Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Evidence-based policy making presents challenges for researchers as the pragmatic imperative of delivering `the right information, at the right time, for the right people' can appear to compromise traditional academic roles and responsibilities. Using the recent evaluation of the UK Cabinet Office-led `Better Government for Older People' programme as a case study, we discuss attempts to meet these challenges in practice. Our experience confirms that there has been a shift from the assumption of rational models (i.e. that evidence will be used as part of a linear planning process) to a more `realistic' perspective in which evidence from research requires advocates to promote its potential contribution. In turn, this suggests that it is in the interest of the research community to try to understand the policy-making process, and so design, undertake and disseminate their research in a way that maximizes the likelihood of its use in actively contributing to policy development.

Keywords

action research evidence-based policy policy evaluation role of the evaluator utilization

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Balthasar, A. and S. Reider (2000) `Learning from Evaluations: Effects of the Swiss Energy 2000 Programme', Evaluation 6(3): 245-60.

Boaz, A. and C. Hayden (2000) Listening to Local Older People, Warwick Research Papers - Better Government for Older People Series No. 2. Warwick: Warwick University.

Boaz, A. , C. Hayden and M. Bernard (1999) Attitudes and Aspirations of Older People: A Review of the Literature, DSS Research Report No. 101. London: The Stationery Office.

Boaz, A. , C. Hayden and F. Taylor (2000) Active Ageing: Putting Policy into Practice, Warwick Research Papers - Better Government for Older People Series No. 4. Warwick: Warwick University.

Cabinet Office (1999) Modernising Government, Cm 4310. London: The Stationery Office.

Cronbach, L.J. , S.R. Ambron , S.M. Dornbusch , R.D. Hess , R.C. Hornik , D.C. Phillips , D.F. Walker and S.S. Weiner (1980) Towards Reform of Programme Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Davies, H.T.O. , S.M. Williams and P.C. Smith (2000) What Works? Evidence Based Policy and Practice in Public Services. Bristol: Policy Press.

DfEE (2000) Influence or Irrelevance: Can Social Science Improve Government? Secretary of State's ESRC Lecture Speech, 2nd February.

Hayden, C. and A. Boaz (2000a) Not Checking but Learning: The Better Government for Older People Evaluation Approach, Warwick Research Papers - Better Government for Older People Series No. 1. Warwick: Warwick University.

10.

Hayden, C. and A. Boaz (2000b) Making a Difference: The Better Government for Older People Evaluation Report. London: Better Government for Older People.

11.

Hayden, C. and A. Boaz (2000c) Government Listening to Older People, Warwick Research Papers - Better Government for Older People Series No. 3. Warwick: Warwick University.

12.

Hayden, C. , A. Boaz and F. Taylor (1999) Attitudes and Aspirations of Older People: A Qualitative Study, DSS Research Report No. 102. London: The Stationery Office.

13.

Hayden, C. , A. Boaz and F. Taylor (2001) Information Poverty in the Knowledge Society, Warwick Research Papers - Better Government for Older People Series No. 5. Warwick: Warwick University.

14.

Jackson, P.M. and L. Stainsby (2000) `Managing Public Sector Networked Organisations' , Public Money and Management 20(1): 11-6.

15.

Martin, S. and A. Boaz (2000) `Public Participation and Citizen-centred Local Government: Lessons from the Best Value and Better Government for Older People Pilot Programmes', Public Money and Management 20(2): 47-54.

16.

Martin, S. and I. Sanderson (1999) `Evaluating Public Policy Experiments: Measuring Outcomes, Monitoring Processes or Managing Pilots?', Evaluation 5(3): 245-58.

17.

Percy-Smith, J. and I. Sanderson (2000) Enhancing Research Capacity: The Importance of Research in Modern Local Government. London: Local Government Association (available on the SSRG website).

18.

Powell, M. and M. Exworthy (2001) `Joined-up Solutions to Address Health Inequalities: Analysing Policy, Process and Resources Streams', Public Money and Management 21(1): 21-5.

19.

Preskill, H.S. and R.T. Torres (1999) `Building Capacity for Organisational Learning through Evaluative Inquiry', Evaluation 5(1): 42-60.

20.

Rossi, P.H. , H.E. Freeman and M.W. Lipsey (1999) Evaluation: A Systematic Approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

21.

Sanderson, I. (2000) `Evaluation in Complex Policy Systems', Evaluation 6(4): 433-54.

22.

Scottish Executive (2001) All Our Futures in Scotland. Edinburgh: Scottish Executive.

23.

Weiss, C.H. (1997) `Theory-based Evaluation: Past, Present, and Future' , in D. J. Rog and D. Fournier (eds) Progress and Future Directions in Evaluation: Perspectives on Theory, Practice, and Methods, New Directions for Evaluation 76, pp. 41-56. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

24.

Weiss, C. (1998) Evaluation: Methods for Studying Programmes and Policies, 2nd edn. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.