Policy practitioners' accounts of evidence-based policy making: The case of universal credit Monaghan, Mark and Ingold, Jo 2019, Policy practitioners' accounts of evidence-based policy making: The case of universal credit, Journal of Social Policy, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 351-368, doi: 10.1017/S004727941800051X. Attached Files Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads Title Policy practitioners' accounts of evidence-based policy making: The case of universal credit Author(s) Monaghan, Mark Ingold, Jo orcid.org/0000-0001-8088-8262 Journal name Journal of Social Policy Volume number 48 Issue number 2 Start page 351 End page 368 Total pages 18 Publisher Cambridge University Press Place of publication Cambridge, Eng. Publication date 2019-04-01 ISSN 0047-2794 1469-7823 Keyword(s) Social Sciences Public Administration Social Issues Social Work WELFARE UK Summary This paper draws on insider accounts from UK Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) officials to analyse the relationship between evidence and policy making at a time of rapid policy development relating to Universal Credit (UC). The paper argues, firstly, that evidence selection within the DWP was constrained by the overarching austerity paradigm, which constituted a Zeitgeist and had a significant bearing on the evidence selection and translation process, sharpening the focus of policy officials and analysts on the primacy of quantitative evidence when advising Ministers. Secondly, while methodological preferences (or an ‘evidence hierarchy’) impacted on evidence selection, this was not as significant as practitioners’ perceived capabilities to handle and develop evidence for policy. These capabilities were linked to departmental structures and constrained by political feasibility. Together, these dimensions constituted a significant filtration mechanism determining the kinds of evidence that were selected for policy development and those omitted, particularly in relation to UC. The paper contributes to debates about the contemporary role of evidence in policymaking and the potential of the relationship between future evidence production and use. Language eng DOI 10.1017/S004727941800051X Indigenous content off Field of Research 1605 Policy and Administration 1607 Social Work 2203 Philosophy HERDC Research category C1.1 Refereed article in a scholarly journal ERA Research output type C Journal article Persistent URL http://hdl.handle.net/10536/DRO/DU:30141865 Document type: Journal Article Collections: Faculty of Business and Law Department of Management Related Links Link Description Connect to published version Go to link with your DU access privileges     Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved. Versions Version Filter Type Fri, 11 Sep 2020, 16:37:54 EST Sat, 12 Sep 2020, 05:04:27 EST Sat, 12 Sep 2020, 06:03:41 EST Mon, 14 Sep 2020, 14:37:54 EST Mon, 14 Sep 2020, 14:43:38 EST Filtered Full Citation counts:   Cited 4 times in TR Web of Science Cited 7 times in Scopus Search Google Scholar Access Statistics: 48 Abstract Views, 0 File Downloads  -  Detailed Statistics Created: Fri, 11 Sep 2020, 16:37:54 EST

Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that permission has been obtained for items included in DRO. If you believe that your rights have been infringed by this repository, please contact drosupport@deakin.edu.au.