Skip to main content
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Erschienen in:
Kapitel lesen Erstes Kapitel lesen

2023 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

2. Scientific Evidence in Policy Processes: Concepts and Histories

verfasst von : Jessica Espey

Erschienen in: Science in Negotiation

Verlag: Springer International Publishing

Einloggen

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

Das Kapitel vertieft sich in die reiche Geschichte wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse in politischen Prozessen und verfolgt ihre Wurzeln bis in die klassische Antike und die philosophischen Debatten, die ihre Bedeutung und Anwendung im Laufe der Zeit geprägt haben. Es werden die verschiedenen Definitionen und Interpretationen wissenschaftlicher Beweise diskutiert, angefangen bei Francis Bacons empirischem Ansatz bis hin zu Karl Poppers empirischer Fälschung. Der Text untersucht auch die Entwicklung einer evidenzbasierten Politik und betont den Wandel von einer deterministischen Sichtweise hin zu einem integrativeren und kontextsensitiveren Ansatz. Darüber hinaus wird die Rolle von Institutionen und institutioneller Kultur bei der Gestaltung der Beweisaufnahme untersucht, wobei der Schwerpunkt auf der Generalversammlung der Vereinten Nationen liegt. Das Kapitel bietet einen Rahmen für die Analyse des Einflusses wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse auf politische Prozesse innerhalb multilateraler Konstellationen, wobei die Formulierung der nachhaltigen Entwicklungsziele als Fallstudie dient. Es betont die Bedeutung von Repräsentation, Zugang, Organisation epistemischer Gemeinschaften, Gestaltung und Präsentation sowie zeitlicher Dynamik bei der Bestimmung der Aufnahme wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnisse in die politische Entscheidungsfindung. Diese umfassende Analyse bietet wertvolle Einblicke in das komplexe Zusammenspiel zwischen Wissenschaft, Politik und politischer Entscheidungsfindung und ist daher ein Muss für alle, die an evidenzbasierter Politik und internationaler Governance interessiert sind.
KI-Generiert

Diese Zusammenfassung des Fachinhalts wurde mit Hilfe von KI generiert.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 390 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe




 

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Jetzt informieren
Vorheriges Kapitel Why Consider Science in International Policy?
Nächstes Kapitel Tracing the SDG Deliberation Process: A Focus on Health, Cities and Data
Fußnoten
1
See, for example, statements made by the UN Secretary General, the 2016 report of the UNESCO Scientific Advisory Board and guidance recently issued for countries on the importance of national science-policy interfaces (UNSG, 2021; UNESCO, 2016; UNDESA, 2021).
 
2
Russell cites J. M. Keynes’s Treatise on Probability (1921) which explains that ‘having experienced A and B together frequently, we now react to A as we originally reacted to B. To make this seem rational, we say that A is a “sign” of B, and that B must really be present though out of sight. This is the principle of induction, upon which almost all science is based. And a great deal of philosophy is an attempt to make the principle seem reasonable. Whenever, owing to past experience, we react to A in the manner in which we originally reacted to B, we may say that A is a “datum” and B is “inferred”. In this sense, animals practice inference. It is clear, also, that much inference of this sort is fallacious: the conjunction of A and B in past experience may have been accidental’ (Russell, 1926a).
 
3
‘Since the first United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in 1992 – known as the Earth Summit – it was recognised that achieving sustainable development would require the active participation of all sectors of society and all types of people. Agenda 21, adopted at the Earth Summit, drew upon this sentiment and formalised nine sectors of society as the main channels through which broad participation would be facilitated in UN activities related to sustainable development. These are officially called ‘Major Groups’ and include the following sectors: ‘Women, Children and Youth, Indigenous Peoples, Non-Governmental Organisations, Local Authorities, Workers and Trade Unions, Business and Industry, Scientific and Technological Community, and Farmers.’ UN (2020) https://​sustainabledevel​opment.​un.​org/​majorgroups/​about (Last accessed 7 May 2020).
 
4
As noted by behavioural economists Gilad, Kaish and Loeb as early as 1984.
 
5
As noted by Algers (2014), ‘During public meetings, members of NGOs have access to representatives of states and members of secretariats in corridors, in meeting rooms, and in various eating and drinking facilities at these headquarters… NGOs with formal consultative status, and also many others, have access to “diplomats” in these parliamentary headquarters that is not equaled in the capitals of the state system’ (Alger, 2014; 112).
 
6
Previously referred to as ‘knowledge intermediaries’ (Jones et al., 2013).
 
Literatur
Allan, B. (2018). Scientific cosmology and international orders, Cambridge studies in international relations. Cambridge University Press.
Bache, I., & Flinders, M. (2004). Multi-level Governance. Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Baron, J., & Haskins, R. (2018). A brief history of evidence-based policy. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 678(1), 40–50.CrossRef
Biesta, G. (2007). Why “what works” Won’t work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research. Educational Theory, 57(1), 1–22.CrossRef
Bonell, C., Meiksin, R., Mays, N., Petticrew, M., & McKee, M. (2018). Defending evidence informed policy making from ideological attack. The BMJ, 362, k3827.CrossRef
Bowen, S., & Zwi, A. B. (2005). Pathways to “evidence-informed” policy and practice: A framework for action. PLoS Medicine, 2(7), e166.CrossRef
Broadbent, E. (2012). Politics of research-based evidence in African policy debates, synthesis of case study findings, evidence based policy in development. London.
Brolan, C. E., & Hill, P. S. (2016). Universal health Coverage’s evolving location in the post-2015 development agenda: Key informant perspectives within multilateral and related agencies during the first phase of post-2015 negotiations. Health Policy and Planning, 31(4), 514–526.CrossRef
Bullard, E., Lovell, B., & Deacon, G. (1975). The effect of world war II on the development of knowledge in the physical sciences [and Discussion], Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 342(1631), 519–536.
Buse, K., Mays, N., & Walt, G. (2012). Making health policy (2nd ed.). Open University Press.
Cairney, P. (2011). Understanding public policy: Theories and issues. Macmillan International Higher Education.
Cairney, P., & Oliver, K. (2017). Evidence-based policymaking is not like evidence-based medicine, so how far should you go to bridge the divide between evidence and policy? Health Research Policy and Systems, 15(1), 35.CrossRef
Cartwright, N., & Hardie, J. (2012). Evidence-based policy: A practical guide to doing it better. Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Center for the Study of Social Policy. (2017). Better evidence for decision-makers. Author.
Chalmers, I. (2005). If evidence-informed policy works in practice, does it matter if it doesn’t work in theory? Evidence and Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 1(2), 227–242.CrossRef
Chupein, T., & Glennerster, R. (2018). Evidence-informed policy from an international perspective. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 678(1), 62–70.CrossRef
Cloete, F. (2009). Evidence-based policy analysis in South Africa: Critical assessment of the emerging government-wide monitoring and evaluation system. Journal of Public Administration, 44(2), 293–311.
Cook, F. (2001). Evidence-based policy making in a democracy: Exploring the role of policy research in conjunction with politics and public opinion. Paper prepared for delivery of 2001 annual meeting of the American Political Science Association, San Francisco, 30 Aug – 2 Sept.
Council on Foreign Relations (2022). Funding the United Nations: How Much Does the U.S. Pay? Online Editorial.
Crimmins, E. M., & Finch, C. E. (2006). Infection, inflammation, height, and longevity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 103(2), 498–503.CrossRef
Culyer, A. J., & Lomas, J. (2006). Deliberative processes and evidence-informed decision making in healthcare: Do they work and how might we know? Evidence and Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 2(3), 357–371.CrossRef
Davies, H. T. O., Nutley, S. M. and Smith, P. C. (eds) (2000) What works? Evidence-based policy and practice in public services, Bristol: Policy Press.
Demeritt, D. (2001). The construction of global warming and the politics of science. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 91(2), 307–337.CrossRef
Demeritt, D. (2006). Science studies, climate change and the prospects for constructivist critique. Economy and Society, 35(3), 453–479.CrossRef
DiMaggio, P. (1998). The new institutionalisms: Avenues of collaboration. Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics., 154(4), 696–705.
Douglas, H. E. (2009). Science, policy, and the value-free ideal. University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRef
Druss, B., Glasziou, P., Kernick, D. P., Gerhardus, A., Wilson, T., Ben-Schlomo, Y., Moayyeri, A., Soltani, A., & Twisselmann, B. (2005). Evidence-based medicine: Does it make a difference? British Medical Journal, 330(7482), 92–94.
Easton, D. (1957). An approach to the analysis of political systems. World Politics, 9(3), 383–400.CrossRef
Epstein, I. (2009). Promoting harmony where there is commonly conflict: Evidence-informed practice as an integrative strategy. Social Work in Healthcare, 48, 216–231.
Farr, J., Hacker, J. S., & Kazee, N. (2006). The policy scientist of democracy: The discipline of Harold D. Lasswell. American Political Science Review, 100, 579–587.CrossRef
Fforde, A. (2019). Yes, but what about the authority of policy analysts? A commentary and discussion of Perl et al., ‘Policy-making and truthiness: Can existing models cope with politicized evidence and willful ignorance in a post-fact world?’. Policy Sciences, 52, 153–169.CrossRef
Foucault, M. (1975). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Penguin. (1991 edition).
Gambrill, E. (2008). Evidence-based (informed) macro practice: Process and philosophy. Journal of Evidence-Based Social Work, 5(3–4), 423–452.CrossRef
Gambrill, E. (2012). Social work practice: A critical Thinker’s guide (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Gauch, H. G. (2003). Scientific method in practice. Cambridge University Press.
Gilad, B., Kaish, S., & Loeb, P. D. (1984). From economic behavior to behavioral economics: The behavioral uprising in economics. Journal of Behavioral Economics, 13(2), 3–24.CrossRef
Goldie, S., Goldhaber-Fieber, J., & Garnett, G. (2006). Chapter 18: Public health policy for cervical cancer prevention: The role of decision science, economic evaluation, and mathematical modeling. Vaccine, 24(3), S155–S163.CrossRef
Green, D. (2005). On evidence-based political science. Daedalus, 134(3), 96–100.CrossRef
Haas, P. M. (1992). Introduction: Epistemic communities and international policy coordination. International Organisation, 46(1), 1–35.CrossRef
Haas, E. (1990). When Knowledge Is Power: Three Models of Change in International Organizations, University of California Press.
Haas, E. B. (2018). When knowledge is power: Three models of change in international Organisations. University of California Press.
Hallsworth, M., Parker, S., & Rutter, J. (2011). Policy making in the real world: Evidence and analysis (Vol. 2, p. 10). Institute for Government.
Hammersely, M. (2013). The myth of research-based policy and practice. Sage.CrossRef
Hammersley, M. (2005a). Is the evidence-based practice movement doing more good than harm? Reflections on Iain Chalmers’ case for research-based policy making and practice. Evidence and Policy, 1(1), 85–100.CrossRef
Hammersley, M. (2005b). The myth of research-based practice: The critical case of educational inquiry. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(4), 317–330.CrossRef
Head, B. W. (2016). Toward more “evidence-informed” policy making? Public Administration Review, 76(3), 472–484.CrossRef
Henig, J. R. (2009). Politicization of evidence: Lessons for an informed democracy. Educational Policy, 23(1), 137–160.CrossRef
Hodgson, G. M. (2015). On defining institutions: Rules versus equilibria. Journal of Institutional Economics, 11(3), 497–505.CrossRef
Hume, D., & Millican, P. F. (2007). An enquiry concerning human understanding. Oxford University Press.
Jappie, N. B. (2019). The role of university leadership in advocating social justice in south African higher education. In R. Jeffries (Ed.), Diversity, equity, and inclusivity in contemporary higher education (pp. 243–260). Hershey PA.CrossRef
Jenkins-Smith, H., & Sabatier, P. (1993). The study of public policy processes. In P. Sabatier & C. Jones (Eds.), (1984) An introduction to public policy. Wadsworth.
Jones, H. (2009). Policymaking as discourse: A review of recent knowledge-to-policy literature, a joint IKM emergent (ODI Working Paper o. 5). ODI.
Jones, H., Jones, N., Shaxston, L., & Walker, D. (2013). Knowledge, policy and power in international development: A practical framework for improving policy, background note. ODI.
Joshi, M. (2016) Major Groups Engagement in the UNFF: Achievements, Challenges and Opportunities. Background paper prepared for the MGPoF for Major Groups Consultation in preparation for the UNFF 2017-2030 Strategic Plan Development, UN: New York.
Kay, A. (2011). Evidence-based policy-making: The elusive search for rational public administration. Australian Journal of Public Administration., 70, 236–245.CrossRef
Klotz, A. (1995). Norms in international relations. The struggle against apartheid. Cornell University Press.
Lewis P. (2013) Policy thinking, fast and slow: a social intuitionist perspective on public policy processes, American Political Science Association 2013 Annual Meeting. Available at: http://​ssrn.​com/​abstract=​2300479. Last accessed 5 May 2022.
Lowndes, V. (2010). The institutional approach in theory and methods in political science. In V. Lowndes & M. Roberts (Eds.), Why institutions matter. Palgrave Macmillan.
Mahony, M., & Hulme, M. (2018). Epistemic geographies of climate change: Science, space and politics. Progress in Human Geography, 42(3), 395–424.CrossRef
March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (1984). The New Institutionalism: Organizational Factors in Political Life. The American Political Science Review, 78(3), 734–749. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2307/​1961840
Marston, G., & Watts, R. (2003). Tampering with the evidence: A critical appraisal of evidence-based policymaking. The drawing board. An Australian Review of Public Affairs, 3(3), 143–163.
Mayhew, S. (2009). A dictionary of geography. Oxford University Press.
Melnyk, B. M., & Newhouse, R. (2014). Evidence-based practice versus evidence-informed practice: A debate that could stall forward momentum in improving healthcare quality, safety, patient outcomes, and costs. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 11(6), 347–349.CrossRef
Mokyr, J. (2016). A culture of growth: The origins of the modern economy. Princeton.CrossRef
Nevo, I., & Slonim-Nevo, V. (2011). The myth of evidence-based practice: Towards evidence-informed practice. The British Journal of Social Work, 41(6), 1176–1197.CrossRef
Newman, J. (2017). Debating the politics of evidence-based policy. Public Administration, 95(4), 1107–1112.CrossRef
North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
Nutley, S., Davies H., & Walter, I. (2002). Evidence based policy and practice: Cross sector lessons from the UK, Keynote paper for the Social Policy Research and Evaluation Conference, Wellington, New Zealand, 2-3 July.
Oliver, K. A., & de Vocht, F. (2017). Defining ‘evidence’ in public health: A survey of policymakers’ uses and preferences. European Journal of Public Health, 27(2), 112–117.
Parkhurst, J. O., & Abeysinghe, S. (2016). What constitutes “good” evidence for public health and social policymaking? From hierarchies to appropriateness. Social Epistemology, 30(5–6), 665–679.CrossRef
Parkhurt, J. (2017). The politics of evidence: From evidence-based policy to the good governance of evidence. Routledge Studies in Governance and Public Policy.
Pemberton, H. R. (2010). “What matters is what works”: Labour’s journey from “national superannuation” to “personal accounts”. British Politics, 5, 41–64.CrossRef
Perl, A., Howlett, M., & Ramesh, M. (2018). Policymaking and truthiness: Can existing policy models cope with politicised evidence and willful ignorance in a “post-fact” world? Policy Sciences, 51(4), 581–600.CrossRef
Pierson, P. (2000). Increasing returns, path dependence, and the study of politics. The American Political Science Review, 94(2), 251–267.CrossRef
Pierson, P. (2004). Politics in time. History, institutions, and social analysis. Princeton University Press.CrossRef
Pitkin, H. (1967). The concept of representation. University of Press.CrossRef
Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. Basic Books. Popper, K. (1934) in Ivancevich, V.​ and T.​ Ivancevich (2008) Quantum leap: From Dirac and Feynman, across the universe to human body and mind, World Scientific Publishing
Prior, M., Sood, G., & Khanna, K. (2015). You cannot be serious: The impact of accuracy incentives on partisan bias in reports of economic perceptions. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 10(4), 489–518.CrossRef
Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.CrossRef
Rixen, T., & Viola, L. A. (2016). Historical institutionalism and international relations: Towards explaining change and stability in international institutions. In T. Rixen, L. A. Viola, & M. Zurn (Eds.), Historical institutionalism and international relations: Explaining institutional development in world politics (pp. 3–35). Oxford University Press.CrossRef
Rossiter, M. (1985). Science and public policy since world war II, Historical writings on American science (pp. 273–294). University of Chicago Press.
Russell, B. (1926a). Theory of knowledge, Encyclopaedia Britannica (Vol. 2, 13th ed., pp. 642–645). The Encyclopaedia Britannica Company Ltd.
Russell, B. (1926b). A history of Western philosophy, (7th ed., republished 1976) Simon and Schuster.
Sabatier, P. A. (1988). An advocacy coalition framework of policy change and the role of policy-oriented learning therein. Policy Sciences, 21(2), 129–168.CrossRef
Sabatier, P., & Jenkins-Smith, H. (1993). The advocacy coalition framework: Assessment, revisions and implications for scholars and practitioners. In P. Sabatier & H. Jenkins-Smith (Eds.), Policy change and learning: An advocacy coalition approach. Boulder, CO.
Sackett, D. L., Rosenberg, W. M., Muir Gray, J. A., Haynes, R. B., & Richardson, W. S. (1996). Evidence based medicine: What it is and what it Isn’t: It’s about integrating individual clinical expertise and the best external evidence. British Medical Journal, 312(7023), 71–72.CrossRef
Shapin, S. (1988). The house of experiment in seventeenth century England. Isis, 79(3), 373.CrossRef
Shepsle, K. A. (2008). Rational choice institutionalism. In S. Binder, R. Rhodes, B. Rockman, & K. Shepsle (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of political institutions. Oxford University Press.
Shlonsky, A., & Mildon, R. (2014). Methodological pluralism in the age of evidence-informed practice and policy. Scandinavian Journal of Public Health., 42(13 Suppl), 18–27.CrossRef
Simons, H. (2010). Evidence-based practice: Panacea or over promise? Research Paper in Education, 18(4), 303–311.CrossRef
Solesbury, W. (2001). Evidence based policy: Whence it came and where It’s going, ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice, Working Paper 1. ESRC.
Stanford (2018) Karl Popper. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.
Sutcliffe, S., & Court, J. (2005). Evidence-based policymaking: What is it? How does it work? What relevance for developing countries? ODI Working Paper.
Swidler, A. (1986). Culture in action: Symbols and strategies. American Sociological Review, 51, 273–286.CrossRef
Tagney, J., & Haines, C. (2009). Using evidence-based practice to address gaps in nursing knowledge. British Journal of Nursing, 18(8), 484–489.CrossRef
Thelen, K. (2003). How institutions evolve. Insights from comparative historical analysis. In J. Mahoney & D. Rueschemeyer (Eds.), Comparative historical analysis in the social sciences (pp. 208–240). Cambridge University Press.CrossRef
United States Government. (2017). The promise of evidence-based policymaking: Report of the commission on evidence-based policymaking. Report Presented to the U.S. President.
Ward, M. and Mowat, D. (2012) “Creating an Organisational Culture for Evidence-Informed Decision Making”, Healthcare Management Forum, 25(3), 146-150.
Waqa, G., Mavoa, H., Snowdon, W., Moodie, M., Nadakuitavuki, R., McCabe, M., & Swinburn, B. (2013). Participants’ perceptions of a knowledge-brokering strategy to facilitate evidence-informed policymaking in Fiji. BMC Public Health, 13(1).
Weiss, C. (1977). Research for Policy’s sake: The enlightenment function of social research. Policy Analysis, 3(4), 531–545.
Weiss, C. H. (1979). The many meanings of research utilization. Public Administration Review, 39(5), 426.CrossRef
Wesselink, A., Colebatch, H., & Pearce, W. (2014). Evidence and policy: Discourses, meanings and practices. Policy Sciences, 47(4), 339–344.CrossRef
What Works Network. (2018). The what works network: Five years on. What Works Network.
Whitehead, A.N. & Russell, B. (1910, 1912, 1913) Principia Mathematica, 3 volumes, Cambridge University Press.
Zhmud, L., & Chernoglazov, A. (2008). The origin of the history of science in classical antiquity. De Gruyter.
UN DESA. (2021). CEPA strategy guidance note on the science policy Interface. UNDESA.
UNESCO. (2016). The future of scientific advice to the United Nations, a summary report to the secretary-general of the United Nations from the scientific advisory board to the UN. UNESCO.
United Nations. (2015a). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for sustainable development, A/RES/70/1. United Nations.
Metadaten
Titel
Scientific Evidence in Policy Processes: Concepts and Histories
verfasst von
Jessica Espey
Copyright-Jahr
2023
Buch
Science in Negotiation

Print ISBN: 978-3-031-18125-2

Electronic ISBN: 978-3-031-18126-9

Copyright-Jahr: 2023

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18126-9_2