Rebecca Natow on politically-infused evidence use

Home

Podcast episodes

Science for Policy podcast episode

Play Video

About this episode

Broadcast on

6 November 2022

Guests

Show notes

Evidence is not the exclusive province of science advisors and science advice institutions. And especially in policy areas where those institutions are weak or absent, other forces rush to fill the vacuum: stakeholders, lobbyists, interest groups.

In this episode, Dr Rebecca Natow talks to Toby Wardman about federal education policy in the US, a domain that employs a 'negotiated rulemaking' methodology to try to find consensus among many stakeholders — even though scientific input is also legally mandated. The result is a swirling, politically-infused debate around the meaning of both quantitative and qualitative evidence.

Resources mentioned in this episode

Reexamining the federal role in higher education https://www.tcpress.com/reexamining-the-federal-role-in-higher-education-9780807766767
Higher education rulemaking: the politics of creating regulatory policy https://www.press.jhu.edu/books/title/11563/higher-education-rulemaking

The views and opinions expressed in our publications, including on this website, are those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union, the European Commission, or any funding authorities.

Within the Scientific Advice Mechanism, SAPEA is funded by the European Union. The activities of associated partners Academia Europaea and Cardiff University are funded by UKRI (grant number 10033786).

The Scientific Advice Mechanism provides independent scientific evidence and policy recommendations to the European institutions by request of the College of Commissioners.

The Advisors

SAPEA

The SAM secretariat

We receive a request

We review the evidence

We make recommendations

We deliver our advice

Rebecca Natow on politically-infused evidence use

Science for Policy podcast episode

About this episode

Broadcast on

Guests

Show notes

Staff login