Revisiting the Base in Evidence-Based Policy

Mike D Schneider, Helena Slanickova, Hannah Rubin, Remco Heesen, Anne Schwenkenbecher, Alejandro Bortolus, Emelda E Chukwu, Chad L Hewitt, Ricardo Kaufer, Evangelina Schwindt, Temitope O Sogbanmu, Katie Woolaston, Li-an Yu

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

Abstract

Evidence-based policy (EBP) has become widely embraced for its commitment to greater uptake of scientific knowledge in policymaking. But what legitimizes EBP and in what respect are evidence-based policymaking practices better than other policymaking practices? In this article, we distinguish and refine three potential legitimizers of EBP. We suggest that evidence-based policymaking practices are better because they “follow the science,” because they focus on “what works,” or because they “follow the rules.” We discuss some consequences, for advocates of EBP, of consciously adopting one or other of these legitimizers. Finally, we examine whether it is appropriate to switch from advocating for EBP to advocating for evidence-informed policy.
Original languageEnglish
JournalPolitical Studies
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 12-Mar-2025

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Revisiting the Base in Evidence-Based Policy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this