What counts as evidence for policy? An analysis of policy actors’ perceptions

Eleanor MacKillop; James Downe

Vol. 11 No. 1 (2023)
Annual Review of Policy Design

Recently Appeared

What counts as evidence for policy? An analysis of policy actors’ perceptions

Published 2023-11-25

Eleanor MacKillop
James Downe

How to Cite

MacKillop, E., & Downe, J. (2023). What counts as evidence for policy? An analysis of policy actors’ perceptions. Annual Review of Policy Design, 11(1). Retrieved from https://ojs.unbc.ca/index.php/design/article/view/1944

Download Citation

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

Abstract

vidence plays a growing role in public administration worldwide. We analyze the perceptions of policy actors, using Q methodology and a structured questionnaire, which reveals four types of profiles. Most policy actors did not fit neatly into an Evidence-Based Policy-Making (EBPM) group. Instead, they either had a pragmatic view where context and policy issues influence what counts as evidence, an inclu- sive position which emphasized the importance of considering a range of different types of evidence, or a political perspective where power relations and politics influence what counts as evidence. Our research also illustrates how different actors in the same community can have different perceptions of evidence, and how this can change over time due to experience and career trajectory.

.pdf