Using evidence to influence policy: Oxfam’s experience

Palgrave Communications - Tập 4 Số 1
Ruth Mayne1, Duncan Green2, Irene Guijt3, Martin Walsh4, Richard English5, Paul Cairney6
1Senior Researcher Influencing, Global Research Team, Oxfam GB, Oxford, UK
2Strategic Advisor, Oxfam GB, Oxford, UK
3Head of Research, Oxfam GB, Oxford, UK
4Senior Researcher, Oxfam GB, Oxford, UK
5National Influencing Advisor, Oxfam GB, Oxford, UK
6Professor of Politics and Public Policy, Division of History and Politics, University of Stirling, Stirling, FK94LA, Scotland

Tóm tắt

AbstractPolicymaking is rarely ‘evidence-based’. Rather, policy can only be strongly evidence-informed if its advocates act effectively. Policy theories suggest that they can do so by learning the rules of political systems, and by forming relationships and networks with key actors to build up enough knowledge of their environment and trust from their audience. This knowledge allows them to craft effective influencing strategies, such as to tell a persuasive and timely story about an urgent policy problem and its most feasible solution. Empirical case studies help explain when, how, and why such strategies work in context. If analysed carefully, they can provide transferable lessons for researchers and advocates that are seeking to inform or influence policymaking. Oxfam Great Britain has become an experienced and effective advocate of evidence-informed policy change, offering lessons for building effective action. In this article, we combine insights from policy studies with specific case studies of Oxfam campaigns to describe four ways to promote the uptake of research evidence in policy: (1) learn how policymaking works, (2) design evidence to maximise its influence on specific audiences, (3) design and use additional influencing strategies such as insider persuasion or outsider pressure, and adapt the presentation of evidence and influencing strategies to the changing context, and (4) embrace trial and error. The supply of evidence is one important but insufficient part of this story.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

Andrews L (2017) ‘How can we demonstrate the public value of evidence-based policy making when government ministers declare that the people ‘have had enough of experts’?’. Palgrave Commun 3:11. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-017-0013-4

Bailey M, Mayne R, Smith M (2001) Fatal Side Effects: Patents under the microscope. Oxfam

Binh LQ, Nguyen Thi Thu N, Pham Quynh P, Pham Thanh T (2016) Benchmark Assessment of Civil Society Space in Vietnam. Hong Duc Publishing House, Vietnam

Baumgartner F, Jones B (2009) Agendas and Instability in American Politics, 1st and 2nd edn. Chicago University Press, Chicago

Baumgartner FR, Jones BD (2015) The Politics of Information: Problem Definition and the Course of Public Policy in America. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

Baumgartner FR, Breunig C, Green-Pedersen C, Jones BD, Mortensen PB, Nuytemans M, Walgrave S (2009) Punctuated Equilibrium in Comparative Perspective. Am J Pol Sci 53(3):603–620

Boswell C, Smith K (2017) Rethinking policy ‘impact’: Four models of research-policy relations. Palgrave Commun 3:44. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-017-0042-z

Braithwaite (2004) Methods of Power for Development: Weapons of the Weak, Weapons of the Strong, Michigan. J Int Law 26:297–330

Braithwaite J, Drahos P (2000) Global Business Regulation. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Cairney P (2016) The Politics of Evidence Based Policy Making. Palgrave Springer, London

Cairney P, Jones M (2016) Kingdon’s Multiple Streams Approach: What Is the Empirical Impact of this Universal Theory? Policy Stud J 44(1):37–58

Cairney P, Kwiatkowski R (2017) How to communicate effectively with policymakers: combine insights from psychology and policy studies. Palgrave Commun 3:37. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-017-0046-8

Cairney P, Weible C (2017) The New Policy Sciences. Policy Sci 50(4):619–27

Cairney P (2018a) The UK Government’s imaginative use of evidence. British Politics, https://doi.org/10.1057/s41293-017-0068-2

Cairney P (2018b) Three habits of successful policy entrepreneurs. Policy Polit 46(2):199–217

Cairney P, Oliver K, Wellstead A (2016) To Bridge the Divide between Evidence and Policy: Reduce Ambiguity as Much as Uncertainty. Public Adm Rev 76(3):399–402

Coe J, Smith J, Duckworth B, Tibbett S (2011) Access to Medicines Evaluation 2001-2011, Oxfam America Evaluation Report

Crompton T (2010) Common Cause: The Case for Working with our Values, Joint Agency Research Report, FOE, Oxfam, COIN, WWF, CPRE; WWF-UK

Davidson B (2017) Storytelling and evidence-based policy: Lessons from the grey literature. Palgrave Commun 3:17093. https://doi.org/10.1057/palcomms.2017.93

Ezekiel Z (2005) Rebuilding Trust in Canadian organisations: Governance and corporate social responsibility. The Conference Board of Canada, Deloitte, Canada

Fuentes-Nieves and Galasso (2014) Working for the Few. Political capture and economic inequality, Oxfam International, https://www.oxfam.org/en/research/working-few

Galasso N, Feroci G, Pfeifer K, Walsh M (2017) The rise of populism and its implicatinos for Development NGOs, Oxfam America, Research Backgrounder

Gaventa J (2006) Finding the spaces for Change: A Power. Anal, IDS Bull 37(6):23–33

Geyer R, Cairney P (eds.) (2015) Handbook on Complexity and Public Policy. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham

Green D (2012) Creating killer facts and graphics, Oxfam GB. https://policypractice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/creating-killer-facts-and-graphics-253013

Green D, MacDonald A (2015) Power and Change: The Arms Trade Treaty, The Active Citizenship series, Oxfam International, http://oxfamilibrary.openrepository.com/oxfam/bitstream/10546/338471/1/cs-arms-tradetreaty-160115-en.pdf

Green D (2016) How Change Happens. Oxford University Press and Oxfam, Oxford, http://how-change-happens.com/

Green D (2017) Theories of Change for Promoting Empowerment and Accountability in Fragile and Conflict-Affected Settings. Oxfam, Action for Empowerment and Accountability, IDS. IDS Working Paper, Vol. 2017 No 499

Guijt I (2016) Innovation in Evaluation: Using SenseMaker to assess the inclusion of smallholder farmers in modern markets. In: Bell S, Aggleton P eds Evaluation in Health and Social Development: Interpretive and ethnographic perspectives. Routledge, UK

Hardoon D (2017) An Economy for the 99%. It’s time to build a human economy that benefits everyone, not just the privileged few, Oxfam Briefing Paper, Oxfam

Hastie R, Hoffler H (2015) Typhoon Haiyan, Community research into the relocation of internally displaced people in the Philippines, Oxfam Case Study, Oxfam International

Heikkila T, Cairney P (2017) A Comparison of Theories of the Policy Process. In: Weible C (ed.) Theories of the Policy Process 4th edn. Westview Press, Chicago

Herweg N, Zahariadis N, Zohlnhöfer R (2017) The Multiple Streams Framework: Foundations, Refinements, and Empirical Applications. In: Weible C, Sabatier P (eds) Theories of the Policy Process, 4th edn. Westview Press, Chicago

Hillier D, Wood B (2003) Shattered Lives: The case for tough international arms control, Campaign Report, Oxfam International

Hoffman B (2013) Behind the Brands: Food Justice and the ‘Big 10’ food and beverage companies, Oxfambriefing paper https://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/behind-the-brands-food-justice-and-the-big-10-food-and-beverage-companies-270393

Hoy C, Mager F (2017) Cross country evidence about perceptions of inequality and support for redistribution. AEA RCT Registry

Hutchings C (2014) Balancing Accountability and Learning: A review of Oxfam GB’s global performance framework. J Dev Eff 6:4, Routledge

Jones MD, Holly LP, Jonathan JP, Nicole H, Amiel B, Holly LR, Nikolaos Z (2016) A River Runs Through It: A Multiple Streams Meta-Review. Policy Stud J 44(1):13–36

Jones M, Crow D (2017) How can we use the ‘science of stories’ to produce persuasive scientific stories? Palgrave Commun 3:53. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-017-0047-7

Kenny C, Rose DC, Hobbs A, Tyler C, Blackstock J (2017) The Role of Research in the UK Parliament Volume One. Houses of Parliament, London, UK

Kingdon J (1984) Agendas, Alternatives and Public Policies 1st and 2nd eds. Harper Collins, New York, NY, 1995

Kvintradze A (2016) Understanding Networks: The application of Social Network Analysis methodology in the South Caucasus context, MECIS case studies, Oxfam

Le Quang B, Nguyen Thi Thu N, Pham QP, Pham TT (undated) Benchmark Assessment of Civil Society Space in Vietnam. Hong Kong Publishing House

Lukes S (2005) Power: A Radical View. 2nd edn. Palgrave, London

Mayne R, Coe J (2008) The Right Ethos: Power and Change. NCVO, London

Mager F, Becca S, Guijt I (2018) How decent is decent work: using SenseMaker to understand workers’ experiences, Oxfam Research report

Maloney W, Jordan G, McLaughlin A (1994) Interest Groups and Public Policy: The Insider/Outsider Model Revisited. J Public Policy 14(1):17–38

Mayah E (2017) Inequality in Nigeria: Exploring the Drivers, Oxfam International

Kimmis J, Mayne R (2000) Tax Havens: Releasing the Hidden Billions for poverty eradication, Oxfam International, https://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/taxhavens-releasing-the-hidden-billions-for-poverty-eradication-114611

Mayne R (2002) The Global Campaign on Patents and Access to Medicines; anOxfam perspective. In: Drahos P, Mayne R Eds Global Intellectual Property Rights: Knowledge, Access and Development. Palgrave Macmillan, UK, p 244–258. (2002)

Mayne R, Kesmaecker-Wissing M, Mizniak J, Knight L (2018) Influencing Behaviours and Practices to Tackle Poverty and Injustice, Oxfam Discussion Paper, Oxfam

Nutley S, Walter I, Davies H (2007) Using evidence: how research can inform public services. The Policy Press, Bristol

Nutley S, Powell A, Davies H (2013) What counts as good evidence? Alliance for Useful Evidence, London

ODI (2009) Planning Tools: Problem Tree Analysis, Toolkits https://www.odi.org/publications/5258-problem-tree-analysis

Oliver K, Pearce W (2017) Three lessons from evidence-based medicine and policy. Palgrave Commun 3:43, https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-017-0045-9

Oxfam (2013a) Oxfam Humankind Index: The new measure of Scotland’s Prosperity, second results, Oxfam GB. https://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/oxfam-humankind-indexthe-new-measure-of-scotlands-prosperity-second-results-293743

Oxfam (2013b) The Journey to Sustainable Food: A three year update on the Behind the Brands campaign, Oxfam. https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/bpjourney-to-sustainable-food-btb-190416-en.pdf

Oxfam (2016) Oxfam Accountability Report 2015-16 https://accountablenow.org/accountability-in-practice/accountability-reports/oxfam-international/

Oxfam (undated) Tax at the Anti-Corruption Summit (ACS) – Oxfam’s priorities, Internal document

Raworth K (2012) A Safe and Just Space for Humanity: Can we live within the doughnut. Discussion Paper, Oxfam International. https://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/asafe-and-just-space-for-humanity-can-we-live-within-the-doughnut-210490

Raworth K (2017) Doughnut Economics: Seven Ways to Think like a 21st-Century Economist, Penguin

Rowland J (1997) Questioning Empowerment. Oxfam. https://policypractice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/questioning-empowerment-working-with-women-inhonduras-121185

Rowlands J (2016) Power in Practice: Bringing Understandings and Analysis of Power into Development Action in Oxfam. IDS Bull 47:No 5, (2016) http://bulletin.ids.ac.uk/idsbo/article/view/2796/ONLINE%20ARTICLE

Sahan E (2016) The Journey to Sustainable Food: A three year update on the Behind the Brands Campaign, Oxfam. https://www.oxfam.org/sites/www.oxfam.org/files/file_attachments/bp-journey-tosustainable-food-btb-190416-

Smith L (2016) Researching the Killer Fact that Highlighted Global Economic Inequality, Oxfam GB. https://policy-practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/researching-the-killer-fact-thathighlighted-global-economic-inequality-620162

Shephard D, Meuer J, Ellersiek A, Rupietta C (2018) The Effectiveness of Oxfam’s Policy Influencing: Meta-Review using fsQCA, Oxfam Evaluation Report, https://policy28practice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/influencing-policy-and-civic-space-a-meta-review-ofoxfams-policy-influence-cit-620462

Simon H (1976) Administrative Behavior, 3rd Edition. MacMillan, London

True JL, Jones BD, Baumgartner FR (2007) Punctuated Equilibrium Theory’. In: Sabatier P (ed.) Theories of the Policy Process 2nd Edition. Westview Press, Cambridge MA

VeneKlasen L, Miller V (2002) A new weave of power, people and politics; the action guide for advocacy and citizen participation. Stylus Publishing US or Practical Action Publishing, UK

Vlastuin J (2017) How we used behavioural insights for digital campaigning, Oxfam Views and Voices, Oxfam Influencing Blog, https://views-voices.oxfam.org.uk/author/jacco-vlastuin

Watson G (2016) GROW campaign in Latin America evaluation 20115-2016, Oxfam, internal document

Weible CM, Heikkila T, Sabatier PA (2012) Understanding and influencing the policy process. Policy Sci 45(1):1–21

Wilshaw R, Unger L, Chi DQ, Thuy PT (2013) Labour Rights in Unilever’s Supply Chain: from compliance to good practice. An Oxfam study of labour issues in Unilever’s Vietnam operations and supply chain, Oxfam. https://policypractice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/labour-rights-in-unilevers-supply-chain-from-complianceto-good-practice-an-oxf-267532

Wilshaw R, Chi DQ, Fowler P, Thuy PT (2016) Labour Rights in Vietnam: Unilever’s progress and systemic challenges, Oxfam Research Report, Oxfam. https://policypractice.oxfam.org.uk/publications/labour-rights-in-vietnam-unilevers-progress-and-systemicchallenges-614926

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Palgrave Communications

Tập 4 Số 1

Thông tin tác giả