印度的循证政策:跨越漫长的上坡桥

Abhirup Bhunia
{"title":"印度的循证政策:跨越漫长的上坡桥","authors":"Abhirup Bhunia","doi":"10.1177/24551333211035566","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The evidence-based-policy ecosystem, and its arsenal of approaches and techniques need course-correction to adequately respond to complex and practical policymaking contexts. Experimental findings do not resonate in scale implementation, particularly in large and diverse contexts like India’s. Causal empiricism leaves out investigation of complex pathways and impact mechanisms, while ‘evidence’ often disengages political economy considerations. Surmounting the methodological constrictions—which limit the utility and uptake of such evidence for a decisionmaker—requires being able to sufficiently account for institutional factors, social norms, politics, and stakeholder incentives among other related influences in policymaking. This may be possible through robust use of qualitative nuances, and integration of political economy analysis towards adopting a realist approach in evidence generation. It is important to acknowledge that measurement alone should qualify as neither evaluation or research. The state of research, its guiding principles, approaches and methods are often directed by current influences and preferences of stakeholders who are in a position to shape discourse. Interjections by more stakeholders are urgently needed to orient evidence generation to ‘real world’ realities and respond to the non-linear complexities of developmental change pathways.","PeriodicalId":243965,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Development Policy and Practice","volume":"108 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evidence-based Policy in India: Crossing the Long, Uphill Bridge\",\"authors\":\"Abhirup Bhunia\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/24551333211035566\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The evidence-based-policy ecosystem, and its arsenal of approaches and techniques need course-correction to adequately respond to complex and practical policymaking contexts. Experimental findings do not resonate in scale implementation, particularly in large and diverse contexts like India’s. Causal empiricism leaves out investigation of complex pathways and impact mechanisms, while ‘evidence’ often disengages political economy considerations. Surmounting the methodological constrictions—which limit the utility and uptake of such evidence for a decisionmaker—requires being able to sufficiently account for institutional factors, social norms, politics, and stakeholder incentives among other related influences in policymaking. This may be possible through robust use of qualitative nuances, and integration of political economy analysis towards adopting a realist approach in evidence generation. It is important to acknowledge that measurement alone should qualify as neither evaluation or research. The state of research, its guiding principles, approaches and methods are often directed by current influences and preferences of stakeholders who are in a position to shape discourse. Interjections by more stakeholders are urgently needed to orient evidence generation to ‘real world’ realities and respond to the non-linear complexities of developmental change pathways.\",\"PeriodicalId\":243965,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Development Policy and Practice\",\"volume\":\"108 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Development Policy and Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/24551333211035566\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Development Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/24551333211035566","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

以证据为基础的政策生态系统及其方法和技术库需要调整路线,以充分应对复杂和实际的决策环境。实验结果不能在大规模实施中产生共鸣,特别是在印度这样的大而多样的环境中。因果经验主义忽略了对复杂途径和影响机制的调查,而“证据”往往脱离了政治经济学的考虑。克服方法学上的限制——这限制了决策者对这些证据的利用和吸收——需要能够充分考虑制度因素、社会规范、政治、利益相关者激励以及决策过程中的其他相关影响。这可以通过强有力地使用定性的细微差别,以及在证据生成中采用现实主义方法整合政治经济分析来实现。重要的是要认识到,测量本身既不能算作评价,也不能算作研究。研究现状、指导原则、方法和方法往往受有能力塑造话语的利益攸关方的当前影响和偏好的影响。迫切需要更多利益攸关方提出意见,以便将证据生成导向“真实世界”的现实,并应对发展变化途径的非线性复杂性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evidence-based Policy in India: Crossing the Long, Uphill Bridge
The evidence-based-policy ecosystem, and its arsenal of approaches and techniques need course-correction to adequately respond to complex and practical policymaking contexts. Experimental findings do not resonate in scale implementation, particularly in large and diverse contexts like India’s. Causal empiricism leaves out investigation of complex pathways and impact mechanisms, while ‘evidence’ often disengages political economy considerations. Surmounting the methodological constrictions—which limit the utility and uptake of such evidence for a decisionmaker—requires being able to sufficiently account for institutional factors, social norms, politics, and stakeholder incentives among other related influences in policymaking. This may be possible through robust use of qualitative nuances, and integration of political economy analysis towards adopting a realist approach in evidence generation. It is important to acknowledge that measurement alone should qualify as neither evaluation or research. The state of research, its guiding principles, approaches and methods are often directed by current influences and preferences of stakeholders who are in a position to shape discourse. Interjections by more stakeholders are urgently needed to orient evidence generation to ‘real world’ realities and respond to the non-linear complexities of developmental change pathways.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信