Does more evidence lead to better policy?

Tim Tenbensel

Policy Studies, 2004, vol. 25, issue 3, 189-207

Abstract: Does more evidence lead to better policy or might it lead to incoherence between the implications of different sources of evidence? This article raises the issue of the commensurability of different sources of evidence gathered in relation to a single, broad policy area, namely health prioritisation in New Zealand during the 1990s. In this case, different government agencies, all committed to gathering better evidence for policy on this issue, each gathered evidence leading to quite different policy implications. The article argues that working out how to handle divergent evidence is at least as important a task as gathering more evidence.

Date: 2004
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/0144287012000277480 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:cposxx:v:25:y:2004:i:3:p:189-207

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/cpos20

DOI: 10.1080/0144287012000277480

Access Statistics for this article

Policy Studies is currently edited by Toby James

More articles in Policy Studies from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().