Responsible researcher: Eduarda Miller de Figueiredo
Intervention Location: United Kingdom
Sample Size: -
Sector: Public Policies
Variable of Main Interest:-
Type of Intervention: Data analysis, interviews
Methodology: Others
Summary
The use of evidence for policy formulation has grown over the years. However, there is a scarcity of studies on the process of this policy formulation. Thus, looking at his notes during his work as a policy consultant in the United Kingdom in 2009, the author discusses this process of policy formulation using evidence. Their findings suggest eight key themes that range from commitment to the use of evidence to totemic harshness, including the issue of uncertainty. Concluding, therefore, that there is an excess of evidence, however, inconclusive.
In recent years there has been a great discussion around “evidence-based policy” (Black, 2001; Boaz and Pawson, 2005). Hill's (2009) study notes in its analysis a lack of study on the process and definition of policy formulation, which tends to be examined through analysis of results and not through careful observation. There is also a difficulty in defining evidence, since for Monaghan (2008), evidence is itself a politically charged discussion.
For the article discussed here, policy formulation was considered to refer to the organized attempt to select objectives and methods for government action.
That said, this article sought to contribute to the development of an explanation of the use of evidence in policymaking, using ethnographic data from a study of policymaking practice in the UK government.
The author says he worked as a policy consultant for six months in 2009 in the policy making section of the UK civil service. In which his team advised the highest levels of government on policies in the areas of social policy and criminal justice, highly politicized areas [1] . With this, the author observed and participated in the work of policy formulation with the minimum of reactivity, that is, as close as possible to the normal process. Thus, by participating in the use of evidence for policy purposes, discussing and observing the process in his day-to-day life, the author gathered data to develop and test the theory.
During the author's research, he highlights that the lack of knowledge about academic results can be partially explained by the “inadequacies” of research in the social sciences for use in evidence (Gans, 1971). Questions policymakers tend to ask include: what should be done in practice; how it will work; what the effects will be; How much will it cost; there will be adverse consequences and on whom they will fall. There is very little evidence available answering such questions conclusively for policymakers (Tilley and Laycock, 2000).
An important point is in relation to the narrative effort for the creation of new policies, as Hajer (1995) highlights about the importance of “telling stories” to influence which proposals will be adopted.
Following an “adaptive coding” approach [2] (Layder, 1998), the author generated a list of provisional codes from his previous work in this area (Stevens, 2007) and existing literature. When coding the field notes and interview transcripts, observations and quotes related to these provisional codes were highlighted, as well as generating new codes as other concepts emerged in the data.
From this eight key themes emerged:
This topic will discuss the data found by the author for each of the key themes:
It has been observed that civil servants are not very different from academics in demonstrating competence in using scientific reason to gain reputations that lead to personal and professional reward (Bourdieu, 2000). Where the public officials with whom the author had contact appeared to be highly committed to the use of evidence. Therefore, evidence was present in the development, discussion and presentation of the constructed policies that were observed.
Fifteen types of evidence were found that entered political debates, in which, in addition to government data collected internally and academic analyzes produced externally, there were opinion polls, thinktank and management consultancy reports, political documents, etc. As discussed previously, policymakers must choose from the limited evidence available, i.e., evidence becomes an oversaturated solution to policy problems.
To gain acceptance, policy proposals must be approved by a wide range of senior civil servants, special advisors and, eventually, departmental ministers. The author observes that the narrative, which was used as an effort to approve the proposal, was a common point in the creation of new policies, testifying to what was stated by Hajer (1995).
Managing uncertainty strengthens the narrative of a policy document, but it also plays a broader role in structuring the context in which public officials operate.
If public servants make themselves useful in the task of creating and executing policies, they will be more likely to achieve their own goals of professional advancement, thus maximizing both types of utility: being useful and the pursuit of personal goals. Therefore, the author emphasizes that the pressures and incentives that civil servants experience in developing their careers are important to understand how they begin to use evidence in formulating policies.
Employees must present proposals that are useful to their superiors and that can be accepted into government policy, therefore, proposals must fit into the existing narrative of government policy. The public servants observed during the research sought to achieve higher status, rather than challenge, reinforced the fundamental assumptions of current political narratives.
It is suggested that public officials learn to avoid uncertainty, complexity and contradiction during policy formulation. Where the causal and harmful impact of inequality is a current of thought that has influenced political agendas. However, during his analysis, the author realized that programs were being sought that could “keep a lid” on the effects of inequality, rather than solving the causes.
It applies only to visible social groups, where the poor and excluded have so consistently been “othered” in contemporary criminal policy (Young, 2007)
The analysis so far suggests that there is an excess of evidence, mostly inconclusive, and an aversion to uncertainty, complexity and contradiction in policymaking circles. The author concludes, therefore, that formulating policies based on evidence is an intensely ideological activity, as it reinforces the unequal distribution of power.
Reference
STEVENS, A. (2011). Telling Policy Stories: An Ethnographic Study of the Use of Evidence in Policy-making in the UK. Journal of Social Policy, 40 (2), 237-255. doi:10.1017/S0047279410000723
[1] During his work as a policy consultant, the author carried out desk research, developed policy proposals, represented at interdepartmental meetings, seminars, etc. In addition to observing interactions between colleagues and public servants and advisors, he conducted interviews with 5 public servants. Not all contacts obtained informed consent, because open research can change the behavior of participants, due to power interests.
[2] Adaptive coding.
[3] Totemic toughness
Check the Institution's registration in the e-MEC System here
© 2025 All Rights Reserved
