Abstract

There is currently intense debate over expertise, evidence and ‘post-truth’ politics, and how this is influencing policy formulation and implementation. In this article, we put forward a methodology for evidence-based policy making intended as a way of helping navigate this web of complexity. Starting from the premise of why it is so crucial that policies to meet major global challenges use scientific evidence, we discuss the socio-political difficulties and complexities that hinder this process. We discuss the necessity of embracing a broader view of what constitutes evidence—science and the evaluation of scientific evidence cannot be divorced from the political, cultural and social debate that inevitably and justifiably surrounds these major issues. As a pre-requisite for effective policy making, we propose a methodology that fully integrates scientific investigation with political debate and social discourse. We describe a rigorous process of mapping, analysis, visualisation and sharing of evidence, constructed from integrating science and social science data. This would then be followed by transparent evidence evaluation, combining independent assessment to test the validity and completeness of the evidence with deliberation to discover how the evidence is perceived, misunderstood or ignored. We outline the opportunities and the problems derived from the use of digital communications, including social media, in this methodology, and emphasise the power of creative and innovative evidence visualisation and sharing in shaping policy.

Highlights

  • There is currently intense debate over expertise, evidence and ‘post-truth’ politics, and how this is influencing policy formulation and implementation

  • We outline a methodology for integrating the process of scientific investigation with political debate and social discourse in order to improve the science–policy interface

  • Science advisors and advisory bodies with scientist representation have steadily increased (Gluckman and Wilsdon, 2016); for example, in the UK in the form of the Food Standard Agency (FSA), the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) or globally within the commissions and advisory bodies associated with the United Nations and/or the use of technical review panels such as within The Global Fund to Fight Aids, Malaria and Tuberculosis

Read more

Summary

What is evidence?

The reasons for these apparent failures are complicated and numerous but one key issue is what constitutes evidence. It is still a highly contentious issue in many parts of the world, the inclusion of political, religious and cultural leaders in the research process in many cases helped to alleviate existing fears and misunderstandings, which facilitated more exact communication and acceptance of the source of evidence (WHO, 2016). Given their reputation for impartiality, transparency and interdisciplinary thinking, universities could play a key independent role, so long as they have procedures to include all stakeholders, those directly affected by a policy intervention This is not always straightforward, especially when research depends upon funding by governments and various external bodies. This is an area to which future research should be directed (Neblo et al, 2017)

Transforming knowledge into policy
Additional information
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call