Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorParkhurst, Justin
dc.date.accessioned2025-05-19T07:33:07Z
dc.date.available2025-05-19T07:33:07Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifierONIX_20250519T091213_9781317380870_74
dc.identifier.urihttps://library.oapen.org/handle/20.500.12657/102156
dc.description.abstractThe 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.
dc.languageEnglish
dc.relation.ispartofseriesRoutledge Studies in Governance and Public Policy
dc.subject.classificationthema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JP Politics and government::JPP Public administration
dc.subject.classificationthema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JM Psychology::JMH Social, group or collective psychology
dc.subject.classificationthema EDItEUR::M Medicine and Nursing::MB Medicine: general issues::MBN Public health and preventive medicine::MBNH Personal and public health / health education
dc.subject.classificationthema EDItEUR::K Economics, Finance, Business and Management::KJ Business and Management::KJU Organizational theory and behaviour
dc.subject.classificationthema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JH Sociology and anthropology::JHB Sociology
dc.subject.classificationthema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JB Society and culture: general::JBF Social and ethical issues::JBFA Social discrimination and social justice
dc.subject.classificationthema EDItEUR::J Society and Social Sciences::JK Social services and welfare, criminology::JKS Social welfare and social services
dc.subject.otherIssue Bias
dc.subject.otherissue
dc.subject.otherEvidentiary Bias
dc.subject.otherbias
dc.subject.otherPolicy Issues
dc.subject.othertechnical
dc.subject.otherEvidence Utilisation
dc.subject.otherevidentiary
dc.subject.otherHIV Prevention
dc.subject.otherpolicy
dc.subject.otherTechnical Bias
dc.subject.otherutilisation
dc.subject.otherAdvocacy Coalitions Framework
dc.subject.otherebp
dc.subject.otherKnowledge Transfer Literature
dc.subject.othermovement
dc.subject.otherTe Ch
dc.subject.otherrelevant
dc.subject.otherThroughput Legitimacy
dc.subject.otherpolicymaking
dc.subject.otherNational Academies
dc.subject.otherInput Legitimacy
dc.subject.otherLib Er
dc.subject.otherPolicy Relevant Evidence
dc.subject.otherEs Ta
dc.subject.otherTraining Decision Makers
dc.subject.otherInterest Group Position
dc.subject.otherDa Te
dc.subject.otherLow HIV Prevalence
dc.subject.otherUK’s Alliance
dc.titleThe Politics of Evidence
dc.title.alternativeFrom evidence-based policy to the good governance of evidence
dc.typebook
oapen.identifier.doi10.4324/9781315675008
oapen.relation.isPublishedBy7b3c7b10-5b1e-40b3-860e-c6dd5197f0bb
oapen.relation.isbn9781317380870
oapen.relation.isbn9781317380856
oapen.relation.isbn9781138570382
oapen.relation.isbn9781138939400
oapen.relation.isbn9781317380863
oapen.relation.isbn9781315675008
oapen.imprintRoutledge
oapen.pages196
oapen.place.publicationOxford
oapen.identifier.ocn963180218
peerreview.anonymitySingle-anonymised
peerreview.idbc80075c-96cc-4740-a9f3-a234bc2598f3
peerreview.open.reviewNo
peerreview.publish.responsibilityPublisher
peerreview.review.stagePre-publication
peerreview.review.typeProposal
peerreview.reviewer.typeInternal editor
peerreview.reviewer.typeExternal peer reviewer
peerreview.titleProposal review
oapen.review.commentsTaylor & Francis open access titles are reviewed as a minimum at proposal stage by at least two external peer reviewers and an internal editor (additional reviews may be sought and additional content reviewed as required).


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record