Words not deeds: the weak culture of evidence in the Canadian policy style

Abstract

The Canadian policy style has been described as one of overpromising and underdelivering, where heightened expectations are often met by underwhelming outcomes. Here, we examine the evidentiary style of Canadian policy-making which undergirds and reflects this policy style, particularly the nature of the policy advisory system that contributes to this pattern of policy-making. We do so by assessing how the different components of the advice system, which include academics, consultants, and policy professionals within the public service, are structured and relate to each other within the overall dynamics of information management and policy formulation in the governments of Canada. Using examples from recent efforts to revitalize Canadian government, the paper argues that the federal government in particular shows a pattern of the predominance of non-innovative academic “super-users,” distributed policy shops, and process-oriented analysts and consultants who combine with attributes of federalism and partisan budgetary politics to drive a distinctively fragmented and procedurally-oriented federal policy-making process. In these processes, evidence is often secondary to political posturing and short-term electioneering in program creation and execution, contributing greatly to the national policy style set out above.