Really, it’s three different ways to make the same argument in the number of words that suits you:
- Guardian post (700 words): ‘When presenting evidence to policymakers, scientists and other experts need to engage with the policy process that exists, not the one we wish existed’
- Public Administration Review article (3000 words) To Bridge the Divide between Evidence and Policy: Reduce Ambiguity as Much as Uncertainty (free version)
- Book (40,000 words)The Politics of Evidence Based Policymaking (free version)
For even more words, see my EBPM page
Pingback: The politics of evidence-based best practice: 4 messages | Paul Cairney: Politics & Public Policy
Pingback: The politics of implementing evidence-based policies | Paul Cairney: Politics & Public Policy
Pingback: We are in danger of repeating the same mistakes if we bemoan low attention to ‘facts’ | Paul Cairney: Politics & Public Policy
Pingback: We are in danger of repeating the same mistakes if we bemoan low attention to ‘facts’ | The Knowledge Exchange Blog
Pingback: What sciences count in government science advice? | Paul Cairney: Politics & Public Policy
Pingback: Kathryn Oliver and I have just published an article on the relationship between evidence and policy | Paul Cairney: Politics & Public Policy
Pingback: Evidence based policymaking: 7 key themes | Paul Cairney: Politics & Public Policy