Abstract
The concept of evidence-based policy making has risen to prominence internationally. This paper briefly traces the history and ideological paradigms associated with evidence-based policy making. Then the international experience in respect of evidence-based policy making is discussed. Finally, the paper turns to an evaluation of the degree to which evidence-based policy making has been entrenched in the development of Provincial Growth and Development Strategies. It is found that the concept of evidence-based policy making is not well developed at provincial levels and that in many cases it is narrowed down to the use of data. Inhibiting factors at provincial government level include the reality that research is seldom institutionalised, the relationship between policy making and research is seldom understood, academic research is viewed as not being relevant to the policy-making process, there is a lack of in-house research capacity and funding resulting in poor quality, research brings conflicting results which are difficult to interpret, there are concerns around research authenticity and legitimacy, concerns around the quality of research conducted in-house, and an overall lack of strategic thinking about research at provincial level. A range of barriers at research institutions were also identified and include the fact that the formal way in which academic research is published and disseminated is not always “friendly” to policy makers, researchers view academic research and policy making as a linear process, not all provinces have universities, research used in these strategies is mainly orientated around the discipline of economics, the fact that universities are accountable to national government and not provincial government, and limited links between researchers and policy makers. Aspects such as an entrenched research culture, an acknowledgment of the importance of research in policy making, the utilisation of international and national research institutions, the ability of researchers to understand the policy-making process, and the availability of a research agenda for provinces were mentioned as reasons contributing to evidence-based policy making. In conclusion, the paper argues that space should be created to evaluate provincially based research findings, and partnerships between universities and provincial planning units are crucial.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Black, N. (2001). Evidence based policy: proceed with care. British Medical Journal, 323(7307), 275–280.
Bulmer, M. (Ed.). (1987). Social science research and government. Comparative analysis of Britain and the United States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Centre for Development Support (2011). OECD reviews of higher education and development. The Free State. Self-evaluation Report. Bloemfontein: University of the Free State.
Davies, H. T. O., & Nutley, S. M. (2001). Evidence-based policy and practice: moving from rhetoric to reality. Third International, Inter-disciplinary Evidence-Based Policies and Indicator Systems Conference, July 2001, University of Durham.
Davies, H. T. O., Nutley, S. M., & Smith, P. C. (1999). Editorial. What works? The role of evidence in public sector policy and practice. Public Money and Management, January – March 1999, 3–5.
Davies, H. T. O., Nutley, S. M., & Smith, P. C. (2000). What works? Evidence based policy and practice in public services. Bristoll: The Policy Press.
Exworthy, A., Bindman, M., Davies, H., & Washington, E. (2006). Evidence into policy and practice? Measuring the progress of U.S. and U.K. policies to tackle disparities and inequalities in U.S. and U.K. health and health care. The Milbank Quarterly, 84(1), 75–109.
Gambrill, E. (2010). Evidence based practice and policy: choice ahead. Research on Social Work Practice, 16(3), 338–357.
Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Huberman, M. (1987). Steps towards an integrated model of research utilisation. Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilisation, 8(4), 586–611.
Nutley, S., Davies, H., & Walter, I. (2002). Evidence based policy and practice: Cross sector lessons from the UK. Research Unit for Research Utilization, University of St Andrews.
Parsons, W. (2002). From muddling through to muddling up—evidence based policy making and the modernisation of British government. Public Policy and Administration, 17(3), 43–60.
Pawson, R. (2002). Evidence-based policy: the promise of “realists synthesis”. Evaluation, 8(3), 340–358.
Plewis, I. (2000). Educational inequalities and education action zones. In C. Pantazis & D. Gordon (Eds.), Tackling inequalities: Where are we now and what can be done. Bristol: Policy Press.
Presidency. (2005). Provincial Growth and Development Strategy Guidelines. Pretoria: The Presidency (Republic of South Africa).
Rosenstock, L., & Lee, L. (2002). Attacks on science: the risks of evidence-based policy. American Journal of Public Health, 92(1), 14–18.
Sanderson, I. (2002). Evaluation, policy learning and evidence-based policy-making. Public Administration, 80(1), 1–22.
Solesbury, W. (2001). Evidence-based policy: whence it came and where it is going? ESRC UK Centre for evidence based policy and practice: working paper 1. London: University of London.
Acknowledgment
An earlier version of this paper was conducted for the pro-poor policy-making project funded by the European Union. However, the opinions expressed in this paper are that of the authors
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Marais, L., Matebesi, Z. Evidence-Based Policy Development in South Africa: the Case of Provincial Growth and Development Strategies. Urban Forum 24, 357–371 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12132-012-9179-4
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12132-012-9179-4