SPA - Week 7

• Types of information for evaluation

  • Scientific data about what HAPPENED
  • Scientific data about what COULD happen
  • Data focused on policy analysis
  • Wider knowledge
• Surveillance data


  Shows patterns in real-world retrospective data
• Research (e.g., observational studies)


  Scientific data about what HAPPENED
• Modelling


  Mathematical or computational models to simulate and analyze real-world phenomena
• Systematic reviews


  Summarize and analyze existing studies on a specific topic
• Public opinion


  Polling and social media
• Data


  Quantitative information
• Information


  Textual information and numbers
• Research


  A scientific process to collect and analyse data and information
• Insight, evaluation, analysis, and intelligence

  Conclusions from data and information

  • NOT the data or information themselves; its the commentary/analysis on them
  • More neutral than evidence
• Evidence


  An assertion based on information
• Expert opinion


  Assertion is based on the legitimacy of the person
• Scientific evidence


  An assertion based on information collected through scientific methods
• Scientific opinion


  An assertion made by people who have a particular education, qualifications, and experiences and thus a specific body of knowledge
• Knowledge


  Knowing or being familiar with something
• Tacit knowledge


  Gained through personal experience, intuition, and practical know-how, rather than through formal training or education
• Impact


  The social change an intervention aspires to achieve

  • Can only see impact once the intervention is in place
• Influence


  A type of impact that happens during the policymaking process, not a clear output and outcome
• Policy actors


  • Individuals or groups involved in the policymaking process
• Types of policy actors(normative, ideal; not reflective of reality)

  • Actors involved in reviewing the evidence and data: academics, TT, charities, consultants
  • Actors involved in generating the advice: gov't committees/advisors, commentators, RC, industry
  • Actors involved in making a decision: ministers, SLB, civil servants
  • Actors involved in evaluating the policy: academics, TT, charities, consultants
• Knowledge transfer


  Sharing knowledge/ evidence
• Differences between academic community and policymaking community

  • Different goals, values, and languages → gap in communication and understanding between them
  • Different time horizons
• Academic community


  • Main focus: pure science; advancing knowledge and theoretical understanding
  • Use specialized terminology
  • Rigorous analysis
  • Research not easily accessible or applicable to policymaking process
• Policymaking community


  • Main focus: practical goals
  • More concerned with real-world problems and & decisions with immediate impact
  • Rely on practical experience, political considerations, and pragmatic solutions
  • Overlooks academic research; seen as complex and impractical
• Weiss's enlightenment model

  A more helpful model of how evidence influences policymaking
• The relationship between social sciences and public decision-making has evolved from mistrust to valuing scientific knowledge for economic and social improvement
• Instrumental use


  When research evidence directly informs policies
• Conceptual use


  The use of evidence to shape policymakers' understanding of an issue

  • Research findings don’t directly lead to specific policies, but contribute to policymakers' knowledge and conceptual frameworks
• Key Research Areas in EBP


  • Research UPTAKE
  • INCREASING research UPTAKE
  • Barriers/facilitates
  • SPECIFIC elements of the policy-making process (not broad view)
• A new agenda for EPB research

  • Examine how research influences policy processes> amount used
  • Find out WHAT type of evidence is used
  • Broaden methods used
  • Clarity re: concepts and metrics used to evaluate impact
• We lack EBP research on:

  
  

  • Perceptions of barriers/facilitators
  • When, why, and how knowledge is deemed relevant
  • How research use leads to better outcomes
• Good evidence


  Depends on what we want to know, for what purposes, and in what contexts we envisage that evidence being used
• Commissioning process


  Contracting someone to carry out a specific project
• Healthcare is seen as a leader in evidence-based decision-making
• Empirical knowing


  The most explicit form of knowing

  • Based on quantitative or qualitative research
• Theoretical knowing


  Uses theoretical frameworks to THINK about a problem, sometimes informed by research, but often from INTUITIVE and informal ways
• Experiential knowing


  Craft or tacit knowledge built up over years of practice/ experience
• What decision makers are interested in


  • Reasons, timing, and target groups for effective policies
  • Potential unintended side-effects
  • Cost-effectiveness
  • Policy impacts across different groups
  • Public acceptability
  • Risks and consequences of implementation failure
• Descriptive evidence


  Evidence on social problems, causes, and at-risk groups
• Enlightenment function of research

  Using research to promote learning and understanding among policy stakeholders