Better Government, Better Science: The Promise of and Challenges Facing the Evidence-Informed Policy Movement

Abstract

Collaborations between the academy and governments promise to improve the lives of people, the operations of government, and our understanding of human behavior and public policy. This review shows that the evidence-informed policy movement consists of two main threads: ( a) an effort to invent new policies using insights from the social and behavioral science consensus about human behavior and institutions and ( b) an effort to evaluate the success of governmental policies using transparent and high-integrity research designs such as randomized controlled trials. We argue that the problems of each approach may be solved or at least well addressed by teams that combine the two. We also suggest that governmental actors ought to want to learn about why a new policy works as much as they want to know that the policy works. We envision a future evidence-informed public policy practice that ( a) involves cross-sector collaborations using the latest theory plus deep contextual knowledge to design new policies, ( b) applies the latest insights in research design and statistical inference for causal questions, and ( c) is focused on assessing explanations as much as on discovering what works. The evidence-informed public policy movement is a way that new data, new questions, and new collaborators can help political scientists improve our theoretical understanding of politics and also help our policy partners to improve the practice of government itself.

Human Biomonitoring Data Enables Evidence-Informed Policy to Reduce Internal Exposure to Persistent Organic Compounds: A Case Study

“…The main objective of this article was to illustrate, by means of a case study, how HBM studies can contribute to evidence-informed policy. According to Bowers and Testa [ 41 ], good evidence-informed policy making should involve cross-sectoral collaborations, use state-of-the-art research designs and contextualized knowledge, and should focus not only on exploring explanations and answers to causal questions, but also on what will work in a given context. The FLEHS program, organized by the Center of Expertise on Environment and Health, has supported the policy decisions in the region of Menen by adding HBM expertise to the knowledge base and by stimulating the local dialogue between the community and local and regional policy makers, resulting in answering to local concerns.…”

Research Impact Through Matchmaking (RITM): Why and How to Connect Researchers and Practitioners

“…For researchers, these relationships complement other forms of engagement such as blogging (Sides 2011), writing policy briefs (Skocpol 2014), and performing public service (Bowers and Testa 2019). As external bodies (e.g., donors and governments) increasingly demand evidence of research impact (Nyhan, Sides, and Tucker 2015), it represents one way for research to influence decision making outside of the academy (Nutley, Walter, and Davies 2007) and for practitioners to efficiently learn what works.…”

Behavioral Implementation and Compliance of Anti-Epidemic Policy in the COVID-19 Crisis

“…Tummers [28] argued that, in order to better implement policy, governments should rely on people's support to guide and change their behavior. Similarly, Bowers [30] proposed applying 'behavioral insight' to guide public policy.…”