they negotiate, and how they establish their credibility in different ways. We build on boundary organisation theory and the concept of policy entrepreneur (PE) (drawn from the multiple streams analysis) to develop a better understanding of KBOs who play multiple roles. By using the PE concept, we bring a greater focus on the politics of brokering. This duality involves them in seeking to provide 'objective' evidence while simultaneously determining what counts as evidence for policy and making recommendations for political decisions.

The concept of policy advisory systems (PAS) has been applied almost exclusively at national level. This article demonstrates that it can also be employed to analyse the development and dynamics of policy advice in a subnational government. Our empirical study of the externalisation of policy advice by the Welsh Government shows that it has been shaped by distinctive historical, institutional and political factors, and its impacts are different to those reported by studies of out-sourcing national policy advice. In our case study, external policy advice was seen as complementing rather than competing with the civil service. Instead of deinstitutionalising policy advice – that is, dislocating it from the usual sites where knowledge for policy is produced – new formal routes have been established for external sources of expertise to influence policy decisions. Contrary to the findings of some previous studies, externalising policy advice has not been a centralising force. Nor has it fundamentally challenged existing assumptions and values or increased politicisation of the policy process. These findings demonstrate that the PAS concept is useful across a range of settings, not just at national level. We show that applying it to a broader range of contexts, including subnational polities, can challenge, strengthen and expand existing theories of policy advice and policymaking.

"There is a mounting body of evidence pointing towards rising levels of public dissatisfaction with the formal political process. Depoliticization refers to a more discrete range of contemporary strategies that add to this growing trend towards anti-politics by either removing or displacing the potential for choice, collective agency, and deliberation. This book examines the relationship between these two trends as understood within the broader shift towards governance. It brings together a number of contributions from scholars who have a varied range of concerns but who nevertheless share a common interest in developing the concept of depoliticization through their engagement with a set of theoretical, conceptual, methodological, and empirical questions. This volume explores these questions from a variety of different perspectives and uses a number of different empirical examples and case studies from both within the nation state as well as from other regional, global, and multi-level arenas. In this context, this volume examines the potential and limits of depoliticization as a concept and its position and contribution in the nexus between the larger and more established literatures on governance and anti-politics."--