The Politics of Evidence
The Open Access version of this book, available at http://www.tandfebooks.com/, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 3.0 license. There has been an enormous increase in interest in the use of evidence for public policymaking, but the vast majorit...
Сохранить в:
| Главный автор: | |
|---|---|
| Формат: | Online |
| Язык: | английский |
| Опубликовано: |
Taylor & Francis
2025
|
| Предметы: | |
| Online-ссылка: | ONIX_20250519T091213_9781317380870_74 |
| Метки: |
Нет меток, Требуется 1-ая метка записи!
|
| _version_ | 1869524101797773312 |
|---|---|
| author | Parkhurst, Justin |
| author_browse | Parkhurst, Justin |
| author_facet | Parkhurst, Justin |
| author_sort | Parkhurst, Justin |
| collection | Directory of Open Access Books |
| description | The Open Access version of this book, available at http://www.tandfebooks.com/, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 3.0 license. There has been an enormous increase in interest in the use of evidence for public policymaking, but the vast majority of work on the subject has failed to engage with the political nature of decision making and how this influences the ways in which evidence will be used (or misused) within political areas. This book provides new insights into the nature of political bias with regards to evidence and critically considers what an ‘improved’ use of evidence would look like from a policymaking perspective. Part I describes the great potential for evidence to help achieve social goals, as well as the challenges raised by the political nature of policymaking. It explores the concern of evidence advocates that political interests drive the misuse or manipulation of evidence, as well as counter-concerns of critical policy scholars about how appeals to ‘evidence-based policy’ can depoliticise political debates. Both concerns reflect forms of bias – the first representing technical bias, whereby evidence use violates principles of scientific best practice, and the second representing issue bias in how appeals to evidence can shift political debates to particular questions or marginalise policy-relevant social concerns. Part II then draws on the fields of policy studies and cognitive psychology to understand the origins and mechanisms of both forms of bias in relation to political interests and values. It illustrates how such biases are not only common, but can be much more predictable once we recognise their origins and manifestations in policy arenas. Finally, Part III discusses ways to move forward for those seeking to improve the use of evidence in public policymaking. It explores what constitutes ‘good evidence for policy’, as well as the ‘good use of evidence’ within policy processes, and considers how to build evidence-advisory institutions that embed key principles of both scientific good practice and democratic representation. Taken as a whole, the approach promoted is termed the ‘good governance of evidence’ – a concept that represents the use of rigorous, systematic and technically valid pieces of evidence within decision-making processes that are representative of, and accountable to, populations served. |
| format | Online |
| id | doab-20.500.12854ir-159877 |
| institution | Directory of Open Access Books |
| language | eng |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| publishDateRange | 2025 |
| publishDateSort | 2025 |
| publisher | Taylor & Francis |
| publisherStr | Taylor & Francis |
| record_format | ojs |
| spelling | doab-20.500.12854ir-1598772025-05-20T05:11:51Z The Politics of Evidence Parkhurst, Justin Issue Bias issue Evidentiary Bias bias Policy Issues technical Evidence Utilisation evidentiary HIV Prevention policy Technical Bias utilisation Advocacy Coalitions Framework ebp Knowledge Transfer Literature movement Te Ch relevant Throughput Legitimacy policymaking National Academies Input Legitimacy Lib Er Policy Relevant Evidence Es Ta Training Decision Makers Interest Group Position Da Te Low HIV Prevalence UK’s Alliance thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JP Politics and government::JPP Public administration thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JM Psychology::JMH Social, group or collective psychology thema EDItEUR::M Medicine and Nursing::MB Medicine: general issues::MBN Public health and preventive medicine::MBNH Personal and public health / health education thema EDItEUR::K Economics, Finance, Business and Management::KJ Business and Management::KJU Organizational theory and behaviour thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JH Sociology and anthropology::JHB Sociology thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JB Society and culture: general::JBF Social and ethical issues::JBFA Social discrimination and social justice thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JK Social services and welfare, criminology::JKS Social welfare and social services The Open Access version of this book, available at http://www.tandfebooks.com/, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 3.0 license. There has been an enormous increase in interest in the use of evidence for public policymaking, but the vast majority of work on the subject has failed to engage with the political nature of decision making and how this influences the ways in which evidence will be used (or misused) within political areas. This book provides new insights into the nature of political bias with regards to evidence and critically considers what an ‘improved’ use of evidence would look like from a policymaking perspective. Part I describes the great potential for evidence to help achieve social goals, as well as the challenges raised by the political nature of policymaking. It explores the concern of evidence advocates that political interests drive the misuse or manipulation of evidence, as well as counter-concerns of critical policy scholars about how appeals to ‘evidence-based policy’ can depoliticise political debates. Both concerns reflect forms of bias – the first representing technical bias, whereby evidence use violates principles of scientific best practice, and the second representing issue bias in how appeals to evidence can shift political debates to particular questions or marginalise policy-relevant social concerns. Part II then draws on the fields of policy studies and cognitive psychology to understand the origins and mechanisms of both forms of bias in relation to political interests and values. It illustrates how such biases are not only common, but can be much more predictable once we recognise their origins and manifestations in policy arenas. Finally, Part III discusses ways to move forward for those seeking to improve the use of evidence in public policymaking. It explores what constitutes ‘good evidence for policy’, as well as the ‘good use of evidence’ within policy processes, and considers how to build evidence-advisory institutions that embed key principles of both scientific good practice and democratic representation. Taken as a whole, the approach promoted is termed the ‘good governance of evidence’ – a concept that represents the use of rigorous, systematic and technically valid pieces of evidence within decision-making processes that are representative of, and accountable to, populations served. 2025-05-20T05:11:50Z 2025-05-20T05:11:50Z 2025-05-19T07:33:07Z 2016 book ONIX_20250519T091213_9781317380870_74 https://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/102156 9781317380870 9781317380856 9781138570382 9781138939400 9781317380863 9781315675008 https://directory.doabooks.org/handle/20.500.12854/159877 eng Routledge Studies in Governance and Public Policy open access image/jpeg Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International https://library.oapen.org/bitstream/20.500.12657/102156/1/9781317380870.pdf Taylor & Francis Routledge 10.4324/9781315675008 10.4324/9781315675008 fa69b019-f4ee-4979-8d42-c6b6c476b5f0 9781317380870 9781317380856 9781138570382 9781138939400 9781317380863 9781315675008 Routledge 196 Oxford open access |
| spellingShingle | Issue Bias issue Evidentiary Bias bias Policy Issues technical Evidence Utilisation evidentiary HIV Prevention policy Technical Bias utilisation Advocacy Coalitions Framework ebp Knowledge Transfer Literature movement Te Ch relevant Throughput Legitimacy policymaking National Academies Input Legitimacy Lib Er Policy Relevant Evidence Es Ta Training Decision Makers Interest Group Position Da Te Low HIV Prevalence UK’s Alliance thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JP Politics and government::JPP Public administration thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JM Psychology::JMH Social, group or collective psychology thema EDItEUR::M Medicine and Nursing::MB Medicine: general issues::MBN Public health and preventive medicine::MBNH Personal and public health / health education thema EDItEUR::K Economics, Finance, Business and Management::KJ Business and Management::KJU Organizational theory and behaviour thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JH Sociology and anthropology::JHB Sociology thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JB Society and culture: general::JBF Social and ethical issues::JBFA Social discrimination and social justice thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JK Social services and welfare, criminology::JKS Social welfare and social services Parkhurst, Justin The Politics of Evidence |
| title | The Politics of Evidence |
| title_full | The Politics of Evidence |
| title_fullStr | The Politics of Evidence |
| title_full_unstemmed | The Politics of Evidence |
| title_short | The Politics of Evidence |
| title_sort | politics of evidence |
| topic | Issue Bias issue Evidentiary Bias bias Policy Issues technical Evidence Utilisation evidentiary HIV Prevention policy Technical Bias utilisation Advocacy Coalitions Framework ebp Knowledge Transfer Literature movement Te Ch relevant Throughput Legitimacy policymaking National Academies Input Legitimacy Lib Er Policy Relevant Evidence Es Ta Training Decision Makers Interest Group Position Da Te Low HIV Prevalence UK’s Alliance thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JP Politics and government::JPP Public administration thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JM Psychology::JMH Social, group or collective psychology thema EDItEUR::M Medicine and Nursing::MB Medicine: general issues::MBN Public health and preventive medicine::MBNH Personal and public health / health education thema EDItEUR::K Economics, Finance, Business and Management::KJ Business and Management::KJU Organizational theory and behaviour thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JH Sociology and anthropology::JHB Sociology thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JB Society and culture: general::JBF Social and ethical issues::JBFA Social discrimination and social justice thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JK Social services and welfare, criminology::JKS Social welfare and social services |
| topic_facet | Issue Bias issue Evidentiary Bias bias Policy Issues technical Evidence Utilisation evidentiary HIV Prevention policy Technical Bias utilisation Advocacy Coalitions Framework ebp Knowledge Transfer Literature movement Te Ch relevant Throughput Legitimacy policymaking National Academies Input Legitimacy Lib Er Policy Relevant Evidence Es Ta Training Decision Makers Interest Group Position Da Te Low HIV Prevalence UK’s Alliance thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JP Politics and government::JPP Public administration thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JM Psychology::JMH Social, group or collective psychology thema EDItEUR::M Medicine and Nursing::MB Medicine: general issues::MBN Public health and preventive medicine::MBNH Personal and public health / health education thema EDItEUR::K Economics, Finance, Business and Management::KJ Business and Management::KJU Organizational theory and behaviour thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JH Sociology and anthropology::JHB Sociology thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JB Society and culture: general::JBF Social and ethical issues::JBFA Social discrimination and social justice thema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JK Social services and welfare, criminology::JKS Social welfare and social services |
| url | ONIX_20250519T091213_9781317380870_74 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT parkhurstjustin thepoliticsofevidence AT parkhurstjustin politicsofevidence |