The neglected politics behind evidence-based policy: shedding light on instrument constituency dynamics

Puzzled by the question why evidence-based policy (EBP) thrives despite evidence against it, we reconstruct the development and spread of EBP in inter-and transnational contexts and find that this process is characterised by some of the same dynamics (including 'structural promises' and 'problem chasing') that have also been observed in many policy instruments. We therefore propose a double reframing: EBP is (1) a 'meta-instrument' aiming to establish a particular role for research in policymaking (our ideational reframing) and (2) co-evolving with an 'instrument constituency' motivated not only by normative goals but also by the prospect of securing an occupational niche for itself (our social reframing). Taken together, these reframings reveal the neglected politics behind EBP and prompt us to treat EBP as a political device rather than as an analytical framework to explain how policymaking actually relates to research.

Automated summary

The article argues that the success of EBP is not solely based on evidence, but also involves neglected political factors. The authors propose a double reframing of EBP, revealing the political motivations behind it and suggesting it be treated as a political tool.