What Evidence should Social Policymakers Use?
Australian Treasury Economic Roundup, Vol. 1, pp. 27-43, 2009
18 Pages Posted: 9 Jun 2009
Date Written: June 6, 2009
Abstract
Policymakers seeking empirical evidence on social policy interventions often find themselves confronted with a mountain of academic studies that are potentially relevant to the question. Without some systematic way to sort through the evidence, there is a risk that analysts will become mired in the research, or simply cherry-pick those studies that support their prior beliefs. An alternative approach is to test each study against a hierarchy of research methods. This article discusses two hierarchies - one used by US medical researchers, and another used by UK social policymakers - and suggests one possible hierarchy for Australia. Naturally, such a hierarchy should not be the only tool used to assess research, and should be used in conjunction with other factors, such as the ranking of the journal in which a study is published. But used carefully, a hierarchy can help policymakers sort through a daunting body of research, and may also inform governments’ decisions on how to evaluate social policy interventions.
Keywords: evidence hierarchy, randomised trials, natural experiments
JEL Classification: C1, C9
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
Recommended Papers
-
To Insure Prejudice: Racial Disparities in Taxicab Tipping
By Ian Ayres, Fredrick E. Vars, ...
-
Some Thoughts on Law and Economics and the Theory of Second Best
-
Expressive Law and Oppressive Norms
By Amy L. Wax
-
Expressive Law and Oppressive Norms
By Amy L. Wax