IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/cposxx/v35y2014i3p264-281.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How evidence becomes authoritative in public policy implementation. Lessons from three Dutch white ravens

Author

Listed:
  • J.A.M. Hufen
  • Joop F.M. Koppenjan

Abstract

Policy scientists and public policymakers are continuously struggling with the troublesome relationship between knowledge and policy. On the one hand, policy and policy processes are generally recognized as having a political nature because they prioritize the generation of will rather than knowledge. On the other hand, it is difficult to accept that knowledge is being wasted or used strategically. One of the main challenges for public policymakers is to reconcile the political rationality of policy processes with the scientific rationality of knowledge and research, for instance by intelligent organization of knowledge generation and knowledge use. This article aims to contribute to the debate on this topic by comparing three policy implementation processes in which knowledge played an authoritative role. On the basis of this analysis of these three ‘white ravens,’ lessons are drawn regarding the conditions under which knowledge becomes authoritative in policy implementation practices.

Suggested Citation

  • J.A.M. Hufen & Joop F.M. Koppenjan, 2014. "How evidence becomes authoritative in public policy implementation. Lessons from three Dutch white ravens," Policy Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(3), pages 264-281, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:cposxx:v:35:y:2014:i:3:p:264-281
    DOI: 10.1080/01442872.2013.875148
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01442872.2013.875148
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/01442872.2013.875148?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:cposxx:v:35:y:2014:i:3:p:264-281. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/cpos .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.