Hard News: Dreaming of a world without evidence
54 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 Newer→ Last
-
@ Russell. Try this for a great academic abstract from a paper studying how policy makers use evidence:
Based on participant observation in a team of British policy-making civil servants carried out in 2009, this article examines the use that is made of evidence in making policy. It shows that these civil servants displayed a high level of commitment to the use of evidence. However, their use of evidence was hampered by the huge volume of various kinds of evidence and by the unsuitability of much academic research in answering policy questions. Faced with this deluge of inconclusive information, they used evidence to create persuasive policy stories. These stories were useful both in making acceptable policies and in advancing careers. They often involved the excision of methodological uncertainty and the use of ‘killer charts’ to boost the persuasiveness of the narrative. In telling these stories, social inequality was ‘silently silenced’ in favour of promoting policies which were ‘totemically’ tough. The article concludes that this selective, narrative use of evidence is ideological in that it supports systematically asymmetrical relations of power.
Telling Policy Stories: An Ethnographic Study of the Use of Evidence in Policy-making in the UK
-
Andrew E, in reply to
Fascinating - thank you very much for the pointer to that.
Untangling those 'systematically asymmetrical relations of power' depends on more people like I/S making use of the OIA, and challenging refusals, IMHO.
-
After today's legal aid announcement - and the apparent failure to develop good policy with any rational basis or logical process -"Dreaming of a world without justice" is the new thing - and that dream is coming true for some and will be a nightmare for others.
-
I think I'll post this here because, well, why not?.
I was talking to some people tonight who said they were lifelong labour supporters but would not be voting for them this time, their reason?
Labour introduced secondary taxation on a second job.
Labour started their term with a surplus and left us in debt.
Labour scrapped the apprenticeship scheme.
The list went on... and on.
When I asked them why they thought this they said "everyone knows that"
I despair. -
Islander, in reply to
O. Berloody> HELL-----
WHY do people, especially people who call themselves "lifelong Labour supporters" not ACTUALLY EDUCATE - ok ok ok, I'm getting upset here, I promise no more caps, truly - themselves? Are these people you mention Steve B, talkback radio listeners perchance?
-
Not to my knowledge, they seem quite intelligent, if not a bit pub bound and on other matters seem quite informed. I was dumbfounded to be honest. It makes you wonder where they get their information from. I will work on them. ;-)
-
Do so, mate. And permantly switch off their radios!
-
I get the impression the are Herald readers.
-
Sofie Bribiesca, in reply to
And, if I had been there…..;), (I probably would have been asked to leave, with my big mouth)
It’s like the “nine long years" mantra for muppets. -
The reason I was "gobsmacked" was that these particular people are good people who usually agree with me (hence "good people") I was just amazed that they would believe these things and more amazed that they thought it was common knowledge. We do have a big problem with the media, bigger than I thought.
-
However, their use of evidence was hampered by the huge volume of various kinds of evidence and by the unsuitability of much academic research in answering policy questions. Faced with this deluge of inconclusive information, they used evidence to create persuasive policy stories.
Does anyone grasp the irony of ethnographers blaming poor sources and poor storytelling ?
-
Islander, in reply to
Yup. Grad studs going out with rampant assumptions?
-
Kumara Republic, in reply to
It’s like the “nine long years" mantra for muppets.
'9 long years' is often a dead giveaway of a concern troll who never voted for Helen in the first place. But as it stands, the waters are far too muddy to tell between genuine turncoats and real-life trolls, and the trolls seem to revel in that - they leave their opponents shooting in the dark.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
various kinds of evidence
Empirical, anecdotal or contradictory. It all works when you have an agenda.
;-) -
Labour are 'wiggy" and not up to much, if they had remained in govt they would have moved into assets sales.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PA0808/S00124.htm
The Nats are agenda driven and doing things because they can do them and not because those things they are doing are the "best" or optimal outcomes for the country.
Shrinking the economy and borrowing for tax cuts is insane.Submission to the select committe considering legal aid will be invited.
It is Hobson's choice this year.
-
Steve Barnes, in reply to
Labour are ’wiggy” and not up to much, if they had remained in govt they would have moved into assets sales.
But..
Then on Agenda, on July 14 2008 Mr Mallard reconfirmed that policy: 'I'm happy for things which are not part of the core to be partially floated, at the moment there's none of those that are big enough to be interesting'.
Mr Brownlee says Labour needs to explain which 'non core' assets it is looking to sell.
Brownlee doesn't have a clue what"non core" means.
If we were to have large Government owned assets that could be managed by private companies I see no problem with selling them off, providing they were "Non Core" ie. not strategic infrastructure such as Power companies or water boards.
National, on the other hand would sell their Grandmothers if there was a buck in it for them or their mates. -
linger, in reply to
Ethnography is, ideally, about faithfully recording and explaining the viewpoint of the subjects of the investigation. The problem is that if you follow that method, it's difficult to use any external reference frame to criticise anyone.
So I hope it’s more like ethnographers (uncritically) reporting politicians as blaming poor sources, and reporting politicians’ own myth about “story creation”.
Even so, that description of “story creation” is just mindboggling in how far it bends over backwards and spreads its legs to be fair to politicians.
they used evidence to create persuasive policy stories.
should really read:
“they cherry-picked, abused, and tortured evidence to tell stories that fit pre-existing policy preferences.” -
Steve Barnes, in reply to
“they cherry-picked, abused, and tortured evidence to tell stories that fit pre-existing policy preferences.”
Sounds like our esteemed PM
-
The demand for this stuff my way seems huge, honestly i've never seen daries put so much advertising for a new product not bankrolled by corporates on their front counters, uncritiqued chemicals at the dairy, strange times.
Chemicals are potentially bad o.k
-
linger, in reply to
Chemicals are potentially bad o.k
Um … good luck finding an example of a food (or, anything at the dairy, really) that doesn’t contain any chemicals.
Could you be a little more specific? -
The point is it's bizzare that this strange new ciggie sprayed with dope aping chemicals is out there freely trading beside the chewing gum and choclate bars , with all the visual associations of dope and an unsoliticited promotion from bob marley yet medical marijuna is banned , a herb with centuries of study.....I believe in Timaru they are trying to jail a guy today for using the real stuff as medicine.
-
BenWilson, in reply to
It is bizarre. I don't like to smoke something that has so little history. It took many decades for the truth about the dangers of tobacco to be widely accepted - the baccy companies still deny it to this day. The virtual absence of any recorded incidences of deaths directly attributed to toxic effects of cannabis span many decades, and millions, if not billions, of users.
-
Sacha, in reply to
The virtual absence of any recorded incidences of deaths
I think you mean *total* absence.
-
Russell Brown, in reply to
I think you mean *total* absence.
I think there are studies showing that cannabis smoking has been a factor in lung disease, to take one example. Possibly also someone had some dropped on their head once.
-
Smoking anything seems likely to be a little bit harmful - bombarding tissue with large, very hot particles. I notice numerous side effects that couldn't be said to be good. But compared to so many other things we do, it's not high on the list of dangerous killers.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.