Insights from ‘policy learning’ on how to enhance the use of evidence by policymakers

Abstract

This article uses the policy-oriented learning literature to provide practical insights on how to enhance the use of evidence by policymakers. After a short introduction to the field, this article presents four steps to understanding and responding to policy learning. First, all people interpret the world through the lens of their beliefs, and learn by combining heuristics and analytical processing. Second, people learn in different ways according to their roles. A novice would not be advised to learn about a specialist isue in the same way as a scientist. Instead, a modified communication strategy would be used to ensure understanding and uptake of evidence. Third, learning is a political process: we interact with our social environment and some actors-including entrepreneurs and brokers-influence the process more than others. Therefore, to encourage learning from scientific evidence we need to move beyond communication towards entrepreneurship and brokerage roles. In other words, policy-oriented learning is as much about interaction and leadership as information.

Creating and communicating social research for policymakers in government

“…The creation of posters provided a space to convert qualitative findings into eye-catching information. Evidence suggests that using a variety of dissemination methods can improve knowledge transfer, engagement with the research and in turn its impact (Walter et al, 2003;Llic and Rowe, 2013;and Witting, 2017). In particular, Llic and Rowe (2013) state that posters provide a concise overview of research findings which can stimulate informal discussion.…”

“…Rather than providing a full account of the evidence/policy literature (which is covered by Oliver and Cairney, 2019;Evans and Cvitanovic, 2018;Cairney and Kwiatkowski, 2017;Witting, 2017), we show how we are making sense of such studies in our day-to-day work. We focus on situating ourselves in the evidence/ policy environment and clearly communicating our research.…”

Storylines for practice: a visual storytelling approach to strengthen the science-practice interface

“…Within the practitioner audience, project managers implement these strategies and are part of decision-making processes at a more specific location or operational level (Roux et al 2006). Advisors often provide input to the above processes with their specialized expertise (Witting 2017). Other interested professionals may provide direct input to decision-making processes and/or advise to specific stakeholder groups (Young et al 2016).…”

“…Heink et al (2015) define relevance as the degree to which content fits the audiences' expectations and consider their decision-making needs; credibility as the audiences' perceptions about the trustworthiness of the source of information and the way it is presented; and legitimacy as the extent to which the information was produced and/or transmitted in a way that is open and observable by the intended audience. Witting (2017) further outlines that humans assess new information based on either their slow and analytical thinking or fast and intuitive thinking. Given their limited time, policy-makers (Cairney and Kwiatkowski 2017) and also practitioners (Young et al 2016) often rely on their fast and intuitive thinking.…”

“…In addition, the use of jargon often privileges those who are familiar with the specific terms and level of detail (Leggett and Finlay 2001). Second, management actors such as project managers and advisors have their own knowledge and expertise (Witting 2017). They have different sources of information and limited time to identify the usefulness of scientific knowledge (Cairney and Kwiatkowski 2017).…”