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, JoORCID iD for 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
Keyword(s) Social Sciences
Public Administration
Social Issues
Social Work
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
Connect to link resolver
Unless expressly stated otherwise, the copyright for items in DRO is owned by the author, with all rights reserved.

Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 4 times in TR Web of Science
Scopus Citation Count Cited 7 times in Scopus
Google Scholar 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.