The politics of ideas: the complex interplay of health inequalities research and policy

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    21 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Public health research is overtly orientated towards influencing policy and yet, despite official commitments to ‘evidence-based policy’, most analyses conclude that the impact of public health research has been limited. Based on an analysis of post-1997 UK policy statements and interviews with 112 key actors, this paper argues that the failure of ‘evidence-based’ policy to emerge relates to the fact it is ideas, not evidence, which travel between research and policy, and that these malleable entities are translated as they move between actors. By unpacking six factors that appear to have shaped the ‘interplay of ideas’ about health inequalities, this paper draws attention to the ways in which policy influences research (as well as vice versa). The paper argues that two distinct ‘idea-types’ are evident within the data, each of which helps explain the difficulties in achieving ‘evidence-based’ policy responses to health inequalities: ‘institutionalised ideas’ and ‘chameleonic ideas’.
    LanguageEnglish
    Pages561-574
    Number of pages14
    JournalScience and Public Policy
    Volume41
    Issue number5
    Early online date6 Dec 2013
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 1 Oct 2014

    Fingerprint

    politics
    health
    evidence
    public health
    travel
    commitment
    policy
    interview

    Keywords

    • evidence-based policy
    • health inequalities
    • ideational
    • institutionalism
    • research impact
    • complexity

    Cite this

    @article{f2649c5ebf004aefa4de31b455b2c4be,
    title = "The politics of ideas: the complex interplay of health inequalities research and policy",
    abstract = "Public health research is overtly orientated towards influencing policy and yet, despite official commitments to ‘evidence-based policy’, most analyses conclude that the impact of public health research has been limited. Based on an analysis of post-1997 UK policy statements and interviews with 112 key actors, this paper argues that the failure of ‘evidence-based’ policy to emerge relates to the fact it is ideas, not evidence, which travel between research and policy, and that these malleable entities are translated as they move between actors. By unpacking six factors that appear to have shaped the ‘interplay of ideas’ about health inequalities, this paper draws attention to the ways in which policy influences research (as well as vice versa). The paper argues that two distinct ‘idea-types’ are evident within the data, each of which helps explain the difficulties in achieving ‘evidence-based’ policy responses to health inequalities: ‘institutionalised ideas’ and ‘chameleonic ideas’.",
    keywords = "evidence-based policy, health inequalities, ideational, institutionalism, research impact, complexity",
    author = "Smith, {Katherine E.}",
    note = "This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced version of an article accepted for publication in Science and Public Policy, following peer review. The version of record Smith, K. E. (2014). The politics of ideas: the complex interplay of health inequalities research and policy . Science and Public Policy, 41(5), 561-574. is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/sct085.",
    year = "2014",
    month = "10",
    day = "1",
    doi = "10.1093/scipol/sct085",
    language = "English",
    volume = "41",
    pages = "561--574",
    journal = "Science and Public Policy",
    issn = "0302-3427",
    number = "5",

    }

    The politics of ideas : the complex interplay of health inequalities research and policy . / Smith, Katherine E.

    In: Science and Public Policy, Vol. 41, No. 5, 01.10.2014, p. 561-574.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - The politics of ideas

    T2 - Science and Public Policy

    AU - Smith, Katherine E.

    N1 - This is a pre-copyedited, author-produced version of an article accepted for publication in Science and Public Policy, following peer review. The version of record Smith, K. E. (2014). The politics of ideas: the complex interplay of health inequalities research and policy . Science and Public Policy, 41(5), 561-574. is available online at: https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/sct085.

    PY - 2014/10/1

    Y1 - 2014/10/1

    N2 - Public health research is overtly orientated towards influencing policy and yet, despite official commitments to ‘evidence-based policy’, most analyses conclude that the impact of public health research has been limited. Based on an analysis of post-1997 UK policy statements and interviews with 112 key actors, this paper argues that the failure of ‘evidence-based’ policy to emerge relates to the fact it is ideas, not evidence, which travel between research and policy, and that these malleable entities are translated as they move between actors. By unpacking six factors that appear to have shaped the ‘interplay of ideas’ about health inequalities, this paper draws attention to the ways in which policy influences research (as well as vice versa). The paper argues that two distinct ‘idea-types’ are evident within the data, each of which helps explain the difficulties in achieving ‘evidence-based’ policy responses to health inequalities: ‘institutionalised ideas’ and ‘chameleonic ideas’.

    AB - Public health research is overtly orientated towards influencing policy and yet, despite official commitments to ‘evidence-based policy’, most analyses conclude that the impact of public health research has been limited. Based on an analysis of post-1997 UK policy statements and interviews with 112 key actors, this paper argues that the failure of ‘evidence-based’ policy to emerge relates to the fact it is ideas, not evidence, which travel between research and policy, and that these malleable entities are translated as they move between actors. By unpacking six factors that appear to have shaped the ‘interplay of ideas’ about health inequalities, this paper draws attention to the ways in which policy influences research (as well as vice versa). The paper argues that two distinct ‘idea-types’ are evident within the data, each of which helps explain the difficulties in achieving ‘evidence-based’ policy responses to health inequalities: ‘institutionalised ideas’ and ‘chameleonic ideas’.

    KW - evidence-based policy

    KW - health inequalities

    KW - ideational

    KW - institutionalism

    KW - research impact

    KW - complexity

    U2 - 10.1093/scipol/sct085

    DO - 10.1093/scipol/sct085

    M3 - Article

    VL - 41

    SP - 561

    EP - 574

    JO - Science and Public Policy

    JF - Science and Public Policy

    SN - 0302-3427

    IS - 5

    ER -