Updating your course reading lists? Check out our essential reading recommendations for Public Policy, Politics and Social Policy from Policy & Politics

by Sarah Brown and Elizabeth Koebele

All articles featured in this blog post are free to access until 31 October 2024

It’s that time of year again when  course syllabi are updated with fresh research. We hope to make this easier with the essential reading list below, which features some of the most significant research relevant to public policy students that we’ve published over the last year. We feature nine articles and a special issue for teaching topical themes such as health policy, policy learning and advocacy. All articles are ideal for Public Policy, Politics and Social Policy classes alike.

As always, we welcome your feedback on the articles featured, as well as future unit topics you’d like to see covered! Let us know what you’re teaching and how we can help!

Health policy

Our first theme focuses on a substantive policy area that is increasingly taught in public and social policy courses, especially in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and on-going climate crisis: health policy.

Our first article, “Analysing the ‘follow the science’ rhetoric of government responses to COVID-19” by Margaret Macaulay and colleagues, has been one of the most widely read and cited articles of last year and was the winner of our Best Paper prize for 2023. This is not surprising, as it advances bold and well evidenced claims on a hot topic in public health governance. In the context of the COVID-19 pandemic – and in the face of widespread anxiety and uncertainty – governments’ mantra that they were “just following the science” was meant to reassure the public that decisions about pandemic responses were being directed by the best available scientific evidence. However, the authors claim that making policy decisions based only on scientific evidence is impossible (if only because ‘the science’ is always contested) and undemocratic (because governments are elected to balance a range of priorities and interests in their decisions). Claiming to be “just following the science” therefore represents an abdication of responsibility by politicians. 

Our second featured article, entitled What types of evidence persuade actors in a complex policy system? by Geoff Bates and colleagues, explores the use of evidence to influence different groups across the urban development system to think more about health outcomes in their decisions. Their three key findings are: (i) evidence-based narratives have wide appeal; (ii) credibility of evidence is critical; and (iii) many stakeholders have priorities other than health, such as economic considerations. The authors conclude that these insights can be used to frame and present evidence that meets the requirements of different urban development stakeholders and persuade them to think more about how the quality of urban environments affects health outcomes. 

Continue reading

Understanding evidence in policy-making

by Grace Piddington, Eleanor Mackillop & James Downe


Different views of evidence
The role of evidence in the policy-making process is contentious. Those who design policy have different perspectives on what constitutes rigorous evidence – whether that is a preference for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or lived experience. Our recent research article, published in Policy & Politics aims to improve understanding of how policy actors in Scotland and Wales view evidence. It finds that perceptions of evidence are not bounded by institutional, professional, or territorial criteria. Rather, they are much more fluid, with the individual’s understanding evolving over time.

Evidence profiles
Our research found four profiles which can help us to understand what constitutes evidence for policy actors. Each profile outlined describes one possible way to understand evidence and its role in the policy-making process. This list is not exhaustive but provides insight into some of the ways that evidence is viewed.

  • Evidence based policy making Idealists: this profile typically prioritises rigorous and clear evidence in decision-making processes. Their preference for high-quality research and systematic reviews can lead to a greater emphasis on evidence-based practices and interventions.
  • Pragmatists: They tend to take a more flexible and context-specific approach toevidence. Pragmatists value practical experience and local knowledge in addition to research findings.
  • Inclusive: Members of this profile emphasise a broad range of evidence sources, including individual stories and lived experiences. They value diverse perspectives and the incorporation of multiple forms of evidence in decision-making.
  • Political: This profile is characterised by a critical view of evidence and a focus on power relations in decision-making. They may question traditional hierarchies of evidence and challenge dominant narratives.
Continue reading

Why Study Sub-national Policy Advisory Systems?

by Andrew Connell, James Downe, Hannah Durrant, Eleanor MacKillop and Steve Martin


The study of Policy Advisory Systems sheds light on the wider network of actors, beyond government, who are involved in generating evidence that informs policy. Early studies of Policy Advisory Systems focused on national governments in Anglophone countries. More recently the concept has been reinvigorated by research in European countries and the global South. But there is a dearth of studies of Policy Advisory Systems at sub-national level.

Our recent research article, entitled Externalising policy advice within subnational governments, addressed this gap by using the concept of a Policy Advisory System to examine the role of a knowledge brokering organisation: the Wales Centre for Public Policy (WCPP). The WCPP provides ministers in the devolved Welsh Government with independent evidence and expertise.

Our study revealed significant differences in the ways that this initiative to externalise policy advice in Wales has played out compared to the results reported by previous studies of externalising policy advice in other settings. And we trace the differences we observed to three key features of the historical, institutional and political context in which the Welsh Government operates.

Continue reading

What role should charitable funding play in the provision of public services?

by Helen Abnett, James Bowles and John Mohan

Our recent research, published in Policy & Politics, shows that in the English and Welsh National Health Services (NHS), support from NHS-linked charities funds a wide range of goods and services. This includes substantial spending on amenities intended to make hospital visits more comfortable for patients and staff. Charities pay for newspapers, toiletry packs, toys for play areas, cushions and books. Charity support also funds education and wellbeing activity and medical research.

We also find that support from charities funds basic hospital equipment and furniture, such as vital signs monitors, bladder scanners, pulse oximeters, mattresses, and chairs, as well as some larger pieces of medical equipment (x-ray machines and ultrasounds).

Continue reading

How might lower-ranking officials have a greater impact on policy development than previously assumed?

andrew cornellAndrew Connell

How can small-territory, subnational governments make the most of their position? Subnational governments like the devolved governments in the UK combine some of the opportunities and limitations of the national and the local governments between which they sit. They have some ‘national government’-type responsibilities and resources, like legislative authority and funding powers, although those resources are limited by their subordinate status. On the other hand, because their territories are comparatively small (Scotland has just under 5.5 million people and 32 local authorities, Wales just over 3 million and 22) they might able to cultivate ‘local government’-type relationships with a comprehensive range of local groups.    Continue reading

How majoritarianism endures in the structures of the UK’s devolved institutions

FelicityProfileFelicity Matthews, Co-Editor of Policy & Politics

This blog post was originally published on the Democratic Audit UK website on 11 May 2018.

This year, the Scotland Act 1998 and the Government of Wales Act 1998 celebrate their twentieth anniversary. Few would disagree that the passage of these acts, which established the Scottish Parliament and National Assembly for Wales, was an important watershed in the United Kingdom’s majoritarian tradition. This milestone anniversary provides a timely opportunity to reflect on the extent to which devolution has delivered the ‘new politics’ that was widely anticipated; and in my recently published article in The British Journal of Politics and International Relations, I examine the extent to which devolution has ‘made a difference’ by systematically comparing the institutional architecture of the Scottish Parliament and National Assembly for Wales with that of Westminster.  Continue reading