This paper advocates for the rigorous use of evidence to improve and better inform public policy making and professional practice. Contrary to widely held views, evidence is commonly used in many circumstances; however the nature of this evidence varies greatly. However rather than promoting the need for evidence-based policy, the article recognises the sometimes limited role that evidence can, does, or even should, play. Consequentially the authors would prefer the term 'evidence influenced', or even just 'evidence aware' to reflect a more realistic view of what can be achieved, while at the same time emphasising the potential for methodological pluralism.

This paper draws out some of the key lessons to have emerged from the experience of trying to ensure that public policy and professional practice are better informed by evidence. It does this by highlighting four requirements for improving evidence use: an agreement on what counts as evidence in what circumstances; a strategic approach to the creation of evidence in priority areas, with systematic efforts to accumulate robust bodies of knowledge; effective dissemination of evidence to where it is most needed, and the development of effective means of providing wide access to knowledge; and initiatives to ensure the integration of evidence into policy and encourage the utilisation of evidence in practice. It then looks at how these issues have been approached in the UK, with comment on a range of public sector initiatives. The key theme to emerge is that simple and unproblematic models of evidence based policy and practice - in which evidence is created by experts and drawn on as necessary by policy makers and practitioners - fail as either accurate descriptions or effective prescriptions.

To improve the use of evidence in policy making, one needs to address the much contested point of what constitutes evidence. Research and research findings are but one form of evidence. Different sectors have their own interpretations of what constitutes as evidence. It is unsurprising therefore that the UK Cabinet Office works with a broad and eclectic definition of evidence: "Expert knowledge; published research; existing research; stakeholder consultations; previous policy evaluations; the Internet; outcomes from consultations; costings of policy options; output from economic and statistical modelling" (The Cabinet Office Strategic Policy Making Team, 1999). This board definition explicitly includes informal knowledge gained from work experience or service use and therefore illustrates that research is just one factor influencing policy making. The authors support a 'horses for courses' approach for deciding what counts as evidence.

Back to EBP bibliography index