Variation in evidence use across policy sectors: the case of Brazil

IF 5.7 1区 社会学 Q1 POLITICAL SCIENCE
Kidjie Saguin, João V Guedes-Neto, Pedro Lucas Moura Palotti, Natália Massaco Koga, Flavio Lyrio Carneiro
{"title":"Variation in evidence use across policy sectors: the case of Brazil","authors":"Kidjie Saguin, João V Guedes-Neto, Pedro Lucas Moura Palotti, Natália Massaco Koga, Flavio Lyrio Carneiro","doi":"10.1093/polsoc/puae031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Evidence use across policy sectors is widely believed to vary as each sector espouses a specific and dominant pattern in how it sources evidence. This view privileges the idea that a “culture of evidence” serves as a norm that guides behavior in the entire sector. In this article, we seek to nuance the policy sectoral approach to understanding evidence use by analyzing the results of a large-N survey of federal employees in Brazil (n = 2,177). Our findings show a diverse set of cultures of evidence with a few sectors like Science and Technology demonstrating a strong likelihood for using scientific evidence with most sectors showing a mixed pattern of sourcing evidence. However, a majority of the surveyed civil servants show an “indistinct” pattern of evidence use who are likely to not use any sources of evidence.","PeriodicalId":47383,"journal":{"name":"Policy and Society","volume":"5 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy and Society","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/polsoc/puae031","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Evidence use across policy sectors is widely believed to vary as each sector espouses a specific and dominant pattern in how it sources evidence. This view privileges the idea that a “culture of evidence” serves as a norm that guides behavior in the entire sector. In this article, we seek to nuance the policy sectoral approach to understanding evidence use by analyzing the results of a large-N survey of federal employees in Brazil (n = 2,177). Our findings show a diverse set of cultures of evidence with a few sectors like Science and Technology demonstrating a strong likelihood for using scientific evidence with most sectors showing a mixed pattern of sourcing evidence. However, a majority of the surveyed civil servants show an “indistinct” pattern of evidence use who are likely to not use any sources of evidence.
各政策部门在使用证据方面的差异:巴西的案例
人们普遍认为,各政策部门对证据的使用不尽相同,因为每个部门在如何获取证据方面都信奉一种特定的主导模式。这种观点认为,"证据文化 "是指导整个部门行为的准则。在本文中,我们试图通过分析一项对巴西联邦雇员(n = 2,177)进行的大样本调查的结果,对以政策部门为基础的证据使用方法进行细化。我们的研究结果表明,证据文化多种多样,少数部门(如科学与技术部门)表现出使用科学证据的强烈倾向,而大多数部门则表现出使用证据的混合模式。然而,大多数接受调查的公务员在证据使用方面表现出 "模糊 "的模式,他们可能不使用任何证据来源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Policy and Society
Policy and Society Multiple-
CiteScore
18.00
自引率
6.50%
发文量
43
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊介绍: Policy and Society is a prominent international open-access journal publishing peer-reviewed research on critical issues in policy theory and practice across local, national, and international levels. The journal seeks to comprehend the origin, functioning, and implications of policies within broader political, social, and economic contexts. It publishes themed issues regularly and, starting in 2023, will also feature non-themed individual submissions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信