Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
0
Overview of evidence‐based decision‐making
Overview of evidence‐based decision‐making
Overview of evidence‐based decision‐making
Overview of evidence‐based decision‐making
Overview of evidence‐based decision‐making
Overview of evidence‐based decision‐making
Overview of evidence‐based decision‐making
Overview of evidence‐based decision‐making
Overview of evidence‐based decision‐making
Overview of evidence‐based decision‐making
Overview of evidence‐based decision‐making
Overview of evidence‐based decision‐making
Overview of evidence‐based decision‐making
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Overview of evidence‐based decision‐making

1,743

Published on

Published in: Education, Health & Medicine
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
1,743
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
3
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Overview
of
evidence‐baseddecision‐makingGillian
PetrokofskyUniversity
of
Oxfordgillian.petrokofsky@zoo.ox.ac.uk10/04/2013 UNFF
Istanbul,
10
April,
2013 1
  • 2. Evidence
Use
in
Policy
MakingNational
governmentsUSAObama,
B.H.
(2009),
Inaugural
Address,
Washington
DC,
20January,
available
at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the‐press‐office/
president‐barack‐obamas‐inaugural‐address.Coalition
for
Evidence‐Based
Policy
Making(http://coalition4evidence.org/)AustraliaLeigh,
A.
(2009),
What
evidence
should
social
policymakersuse?,
Australian
Treasury
Economic
Roundup,
1,
pp.
27‐43.CanadaTownsend,
T.
and
Kunimoto
B.
(2009),
Collaboration
andCulture.
The
Future
of
the
Policy
Research
Function
in
theGovernment
of
Canada,
Policy
Research
Initiative,
Ottawa,Canada,
March.New
ZealandMarsh,
D.
(2006)
Evidence‐based
policy:
framework,
resultsand
analysis
from
the
New
Zealand
biotechnology
sector.Int.
J.
of
Biotechnology,
Vol.8,
No.3/4,
pp.206
‐
224South
AfricaOffice
of
the
Presidency
(2010),
Guide
To
The
OutcomesApproach,
Pretoria,
Office
of
the
Presidency
of
South
AfricaUKCabinet
Office
(1999)
Modernising
Government
WhitePaper,
CM4310.
London:
TSO.International
focusOECDUNESCOWorld
BankDfIDAusAIDCochrane
CollaborationCampbell
CollaborationCollaboration
for
Environmental
EvidenceEppi
Centre10/04/2013 UNFF
Istanbul,
10
April,
2013 2
  • 3. Evidence
for
policy“science
does
not
per
se
provide
answersto
policy
issues,
nor
is
it
the
only
source
ofwhat
counts
as
authoritative
evidence”(Sutherland
et
al.,
2012)We
acknowledge
that
it
is
complexScience
is
not
the
only
form
of
evidence…….however‘rarely
does
research
supply
an
“answer”that
policy
actors
employ
to
solve
a
policyproblem.
Rather,
research
provides
abackground
of
data,
empiricalgeneralisations,
and
ideas
that
affect
theway
that
policy
makers
think
about
aproblem……but
to
acknowledge
this
is
not
the
sameas
saying
that
research
findings
have
littleinfluence
on
policy.’
(Weiss,1982)10/04/2013 UNFF
Istanbul,
10
April,
2013 3
  • 4. ‘Evidence
based
forestry’a
modelBestscienceSociety’sneeds
&preferencesExpertopinionEBF7/05/2013 Corvallis,Oregon
2013 4Beware
of
experts’
bias!
  • 5. Good
information
for
policy10/04/2013 UNFF
Istanbul,
10
April,
2013 5A
framework
to
reduce
bias Systematic
review:a
review
of
a
clearly
formulatedquestion
that
uses
systematic
andexplicit
methods
to
identify,
selectand
critically
appraise
relevantresearch,
and
to
collect
andanalyse
data
from
the
studies
thatare
included
within
the
review.Statisticalmethods
(meta‐analysis)
may
ormay
not
be
used
to
analyse
andsummarise
the
results
of
theincluded
studies.Collaboration
for
Environmental
Evidence(2013)
Guidelines
for
Systematic
Reviewand

Evidence
Synthesis
in
EnvironmentalManagement.
  • 6. Good
information
for
policy10/04/2013 UNFF
Istanbul,
10
April,
2013 6A
framework
to
reduce
bias Systematic
review:a
review
of
a
clearly
formulatedquestion
that
uses
systematic
andexplicit
methods
to
identify,
selectand
critically
appraise
relevantresearch,
and
to
collect
andanalyse
data
from
the
studies
thatare
included
within
the
review.Statisticalmethods
(meta‐analysis)
may
ormay
not
be
used
to
analyse
andsummarise
the
results
of
theincluded
studies.Collaboration
for
Environmental
Evidence(2013)
Guidelines
for
Systematic
Reviewand

Evidence
Synthesis
in
EnvironmentalManagement.
  • 7. Good
information
for
policy10/04/2013 UNFF
Istanbul,
10
April,
2013 7Systematic
review:a
review
of
a
clearly
formulatedquestion
that
uses
systematic
andexplicit
methods
to
identify,
selectand
critically
appraise
relevantresearch,
and
to
collect
andanalyse
data
from
the
studies
thatare
included
within
the
review.Statisticalmethods
(meta‐analysis)
may
ormay
not
be
used
to
analyse
andsummarise
the
results
of
theincluded
studies.Collaboration
for
Environmental
Evidence(2013)
Guidelines
for
Systematic
Reviewand

Evidence
Synthesis
in
EnvironmentalManagement.A
framework
to
reduce
bias
  • 8. What
are
the
important
questions?• Who
decides?– How
much
collaboration?– What
methods?– Who
pays?– So
what?10/04/2013 UNFF
Istanbul,
10
April,
2013 8
  • 9. CIFOR
&
Partners’
EBF
initiative• Who
decides?– Partnership– guided
by
a
Steering
Committee• What
methods?– internet‐based
moderated
approach– standing
invitation
to
suggest
questions– meetings
where
key
stakeholders
gather• Who
pays?– initial
seed‐funding– donor/national/International/Private
sector
funding• So
what?– Systematic
Reviews
of
evidence
to
support
questions10/04/2013 UNFF
Istanbul,
10
April,
2013 9
  • 10. First
tranche
of
priority
questionsTopicCIFOR
lead
author;key
partnersImpacts
of
biofuel
crops
on
biodiversitySini
Savilaasko;ETHGender,
forests
&
food
security Esther
Mwangi;SLUConcepts
of
science
quality
&
researchevaluationBrian
Belcher;Royal
Roads
UnivBiodiversity
benefits
of
“alternativelivelihood”
projectsTerry
Sunderland;IIED,
Zoological
Societyof
LondonProperty
rights
and
the
environmentMaria
Ojanen;U
Michigan10/04/2013 UNFF
Istanbul,
10
April,
2013 10
  • 11. Second
tranche
and
beyondOnline
collaboration Collaboration
at
MeetingsUNFF
–
an
interactivesession
to
scope
policyquestions
for
systematicreview10/04/2013 UNFF
Istanbul,
10
April,
2013 11
  • 12. Interactive
session
to
scope
policyquestionsAim:
Identify
key
policy
questions
of
policy‐relevance
which
requirestrong
science
evidence
baseWhat
to
do1. review
flyer
&
briefly
complete
the
second
page
individually(5
minutes)2. get
into
small
groups
&
choose
a
spokesperson
&
note‐taker3. discuss
your
individual
questions4. select
one
that
you
can
all
agree
is
a
high
priority
and
can
beaddressed
practically5. as
a
group
complete
a
form
for
this
question6. be
prepared
to
present
your
question
briefly
to
all7. we
will
collect
ALL
individual
and
group
suggestionsplease
take
good
notes
of
your
group
discussions10/04/2013 UNFF
Istanbul,
10
April,
2013 12
  • 13. References• Lomas,
J.
(2000)
Connecting
research
and
policy.
Spring.• Seddon,
A.
et
al.
(in
press)
Looking
forward
through
the
past.
Identification
of50
priority
research
questions
in
palaeoecology• Petrokofsky,
G.,
N.D.
Brown,
G.E.
Hemery,
et
al.
(2010).
A
participatory
processfor
identifying
and
prioritizing
policy‐relevant
research
questions
in
naturalresource
management:
a
case
study
from
the
UK
forestry
sector.
Forestry
83,357‐367.• Pretty,
J.,
et
al.
(2010)
The
top
100
questions
of
importance
to
the
future
ofglobal
agriculture.
International
Journal
of
Agricultural
Sustainability,
8
(4)219‐236• Sutherland
W.J,
Bellingan
L,
Bellingham
J.R,
Blackstock
J.J,
Bloomfield
RM,
et
al.,2012.
A
collaboratively‐derived
science‐policy
research
agenda.
PLoS
ONE7(3):
e31824.
doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0031824• Weiss,
C.H.
(1982)
Policy
research
in
the
context
of
diffuse
decision‐making,
in:D.
P.B.
KALLEN,
G.B.
KOSSE
et
al.
(1982)
Social
Science
Research
and
PublicPolicy
Making:
a
reappraisal
(Windsor,
NFER‐Nelson).10/04/2013 UNFF
Istanbul,
10
April,
2013 13

×