This article provides a discussion on evidence-based policy, deconstructing the assumptions therein and dismissing the notion that evidence-based-policy can eradicate failure. It exposes the falseness of political rhetoric in synonymizing "evidence" with scientific empiricism which is devoid of controversy and ideology. Evidence-based policy, as demonstrated by constructivists, has value laden underpinnings, however, such an acknowledgement is unhelpful as it results in relativism and "analysis-paralysis". Instead, this article highlights the shortcomings of evidence-based policy whilst simultaneously arguing that good policy should be informed by and aware of research. In this context, "evidence" must be understood from a pluralist perspective if it is to be congruent with the modern world requirements for multi-networked, negotiated solutions. Evidence, in the conventional sense of the word (i.e. scientifically empirical research), is merely one of many tools available to policy makers. The question is not whether evidence-based policy can eradicate failure but how evidence can better inform policy in order to increase success. This article identifies a gap in the literature, advocating for research to focus on how the different types of evidence (in the form of knowledge and input) from plethora stakeholders, relate to one another; and what (if any) is the hierarchy of knowledge(s) from the various communities (policy, research and practice).
1. Introduction .
Evidence-based-policy has been accepted into the social policy arena with great enthusiasm, raising questions about the policy-making-process and public administration1. It is inexorably linked to the modernizing agenda: evidence over ideology is the new mantra, providing an opportunity for social sciences to research the complexities of social reality2. This phenomenon is not uniquely Australian; most Western governments have preeminently placed evidence at the forefront of policy-making3, propagating it as the hallmark of good governance (Packwood 2002).
