The Academy of Social Sciences has today published a new report highlighting a variety of recommendations which would strengthen the UK Government’s use of evidence in policymaking and delivery, with the purpose of improving outcomes for citizens.
The report derives from a major Academy project exploring the evidence infrastructures, approaches and mindsets in UK Government from an evidence supply perspective.
It highlights identified needs, potential benefits and recommendations for giving a wider and richer mix of evidence more weight. The report warmly welcomes the progress that has been made in recent years, not least in the Government Office for Science, and provides recommendations for how this trajectory could be further developed.
Alongside desk-based research, a mapping exercise, and an international comparator study, more than 40 senior figures well-versed in Whitehall, evidence, analysis and policy, shared their expertise and views. This group largely comprised senior UK Government officials, both past and present, across a range of roles and science backgrounds.
The findings from many contributors indicate that while some excellent pockets of expertise exist, social science evidence in general is currently underweighted in government policymaking processes. There was a clear and consistent call for a breadth of social science evidence to be more systematically and better embedded in existing evidence infrastructures and processes in Whitehall. Thereby making it more fully and more readily available to government decision making.
In arguing that the best and most appropriate evidence from any source is available, regardless of narrow discipline boundaries, it goes beyond economic evidence to include social, behavioural, educational, environmental, institutional and place-based evidence, all of which is integral to the social sciences.
Recommendations span four areas in the evidence infrastructure: science advice and evidence; the analysis function; policy formulation and external expert advice. That is, across the evidence supply ecosystem. Interviewees were clear that a single point of change is unlikely to succeed.
The report has 12 recommendations. The primary ones include:
- The UK Government Office for Science (GO-Science) – as the science evidence and advice hub in government – should explore ways to ensure that there is clearer leadership of and support for social science advice and evidence within UK Government structures, including its own.
- The UK Government should consider ways of systematically increasing the transparency about the evidence, and the range of evidence, considered in decision making at key point(s) in the process. For example, by publishing the evidence base that underpins policy proposals at clearly defined point(s) in the process, such as when evidence briefings are prepared for Ministers or when policies underpinned by evidence are submitted for Parliamentary consideration.
- The UK Government to consider ways to ensure a wide range of skills are included in the review of the government training offer and possible National School of Government. It was felt this would benefit from developing sufficient skills to commission and judge the quality of a breadth of evidence and analysis, including a wider range of social science.
Potential benefits that could accrue to government in taking the recommendations on board form the final section of the report. Examples include a stronger evidence base to its policy making across the many societal areas within its goals and missions; better knowledge of how policy will land with people, including demographics and locations; and supporting government to target increasingly pressurised spending.
Dr Rita Gardner CBE FAcSS, Chief Executive of the Academy of Social Sciences, said, “We have seen welcome progress in recent years in how government uses evidence. This report is an encouragement for government to develop this trajectory further, to embed use of a wider mix of evidence in its structures and processes, and in particular social science evidence more fully, to benefit citizens in the UK – and the government itself – through enhanced policymaking.”
Will Hutton FAcSS, President of the Academy of Social Sciences, said, “The more evidence is used both to base public policy, and as importantly rule out self-defeating and poor policy, the better. Enter social science and the particular prism, methodologies and insights it brings to the policy-making process. This report suggests that while parts of the government machine understand this, in others there is work to do. The Academy looks forward to working with government to take forward its recommendations.”
Professor Bobby Duffy FAcSS, Professor of Public Policy and Director of The Policy Institute at King’s College London, said, “It is no accident that around 80% of the government’s “Areas of Research Interest” – those questions that government departments say they really want answers to – are substantially social science questions. For policy and practice to genuinely improve lives it needs to build on the best understanding of how societies actually work, where the social sciences are key. There has been significant progress in recognising a wider base of evidence, but there is still a clear perception among senior practitioners inside and outside government that we could do more to fully embed this in structures, processes and mindsets – this report seeks to make practical and pragmatic recommendations on how to build on the progress that has been made.”
Download the report
Notes to Editors
For further information contact:
Amy Williams (Senior Communications Manager) at a.williams@acss.org.uk / media@acss.org.uk
About the Academy of Social Sciences
The Academy of Social Sciences is the national academy of academics, practitioners and learned societies in the social sciences. The sector’s leading independent voice in the UK, we champion the vital role social sciences play in education, governments and business.
The social sciences include: anthropology; business, finance & management; criminology; development studies; economics & econometrics; economic & social history; education; human geography; law; planning; politics & international relations; regional studies; sociology; social policy; social psychology; social statistics & methodologies.