How do policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence-informed policymaking? Towards a research agenda

Louise Shaxson; Rick Hood; Annette Boaz; Brian Head

How do policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence-informed policymaking? Towards a research agenda

Louise Shaxson
, Rick Hood
, Annette Boaz
, Brian Head

Research output: Working paper

1 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background: Studies from a range of countries and from different bodies of public policy scholarship have improved our understanding of evidence-informed policymaking as a complex political process. It is shaped by relations between policy officials and evidence providers, by relations between different groups of policy officials, and by organisational and administrative mechanisms. Aims and objectives: There has been little analysis of the resource implications of this complexity: how officials in government departments manage their human, financial and other resources to improve how they use evidence to inform policy decisions. Our study investigates this apparent gap in the literature. Methods: A three-stage ÔÇÿhourglassÔÇÖ review was used to search for empirical research on how policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence use. Stage 1 mapped contributing literatures, Stage 2 used the PRISMA protocol to search seven databases and Stage 3 reviewed a wider range of studies. Findings: The Stage 2 review found no studies which used empirical data to analyse how effectively resources are managed to support evidence use in policymaking. However, the Stage 3 review, which relaxed two of the PRISMA criteria, identified sixteen studies that contributed to an iterative, reflexive exploration of the research question. Discussion and conclusion: The issue of how policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence-informed policymaking appears to have been overlooked, but the Stage 3 review uncovered a set of interlinked issues worth of further study. We propose four themes that could shape a research agenda to deepen our understanding of how evidence-informed policymaking is practised inside government departments.

Original language	English
Place of Publication	Kingston upon Thames, U.K.
Publisher	Kingston University
Number of pages	27
Publication status	Published - 2 May 2024

Bibliographical note

Note: This working paper forms part of a PhD thesis by prospective publication.

Impact: This working paper outlines an agenda for future research to understand how policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence-informed policymaking. It suggests that analysing how resources are allocated to evidenceÔÇöwho decides the allocations and on what basisÔÇöcould deepen our understanding of how evidence-informed policymaking is practiced inside government departments. It opens a new avenue for interdisciplinary research that could draw together the fields of public administration, policy sciences, science and technology studies, public sector budgeting and organisational behaviour. With a better understanding of resource allocation to evidence and a fuller appreciation of how this interacts with broader issues of policy governance and of political permission, researchers will be in a better position to help civil servants understand what shapes how they source and use evidence and thereby improve the choices they make.

Keywords

evidence-informed policymaking
research agenda
resource management
resource use
resourcing the evidence base

Access to Document

Shaxson-L-54662-VoRFinal published version, 486 KBLicence: CC BY

Cite this

@techreport{fbd8a8f6428240bc8640c829f26611a9,

title = "How do policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence-informed policymaking? Towards a research agenda",

abstract = "Background: Studies from a range of countries and from different bodies of public policy scholarship have improved our understanding of evidence-informed policymaking as a complex political process. It is shaped by relations between policy officials and evidence providers, by relations between different groups of policy officials, and by organisational and administrative mechanisms. Aims and objectives: There has been little analysis of the resource implications of this complexity: how officials in government departments manage their human, financial and other resources to improve how they use evidence to inform policy decisions. Our study investigates this apparent gap in the literature. Methods: A three-stage {\^O}{\c C}{\"y}hourglass{\^O}{\c C}{\"O} review was used to search for empirical research on how policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence use. Stage 1 mapped contributing literatures, Stage 2 used the PRISMA protocol to search seven databases and Stage 3 reviewed a wider range of studies. Findings: The Stage 2 review found no studies which used empirical data to analyse how effectively resources are managed to support evidence use in policymaking. However, the Stage 3 review, which relaxed two of the PRISMA criteria, identified sixteen studies that contributed to an iterative, reflexive exploration of the research question. Discussion and conclusion: The issue of how policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence-informed policymaking appears to have been overlooked, but the Stage 3 review uncovered a set of interlinked issues worth of further study. We propose four themes that could shape a research agenda to deepen our understanding of how evidence-informed policymaking is practised inside government departments.",

keywords = "evidence-informed policymaking, research agenda, resource management, resource use, resourcing the evidence base",

author = "Louise Shaxson and Rick Hood and Annette Boaz and Brian Head",

note = "Note: This working paper forms part of a PhD thesis by prospective publication. Impact: This working paper outlines an agenda for future research to understand how policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence-informed policymaking. It suggests that analysing how resources are allocated to evidence{\^O}{\c C}{\"o}who decides the allocations and on what basis{\^O}{\c C}{\"o}could deepen our understanding of how evidence-informed policymaking is practiced inside government departments. It opens a new avenue for interdisciplinary research that could draw together the fields of public administration, policy sciences, science and technology studies, public sector budgeting and organisational behaviour. With a better understanding of resource allocation to evidence and a fuller appreciation of how this interacts with broader issues of policy governance and of political permission, researchers will be in a better position to help civil servants understand what shapes how they source and use evidence and thereby improve the choices they make.",

year = "2024",

month = may,

day = "2",

language = "English",

publisher = "Kingston University",

address = "United Kingdom",

type = "WorkingPaper",

institution = "Kingston University",

}

TY - UNPB

T1 - How do policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence-informed policymaking? Towards a research agenda

AU - Shaxson, Louise

AU - Hood, Rick

AU - Boaz, Annette

AU - Head, Brian

N1 - Note: This working paper forms part of a PhD thesis by prospective publication. Impact: This working paper outlines an agenda for future research to understand how policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence-informed policymaking. It suggests that analysing how resources are allocated to evidenceÔÇöwho decides the allocations and on what basisÔÇöcould deepen our understanding of how evidence-informed policymaking is practiced inside government departments. It opens a new avenue for interdisciplinary research that could draw together the fields of public administration, policy sciences, science and technology studies, public sector budgeting and organisational behaviour. With a better understanding of resource allocation to evidence and a fuller appreciation of how this interacts with broader issues of policy governance and of political permission, researchers will be in a better position to help civil servants understand what shapes how they source and use evidence and thereby improve the choices they make.

PY - 2024/5/2

Y1 - 2024/5/2

N2 - Background: Studies from a range of countries and from different bodies of public policy scholarship have improved our understanding of evidence-informed policymaking as a complex political process. It is shaped by relations between policy officials and evidence providers, by relations between different groups of policy officials, and by organisational and administrative mechanisms. Aims and objectives: There has been little analysis of the resource implications of this complexity: how officials in government departments manage their human, financial and other resources to improve how they use evidence to inform policy decisions. Our study investigates this apparent gap in the literature. Methods: A three-stage ÔÇÿhourglassÔÇÖ review was used to search for empirical research on how policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence use. Stage 1 mapped contributing literatures, Stage 2 used the PRISMA protocol to search seven databases and Stage 3 reviewed a wider range of studies. Findings: The Stage 2 review found no studies which used empirical data to analyse how effectively resources are managed to support evidence use in policymaking. However, the Stage 3 review, which relaxed two of the PRISMA criteria, identified sixteen studies that contributed to an iterative, reflexive exploration of the research question. Discussion and conclusion: The issue of how policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence-informed policymaking appears to have been overlooked, but the Stage 3 review uncovered a set of interlinked issues worth of further study. We propose four themes that could shape a research agenda to deepen our understanding of how evidence-informed policymaking is practised inside government departments.

AB - Background: Studies from a range of countries and from different bodies of public policy scholarship have improved our understanding of evidence-informed policymaking as a complex political process. It is shaped by relations between policy officials and evidence providers, by relations between different groups of policy officials, and by organisational and administrative mechanisms. Aims and objectives: There has been little analysis of the resource implications of this complexity: how officials in government departments manage their human, financial and other resources to improve how they use evidence to inform policy decisions. Our study investigates this apparent gap in the literature. Methods: A three-stage ÔÇÿhourglassÔÇÖ review was used to search for empirical research on how policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence use. Stage 1 mapped contributing literatures, Stage 2 used the PRISMA protocol to search seven databases and Stage 3 reviewed a wider range of studies. Findings: The Stage 2 review found no studies which used empirical data to analyse how effectively resources are managed to support evidence use in policymaking. However, the Stage 3 review, which relaxed two of the PRISMA criteria, identified sixteen studies that contributed to an iterative, reflexive exploration of the research question. Discussion and conclusion: The issue of how policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence-informed policymaking appears to have been overlooked, but the Stage 3 review uncovered a set of interlinked issues worth of further study. We propose four themes that could shape a research agenda to deepen our understanding of how evidence-informed policymaking is practised inside government departments.

KW - evidence-informed policymaking

KW - research agenda

KW - resource management

KW - resource use

KW - resourcing the evidence base

M3 - Working paper

BT - How do policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence-informed policymaking? Towards a research agenda

PB - Kingston University

CY - Kingston upon Thames, U.K.

ER -

How do policy officials allocate their resources to support evidence-informed policymaking? Towards a research agenda

Abstract

Bibliographical note

Keywords

Access to Document

Fingerprint

Cite this