Technocracy Reinvented: The New Evidence Based Policy Movement

Introduction For all governments there is often an attempt to establish, according to their own agenda, what actually 'is best administered' in the realms of policy making. Whilst there is an expansive literature on the subject, there is, not unexpectedly, little agreement on the most appropriate approach and such lack of certainty enables governments to find their own 'best'. Let us not delude ourselves, there is no irrefutable 'best' in the world of policy making and, as in many things, fashion plays its part; ways of making and doing policy are subject to whims and trends. Arguably the one constant over time is the inherent messiness of the process; a messiness politicians are perennially tempted to tidy up by getting experts to establish 'what is to be done'. In practice policy is not, nor can it ever be, a neat process which begins with 'deciding to decide' and concludes with an evaluation before starting all over again. However, and because of the intrinsic messiness, governments frequently seek to impose order and control upon it. The current government is looking to evidence to bring order: Evidence Based Policy Making (EBPM) is in vogue. The suggestion that evidence should contribute to policy is one that, more usually than not, leads people to question if evidence has not always made such a contribution. Naturally using evidence to influence and formulate policy making is not a new phenomenon. Though Solesbury (2002, p.93), claims that 'evidenced-based policy seems to be principally a British commitment' it has been identified elsewhere. Innes (2002, p.102) highlights its longevity (although with periods of unfashionableness) in the United States. Nor is it absent from 'other Anglophone countries' (David, 2002,