20
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Scientific integrity and anti-doping regulation

      1 , 2
      International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics
      Informa UK Limited

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Book: not found

          The Honest Broker

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Evidence-based policymaking is not like evidence-based medicine, so how far should you go to bridge the divide between evidence and policy?

            There is extensive health and public health literature on the ‘evidence-policy gap’, exploring the frustrating experiences of scientists trying to secure a response to the problems and solutions they raise and identifying the need for better evidence to reduce policymaker uncertainty. We offer a new perspective by using policy theory to propose research with greater impact, identifying the need to use persuasion to reduce ambiguity, and to adapt to multi-level policymaking systems. We identify insights from secondary data, namely systematic reviews, critical analysis and policy theories relevant to evidence-based policymaking. The studies are drawn primarily from countries such as the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. We combine empirical and normative elements to identify the ways in which scientists can, do and could influence policy. We identify two important dilemmas, for scientists and researchers, that arise from our initial advice. First, effective actors combine evidence with manipulative emotional appeals to influence the policy agenda – should scientists do the same, or would the reputational costs outweigh the policy benefits? Second, when adapting to multi-level policymaking, should scientists prioritise ‘evidence-based’ policymaking above other factors? The latter includes governance principles such the ‘co-production’ of policy between local public bodies, interest groups and service users. This process may be based primarily on values and involve actors with no commitment to a hierarchy of evidence. We conclude that successful engagement in ‘evidence-based policymaking’ requires pragmatism, combining scientific evidence with governance principles, and persuasion to translate complex evidence into simple stories. To maximise the use of scientific evidence in health and public health policy, researchers should recognise the tendency of policymakers to base judgements on their beliefs, and shortcuts based on their emotions and familiarity with information; learn ‘where the action is’, and be prepared to engage in long-term strategies to be able to influence policy; and, in both cases, decide how far you are willing to go to persuade policymakers to act and secure a hierarchy of evidence underpinning policy. These are value-driven and political, not just ‘evidence-based’, choices.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              First Report of the Cereal Cyst Nematode Heterodera latipons on Wheat in Morocco

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics
                International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics
                Informa UK Limited
                1940-6940
                1940-6959
                December 23 2018
                April 03 2019
                April 12 2019
                April 03 2019
                : 11
                : 2
                : 295-313
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Sports Governance Center, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, USA
                [2 ] Department of Radiation Biology, Institute for Cancer Research, Oslo, Norway
                Article
                10.1080/19406940.2019.1596968
                c45dc49d-6154-417c-aa1a-c484f02285d2
                © 2019
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Smart Citations
                0
                0
                0
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content1,547

                Cited by11

                Most referenced authors376