Stakeholders and perspectivism in qualitative policy evaluation: A realist reflection

This paper examines the epistemological bases for the inclusion of stakeholders in policy research. While it concedes that the input of stakeholders provides essential expert and experiential knowledge for the understanding of complex policies and programmes, it contends that the approach which assumes that all interpretations of policy including those of stakeholders should be afforded equal validity, which we term relativist perspectivism, undermines the possibility of robust research by allowing power to replace methodological rigour as the primary research dynamic. It is noted that this problem tends to be more acute when the research is qualitative. A study into the gendered effects of Common Agricultural Policy reforms is used as an illustrative example of how research can be compromised by relativist perspectivism. It is argued that realist research methodologies uniquely provide the capacity to maintain epistemological robustness, while also being able to take due account of the perspectives of stakeholders.

The discursive turn in policy analysis and the validation of policy stories

This paper is concerned with the language of policy documents in the field of health care, and how ‘readings’ of such documents might be validated in the context of a narrative analysis. The substantive focus is on a comparative study of UK health policy documents (N=20) as produced by the various assemblies, governments and executives of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland during the period 2000-2009. Following an identification of some key characteristics of narrative structure the authors indicate how text-mining strategies allied with features of semantic and network analysis can be used to unravel the basic elements of policy stories and to facilitate the presentation of data in such a way that readers can verify the strengths (and weaknesses) of any given analysis – with regard to claims concerning, say, the presence, absence, or relative importance of key ideas and concepts. Readers can also ‘see’ how the different components of any one story might fit together, and to get a sense of what has been excluded from the narrative as well as what has been included, and thereby assess the reliability and validity of interpretations that have been placed upon the data.

Telling stories of 21st Century welfare: the UK Coalition Government and the neo-liberal discourse of worklessness and dependency’ Critical Social Policy

Policy documents are a useful source for understanding the privileging of particular ideological and policy preferences (Scrase and Ockwell, 2010) and how the language and imagery may help to construct society’s assumptions, values and beliefs. This article examines how the UK Coalition government’s 2010 Green Paper, 21st Century Welfare, and the White Paper, Universal Credit: Welfare that Works, assist in constructing a discourse about social security that favours a renewal and deepening of neo-liberalization in the context of threats to its hegemony. The documents marginalize the structural aspects of persistent unemployment and poverty by transforming these into individual pathologies of benefit dependency and worklessness. The consequence is that familiar neo-liberal policy measures favouring the intensification of punitive conditionality and economic rationality can be portrayed as new and innovative solutions to address Britain’s supposedly broken society and restore economic competitiveness.

Gender mainstreaming and the Common Agricultural Policy

While there are many case studies looking at gender mainstreaming in national contexts, this article offers a pan-European perspective to examine how a stated commitment to gender equality at this meta-level works in practice. The European Union’s (EU) stated commitment to gender mainstreaming the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) is critically reviewed. The article reviews theoretical literature on gender mainstreaming, considers the position of women in agriculture across Europe, and examines efforts by the EU to gender mainstream the CAP. It argues that at best, gender mainstreaming focuses on the symptoms of gender inequality in agriculture rather than the causes. Because of this, gender mainstreaming cannot be transformative in this context. Little thought has been given to the practical difficulties of actually gender mainstreaming a policy such as the CAP. The EU’s priority for the CAP focuses on the mainstream business goal of a viable agricultural industry and does not pay any heed to gender inequalities in agriculture. In short, the stated commitment to gender mainstreaming is empty rhetoric

Afterword::Innovation, Ecological Modernisation and the ‘Post-Conflict’ Policy Agenda

Perhaps the weakest dimension of the ‘triple bottom line’ understanding of
sustainable development has been the ‘economic’ dimension. Much of the thinking
about the appropriate ‘political economy’ to underpin sustainable development has
been either utopian (as in some ‘environmental’ political views) or ‘business as usual’ approaches. Rejecting both of these utopian and realist views, it is clear from the papers presented here and the conference debates that something like ‘ecological modernisation’ is the preferred conceptualisation of ‘sustainable development’ within policy circles in Northern Ireland, the UK and other European states.

Medical consensus, guidelines, and position papers: A policy for the ECFS

The terms consensus, guideline and position paper are sometimes employed as if they were interchangeable, but the purpose of such documents and the robustness of advice vary as the evidence base does not have the same depth in each. The Board of the European Cystic Fibrosis Society deemed it to be helpful to provide a short commentary on the definition of these terms, on their interconnections and on how ECFS considers them in documents endorsed by the society.