Using early childhood education as the example, William Gormley, a Georgetown University professor, has provided an analysis of the barriers impeding the use of scientific data in policymaking, identified the contexts in which science is taken seriously, and described actions which can be taken to improve the utilization of data.

Science Influence

Early in his article (Science 19 Aug 2011), Gormley is quick to condemn what he calls the “hypodermic needle” concept of how science works to impact policy. For a variety of reasons, a belief in such a direct influence of science on policy reflects a simplistic understanding of the policy process in which inputs from multiple actors are involved. This simplistic understanding can lead to unrealistic expectations among scientists about their potential for influence on policy.

Facilitators of Use

While some factors, such as a lack of scientific consensus or tight budgets work against the adoption of evidence and are beyond the researcher’s control, there are factors which facilitate the adoption of evidence. According to Gormley, these are 1) clear and brief reports, 2) credible methods and nonpartisan researchers, 3) trust between researchers and the public officials, and 4) framing issues in ways which gain public support.

 Steps To Take

To strengthen the connection between data and policy, Gormley recommends several steps that scientists and public officials could take. For scientists, these include 1) providing explanations for the findings of studies on program successes and failures, and 2) supporting institutions which facilitate interactions between scientists and between citizens and public officials. For public officials, these include 1) allowing longer time frames for calculating costs and long term benefits of interventions, and 2) supporting state level agencies that can carry out rigorous evaluations of state programs.

According to Gromley, “With more modest expectations, there may be reason for optimism among researchers hoping to influence policy.”