LIST OF PANELS

The belief that improved use of evidence, or knowledge, will lead to better policy is often taken for granted and has been a powerful rallying point for decades across academia and policy. Many countries have attempted to put in place systems and practices for evidence to inform policy, with some Anglo-Saxon countries investing vast resources in this area (e.g., What Works Clearinghouses in the US and What Works Centres in the UK to name a few).
 
Despite decades of research and investment, practical examples of evidence use and evaluation of its impact on policy continue to raise thorny questions and are relatively underexplored outside health. Although there is a growing scholarship on Evidence Informed Policy Making (EIPM), it is generally situated in a positivist tradition, which often mutes or ignores the role of politics, framing policy-making as a mechanistic and objective process. The meaning of evidence and its use are often seen as being unproblematic. The critical empirical research which does exist is often based on a single policy area e.g., clinical research, health care, or social work – which makes it difficult to generalise (Smith, 2013; Bache, 2020; Cairney, 2016; Parkhurst et al., 2018).
 
This panel will discuss and examine how evidence is currently being used in different contexts across the world, so that we can build better understanding of the practices and systems of evidence use. Many scholars in the field – and practitioners – recognise that evidence use can be difficult and is subject to multiple pressures – e.g., political agendas, elections, time, costs and other resource issues – and that evidence should be understood as one cog amongst many others in the making of policy. By drawing on research from different contexts and perspectives, especially with comparative analyses, we aim to reflect on the different practices of evidence use and their impact.
 
We welcome papers that advance understanding of the practices of evidence use in any way, providing either new empirical, theoretical, methodological, or comparative insights. Papers might examine the practices and/or politics of evidence use, and questions relating to the impact of evidence on policy. Questions include:
 
o   What are the practices of evidence mobilisation and wider systems of evidence use that currently exist in different contexts – country, government setting, different levels of government – and how do they work? (Comparative papers are particularly welcome).
o   How do different political systems and cultures influence how evidence is used?
o   How is evidence reconciled with other factors in the policy-making process such as resources, political agendas, and competing interests?
o   How have perceptions of evidence use in different contexts been challenged, adapted and/or changed during or following the Covid-19 pandemic?
o   What innovative methods are currently being used in different countries to measure the impact of evidence use?
 
References
 
Smith, K. (2013) Beyond Evidence-Based Policy in Public Health. Palgrave Macmillan: London.
 
Bache, I. (2020) Evidence, Policy and Wellbeing. Palgrave Pivot: London.
 
Cairney, P. (2016) The Politics of Evidence-Based Policy Making. Palgrave Pivot: London.
 
Parkhurst, J., Hawkins, B. and Ettelt, S. (2018) Evidence Use in Health Policy Making. Palgrave Macmillan: London.

Despite decades of research and investment, practical examples of evidence use and evaluation of its impact on policy continue to raise thorny questions and are relatively unexplored outside health. We are interested in different perspectives and practices of evidence mobilisation and use in policy which do not sit strictly fit within the EIPM tradition and reflect a critical understanding of how the policy process works.
 
Papers may discuss any question relevant to the panel’s topic, for instance including some of those below:
 
o   What are the practices of evidence mobilisation and wider systems of evidence use that currently exist in different contexts – country, government setting, different levels of government – and how do they work? (Comparative papers are particularly welcome).
o   What are the main issues relating to the systems of evidence use in generating, synthesising and/or implementing evidence in different countries?
o   How do different political systems and cultures influence how evidence is used?
o   How is evidence reconciled with other factors in the policy-making process such as resources, political agendas, and competing interests?
o   How have perceptions of evidence use in different contexts been challenged, adapted and/or changed during or following the Covid-19 pandemic?
o   What innovative methods are currently being used in different countries to measure the impact of evidence use?
o   How can learning from different theories and disciplines – e.g., political science, public administration, science and technology studies – help improve understanding of evidence use in practice?
This panel aims to start a conversation with interested academics in the field on developing a publication such as an edited book – on the practices of evidence use – which would include critical insights and case studies of evidence use in practice.