Logo image
A model of faulty and faultless disagreement for post-hoc assessments of knowledge utilization in evidence-based policymaking
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

A model of faulty and faultless disagreement for post-hoc assessments of knowledge utilization in evidence-based policymaking

Remco Heesen, Hannah Rubin, Mike D Schneider, Katie Woolaston, Alejandro Bortolus, Emelda E Chukwu, Ricardo Kaufer, Veli Mitova, Anne Schwenkenbecher, Evangelina Schwindt, …
Scientific reports, Vol.14(1), 18495
2024
pdf
Published 1.28 MBDownloadView
Published (Version of Record)CC BY-NC-ND V4.0 Open Access

Abstract

Evidence-based policy Disagreement Transparency Epistemology
When evidence-based policymaking is so often mired in disagreement and controversy, how can we know if the process is meeting its stated goals? We develop a novel mathematical model to study disagreements about adequate knowledge utilization, like those regarding wild horse culling, shark drumlines and facemask policies during pandemics. We find that, when stakeholders disagree, it is frequently impossible to tell whether any party is at fault. We demonstrate the need for a distinctive kind of transparency in evidence-based policymaking, which we call transparency of reasoning. Such transparency is critical to the success of the evidence-based policy movement, as without it, we will be unable to tell whether in any instance a policy was in fact based on evidence.

Details

Metrics

25 File views/ downloads
31 Record Views
Logo image