Understanding UK policymakers’ evidence needs through policy questions
Abstract The present mixed methods study used UK policymakers to answer the following: (1) are there common topics for which evidence is requested over time (2019 to 2023) that cut across government departments or agencies, and (2) is there a preferred style in the way evidence is requested? Three s...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Nature Portfolio
2025-07-01
|
| Series: | Scientific Reports |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-05911-3 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849768639309283328 |
|---|---|
| author | Magda Osman Nick Cosstick |
| author_facet | Magda Osman Nick Cosstick |
| author_sort | Magda Osman |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract The present mixed methods study used UK policymakers to answer the following: (1) are there common topics for which evidence is requested over time (2019 to 2023) that cut across government departments or agencies, and (2) is there a preferred style in the way evidence is requested? Three separate datasets of policy questions (n = 3260) posed by UK policy makers to academics were coded by a combination of humans and an algorithm and then analysed. First, of the 7 recurring topics identified (Climate and Environment, Defence and Security, Economy, Health, Information Technology, Social Welfare, Technology), Economy (27%) was the most featured across all policy makers across all 5 years. Climate and Environment showed the sharpest rise over time (16–38%). Second, of 7 styles of questions, procedural (33%) was the most common, which means addressing “how to” (e.g. measure, intervene, prevent) type questions. In the qualitative interviews policymakers reported gaining the most from an exploratory rather than a goal-specific approach during one-to-one interactions with academics. Also when having their assumptions challenged this helped to expand the way they thought of policy issues that they were currently addressing. This UK test case shows the value of focused iterative policy-academic exchanges and could be a way to enhance evidence-based policymaking initiatives. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-2cae14edf75b46f6b8b03ac30b85a78f |
| institution | DOAJ |
| issn | 2045-2322 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-07-01 |
| publisher | Nature Portfolio |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Scientific Reports |
| spelling | doaj-art-2cae14edf75b46f6b8b03ac30b85a78f2025-08-20T03:03:42ZengNature PortfolioScientific Reports2045-23222025-07-0115111210.1038/s41598-025-05911-3Understanding UK policymakers’ evidence needs through policy questionsMagda Osman0Nick Cosstick1Judge Business School, University of CambridgeJudge Business School, University of CambridgeAbstract The present mixed methods study used UK policymakers to answer the following: (1) are there common topics for which evidence is requested over time (2019 to 2023) that cut across government departments or agencies, and (2) is there a preferred style in the way evidence is requested? Three separate datasets of policy questions (n = 3260) posed by UK policy makers to academics were coded by a combination of humans and an algorithm and then analysed. First, of the 7 recurring topics identified (Climate and Environment, Defence and Security, Economy, Health, Information Technology, Social Welfare, Technology), Economy (27%) was the most featured across all policy makers across all 5 years. Climate and Environment showed the sharpest rise over time (16–38%). Second, of 7 styles of questions, procedural (33%) was the most common, which means addressing “how to” (e.g. measure, intervene, prevent) type questions. In the qualitative interviews policymakers reported gaining the most from an exploratory rather than a goal-specific approach during one-to-one interactions with academics. Also when having their assumptions challenged this helped to expand the way they thought of policy issues that they were currently addressing. This UK test case shows the value of focused iterative policy-academic exchanges and could be a way to enhance evidence-based policymaking initiatives.https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-05911-3Evidence-based policymakingPublic policymakingPolicy inquiriesScience-policy exchanges |
| spellingShingle | Magda Osman Nick Cosstick Understanding UK policymakers’ evidence needs through policy questions Scientific Reports Evidence-based policymaking Public policymaking Policy inquiries Science-policy exchanges |
| title | Understanding UK policymakers’ evidence needs through policy questions |
| title_full | Understanding UK policymakers’ evidence needs through policy questions |
| title_fullStr | Understanding UK policymakers’ evidence needs through policy questions |
| title_full_unstemmed | Understanding UK policymakers’ evidence needs through policy questions |
| title_short | Understanding UK policymakers’ evidence needs through policy questions |
| title_sort | understanding uk policymakers evidence needs through policy questions |
| topic | Evidence-based policymaking Public policymaking Policy inquiries Science-policy exchanges |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-05911-3 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT magdaosman understandingukpolicymakersevidenceneedsthroughpolicyquestions AT nickcosstick understandingukpolicymakersevidenceneedsthroughpolicyquestions |