Policy evaluation and democracy: Do they fit?

Sager, Fritz

doi:10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2017.08.005

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 43 publications

(32 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If we look for answers to this question, the literature on policy evaluation is the most obvious starting point. Typically, evaluation studies seek to establish causal linkages between a given policy and its impact (Pawson & Tilley 1997; Sager 2017). Although many studies examine potential causal effects of a single policy measure in a respective country (Knill & Tosun 2012), a growing body of work analyses the impact of a given policy measure from a comparative perspective.…”

Section: Rule Growth and Policy Impactmentioning

confidence: 99%

The more the better? Rule growth and policy impact from a macro perspective

Limberg

Steinebach²,

Bayerlein

et al. 2020

European J Political Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Do more rules improve overall policy performance? To answer this question, we look at rule growth in the area of environmental policy from an aggregate perspective. We argue that impactful growth in rules crucially depends on implementation capacities. If such capacities are limited, countries are at risk of ‘empty’ rule growth where they lack the ability to implement their ever‐growing stock of policies. Hence, rules are a necessary, yet not sufficient condition for achieving sectoral policy objectives. We underpin our argument with an analysis of the impact of a new, encompassing measure of environmental rule growth covering 13 countries from 1980 to 2010. These findings call for ‘sustainable statehood’ where the growth in rules should not outpace the expansion in administrative capacities.

show abstract

Section: Rule Growth and Policy Impactmentioning

confidence: 99%

The more the better? Rule growth and policy impact from a macro perspective

Limberg

Steinebach²,

Bayerlein

et al. 2020

European J Political Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…coined the term intelligent democracy, a democracy in which free access to scientific evidence provides for an informed public discourse. Such an evidence-based discourse is especially relevant in direct-democratic campaigns where political actors aim to convince citizens to oppose or support a policy through arguments (Stucki et al 2018;Sager et al 2017b;Sager 2017). To this end, political actors frame their arguments, that is, "they select some aspects of a perceived reality and make them more salient in a communicating text" (Entman 1993: 52).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aristotelian framing: logos, ethos, pathos and the use of evidence in policy frames

Stucki

Sager

2018

Policy Sci

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this research note, we propose to complement the analytical toolbox for framing analyses with the categories of Aristotelian rhetoric. As our case, we analyse the function of the use of evidence in frame building in the context of Swiss direct-democratic campaigns preceding votes on smoking bans. Based on rhetoric, a frame can be considered to contain three interrelated elements: (1) political arguments (logos), (2) cultural symbols (ethos), and (3) emotional appeal (pathos). By comparing evidence-based arguments with arguments that do not refer to evidence, the research note illustrates that backing arguments (logos) by evidence increases their trustworthiness (ethos) but not their emotional appeal (pathos). We consider the Aristotelian categories a fruitful tool to enlarge existing framing research with regard to the use of evidence.

show abstract

“…That means that politicians, interest groups, and governments select those findings that support their position and interpret evidence in accordance with their political conviction (Boswell ; Shulock ). This article assembles the results of a multiyear research project on the political use of scientific evidence in referendum campaigns in Switzerland (Sager ; Schlaufer , , 2016c; Stucki , , ; Stucki and Schlaufer ) 1. Based on these results, the article argues that using scientific evidence politically contributes to democratic discourse in several ways.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

The Political Use of Evidence and Its Contribution to Democratic Discourse

Schlaufer

Stucki

Sager

2018

Public Administration Review

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article argues that evidence, even when used politically, contributes to high‐quality democratic discourse. Research results on the use of evidence in referendum campaigns in Switzerland show that (1) evidence fosters discourse quality and shifts the focus away from politics to policy; (2) evaluations and basic research contribute positively to discourse, but not opinion surveys and statistics; (3) the participation of experts and administrative practitioners in discourse is crucial to make evidence available to the public; and (4) evidence is always used as a part of a narrative and can alter the constructed images used in a story. In conclusion, the implications for practitioners are discussed.

show abstract

Policy evaluation and democracy: Do they fit?

Cited by 3 publications

References 43 publications

The more the better? Rule growth and policy impact from a macro perspective

The more the better? Rule growth and policy impact from a macro perspective

Aristotelian framing: logos, ethos, pathos and the use of evidence in policy frames

The Political Use of Evidence and Its Contribution to Democratic Discourse

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About