From Evidence-Based to Evidence-Informed: The Evolution of Policymaking in a Complex World

In the past few decades, the phrase “evidence-based policymaking” (EBPM) has become a central tenet of good governance. The idea is intuitive and appealing: policies should be grounded in the best available evidence, particularly from rigorous scientific research, to ensure effective and efficient public outcomes. However, as policymakers have grappled with the messy realities of governance, the limitations of a strictly evidence-based approach have become increasingly clear. This has led to the evolution toward a more flexible, inclusive, and context-sensitive model: evidence-informed policymaking (EIPM).

The Rise of Evidence-Based Policymaking

EBPM emerged in the 1990s, heavily influenced by evidence-based medicine. The movement gained traction among governments seeking to increase accountability, transparency, and cost-effectiveness in policy decisions. The basic premise was that objective, scientifically derived evidence could guide policymakers toward “what works.”

Frameworks such as randomised controlled trials (RCTs), systematic reviews, and meta-analyses became the gold standards for generating policy-relevant evidence. Organisations like the UK’s What Works Centres and the U.S. Commission on Evidence-Based Policymaking institutionalised EBPM practices across sectors such as education, health, and criminal justice.

Limitations of the Traditional Model

Despite its strengths, the EBPM model faced several critiques:

• Oversimplification: Policies do not operate in controlled environments; social systems are dynamic, complex, and politically charged.
• Narrow Scope of Evidence: Emphasising quantitative methods often excludes qualitative insights, community knowledge, and lived experience.
• Context Neglect: What works in one setting may not work elsewhere due to cultural, economic, or institutional differences.
• Political Realities: Policymaking is inherently political. Decisions are influenced by values, ideology, timing, and public sentiment.

These critiques underscored the need for a more nuanced understanding of how evidence interacts with policy.

The Shift to Evidence-Informed Policymaking

Evidence-informed policymaking acknowledges the value of evidence while recognising its limitations. It promotes a more holistic approach that integrates multiple forms of knowledge and adapts to context. Key characteristics of EIPM include:

• Pluralism in Evidence: Welcomes diverse sources including qualitative research, expert judgment, and citizen input.
• Context Sensitivity: Tailors evidence use to local political, social, and institutional realities.
• Political Acumen: Recognises that values, power dynamics, and timing matter in decision-making.
• Iterative Learning: Encourages continuous evaluation, feedback loops, and adaptive policies

Emerging Approaches in EIPM

• Behavioural Insights: Grounded in behavioural economics, this approach focuses on how real people make decisions. Governments have used “nudges” to improve tax compliance, organ donation rates, and public health outcomes.
• Systems Thinking: Policies are viewed as interventions in complex adaptive systems. This requires a shift from linear cause-effect assumptions to an understanding of interdependencies and emergent behaviour.
• Co-Production and Participatory Policymaking: Engaging citizens and stakeholders in the policymaking process ensures that policies reflect lived realities and foster public trust.
• Digital and Real-Time Evidence: The rise of digital governance allows for real-time data collection and analysis, enabling faster and more responsive policy interventions

Case Study Examples:

• New Zealand’s Wellbeing Budget (2019): Emphasised outcomes beyond GDP, drawing from broad evidence bases and public consultation.
• UK’s Behavioural Insights Team: Applied behavioural science to improve government programs through low-cost, scalable interventions.
• Estonia’s E-Governance Model: Leverages real-time data and digital tools for dynamic and adaptive policymaking.

Conclusion

The evolution from evidence-based to evidence-informed policymaking represents a maturing of the policy field. While the rigorous use of evidence remains essential, it must be embedded within a broader framework that respects complexity, context, and the multiplicity of voices in society. In a world facing intricate challenges—from climate change to social inequality—the ability to use evidence wisely and inclusively may be the most important innovation in governance today.