Can, and should, behavioural neuroscience influence public policy?

Recent years have seen enormous demand amongst policy makers for new insights from the behavioural sciences, especially neuroscience. This demand is matched by an increasing willingness on behalf of behavioural scientists to translate the policy implications of their work. But can neuroscience really help shape the governance of a nation? Or does this represent growing misuse of neuroscience to attach scientific authority to policy, plus a clutch of neuroscientists trying to overstate their findings for a taste of power?. © 2012.

An investigation of the utilisation of health impact assessments (HIAs) in Irish public policy making

It is the aim of this thesis to investigate Health Impact Assessment (HIA) use in public policy formulation in Northern Ireland and in the Republic of Ireland. The influences affecting the use of HIAs will be examined in this study. Four case studies, where HIA has been conducted, will be used for research analysis. This includes HIAs conducted on traffic and transport in Dublin, Traveller accommodation in Donegal, a draft air quality action plan in Belfast and on a social housing regeneration project in Derry. HIA aims to identify possible intended and unintended consequences that a project, policy or programme will have on the affected population’s health. Although it has been acknowledged as a worthwhile tool to inform decision-makers, the extent to which it is used in policy in Ireland is subject to scrutiny. A theoretical framework, drawing from institutionalist, impact assessment and knowledge utilisation theories and schools of literature, underpin this study. The investigation involves an examination of the unit of analysis which consists of the HIA steering groups. These are made up of local authority decision makers, statutory health practitioners and community representatives. The overarching structure and underlying values which are hypothesized as present in each HIA case are investigated in this research. Chapters 2 and 3 outline the main literature in the area which includes theories from the public health and health promotion paradigm, the policy sciences and impact assessment techniques. Chapter 4 describes the methodology in this research which is a multiple case study design. This is followed by an analysis of the cases and then concludes with practical recommendations for HIA in Ireland and theoretical conclusions of the research.

Legislative policy, law and competitiveness: a mysterious and difficult relationship in the EU

The Lisbon Agenda places Europe in a uniquely difficult position globally, most particularly as an example of a social and regulatory experiment which many consider to be doomed to failure. The drive towards economic competitiveness has led to a focus on regulation and its effect on entrepreneurship, productivity and business growth but assessing this relationship is complex for a number of reasons. First, not all regulatory effects can be predicted precisely in relation to behavioural outcomes. Path-dependency scholars have also demonstrated that the regulation will have varying effects depending on context. Second, theoretically it is clear that many non-regulatory factors may contribute to economic and competitive success. Third, there is evidence of internal conflict within the Commission as to the relative importance of the Lisbon goals. Finally, the experience of distinct Member States presents challenges both for assessment and prescriptive remedies. The Commission has estimated that the cost of regulatory compliance obligations on businesses in the EU is between 4% and 6% of gross domestic product and that 15% of this figure is avoidable 'red tape' (the term used specifically to signify unnecessary compliance burdens). This article proposes to assess the likely outcomes of de-regulation as we rapidly approach 2010, the year for attainment of the Lisbon goals.

The Role of Subjectivity and Knowledge Power Struggles in the Formation of Public Policy

There is a growing incentive for sociologists to demonstrate the use value of their research. Research ‘impact’ is a driver of research funding and a measure of academic standing. Academic debate on this issue has intensified since Burawoy’s (2004) call for a ‘public’ sociology. However the academy is no longer the sole or primary producer of knowledge and empirical sociologists need to contend with the ‘huge swathes’ of social data that now exist (Savage and Burrows, 2007). This article furthers these debates by considering power struggles between competing forms of knowledge. Using a case study, it specifically considers the power struggle between normative and empirical knowledge, and how providers of knowledge assert legitimacy for their truth claims. The article concludes that the idea of ‘impact’ and ‘use-value’ are extremely complex and depends in the policy context on knowledge power struggles, and on how policy makers want to view the world. © The Author(s) 2012