The author highlights the new environment in which governments are now operating; a far more knowledge rich context, and a more informed public. Although evidence based policy making is far from new, the current policy arena demands knowledge rooted in diverse sources, highly integrated in both theoretical and practical expertise.

Mulgan identifies three different types of policy field, which affect the way in which knowledge is used:

1. Stable policy fields. These are well-established areas in which knowledge is settled, therefore the most that can be expected is incremental improvements and the filling of knowledge gaps. Good innovations can be identified through systematic reviews and spread through formal networks. For example labour market policy
2. Policy fields in flux. These have a contested knowledge base where professionals entrenched in debate are defensive to change. New knowledge from outside may be useful to recognise promising innovations. For example education.
3. Inherently novel policy fields. These are emerging fields with no established evidence base and therefore noone is likely to know what works and what doesn't. Foundations at an arms length from government may be best placed to learn quickly from innovation. For example the regulation of biotechnology.

In these contexts, Mulgan notes that it is important to acknowledge the limitations of evidence based government decision making. Firstly that if democratic will lies contrary to existing evidence, the democratic will cannot be ignored. Secondly that full revelation in politics has the potential to be destabilising, undermine self and mutual respect and be counter-productive. Finally it is important to recognise the different time scales on which researchers and policy makers are working. While researchers are thinking in terms of long-term societal gains, policy makers are pressurised by the short-term need to fulfil public demands.

Back to EBP bibliography index