Abstract
AbstractThe use of knowledge and evidence in policymaking is a recurrent topic of research due to its scientific and policy relevance. The existing and expansive body of literature has been scrutinised in various ways to grasp the dimensions of knowledge utilisation in policymaking, although most of this research has a monosectoral focus and is based on very general criteria of analysis that do not completely account for the complexity of policy making. This paper overcomes this limitation by enlightening the epistemological divide in the field between an objectivist and a subjectivist perspective and by distinguishing two different focuses in this literature: a focus on knowledge for policy making and a focus on knowledge in policy making. Based on this analytical distinction, the paper presents an original and unprecedented systematic, intersectoral metareview by considering the thirty-year period between 1990 and 2020 (approximately 1,400 were selected for fine-grained analysis). This metareview offers a broader and more detailed map with a clear idea of the distribution of interest in the topic among the different policy fields, a better classification of the theoretical/empirical content and research goals that scholars adopt and a novel and, above all, more fine-grained perspective on the types of conditions that favour or disfavour a significant role of knowledge in policymaking. Ultimately, and above all, this metareview identifies three highly relevant components of policy making that can facilitate or constrain the use of knowledge in policymaking more than others: values/ideology/beliefs, actors’ relationships, and policy capacities.
Funder
Ministero dell’Istruzione, dell’Università e della Ricerca
Alma Mater Studiorum - Università di Bologna
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law,Public Administration,General Social Sciences,Sociology and Political Science,Development
Reference81 articles.
1. Aartsen, M., Koop, S., Hegger, D., Goswami, B., Oost, J., & Van Leeuwen, K. (2018). Connecting water science and policy in India: Lessons from a systematic water governance assessment in the city of Ahmedabad. Regional Environmental Change, 18(8), 2445–2457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-018-1363-1
2. Adams, D. (2004). Usable knowledge in public policy. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 63(1), 29–42. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8500.2004.00357.x
3. Andersen, P. H., & Kragh, H. (2010). Sense and sensibility: Two approaches for using existing theory in theory-building qualitative research. Industrial Marketing Management, 39(1), 49–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2009.02.008
4. Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 18(4), 543–571. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mum032
5. Bach-Mortensen, A. M., Lange, B. C. L., & Montgomery, P. (2020). Barriers and facilitators to implementing evidence-based interventions among third sector organisations: A systematic review. Implementation Science, 13(1), 1–19.
Cited by
14 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献