Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Pathways into policy: a study of the relationship between research, policy and government

By Aidan Wilcox, Alex Hirschfield and University of Huddersfield Applied Criminology Centre


The research presented in this report was conducted as part of the ESRC funded\ud scopic network. It aimed to study the inter-relationship between policy, research and\ud government with a view to making recommendations designed to enhance the\ud influence of research on policy.\ud The research involved a comparison of approaches to policy making in criminal\ud justice and healthcare, and comprised a review of the relevant literature as well as\ud interviews with 13 key policy makers in both fields.\ud The concept of ‘evidence based policy’ raises a number of interesting questions,\ud including: what kinds of evidence are used; what should the proper role of evidence\ud in policy be; what are the obstacles to adopting an evidence-based approach to\ud policy; how can the findings of research be made more policy relevant?, and; what\ud can researchers and policy makers do to achieve a more productive relationship?\ud These questions are addressed in this report

Topics: H1, HM
Publisher: University of Huddersfield
Year: 2007
OAI identifier:

Suggested articles


  1. (2005). A Guide to NICE London: NICE. Available online at: doi
  2. (2007). A Rapid Evidence Assessment of the Impact of Mentoring on Re-offending Home Office Online Report 11/07 Available online at: Kershaw,
  3. (2003). A Short History of Randomized Experiments in Criminology’, doi
  4. (2000). A Strategic Approach to Research and Development’ doi
  5. (2006). Annual Report and Accounts 2006/7 London: The Stationary Office.
  6. (2000). Assessing Correctional Rehabilitation: Policy, Practice and Prospects
  7. (2007). Available online at: (accessed 23
  8. (2001). Better Policy Making London: Cabinet Office.
  9. (2001). Bridging Research and Policy An International Workshop Funded by the UK
  10. (1984). Cognitive Simplification Processes in Strategic Decision doi
  11. (2003). Connecting with Users and Citizens London: Audit Commission.
  12. (1990). Crime and Accountability: Victim/offender Mediation in Practice London:
  13. (1990). Crime, Justice and Protecting the Public London,
  14. (1971). Criminal Statistics and Sociological Explanations of Crime’
  15. (2002). Criminology and Penal Policy: The Vital Role of Empirical Research’
  16. (1985). Designing for Car Security: Towards a Crime Free Car Crime Prevention Unit Paper No. 4 London: Home Office.
  17. (2007). Do not cite without authors’ permission © Wilcox and Hirschfield
  18. (2006). Doing without Knowing: Common Pitfalls in Crime Prevention’
  19. (2000). Editorial: Getting Research into Practice . doi
  20. (2000). Education: Realising the Potential’ doi
  21. (2000). Educational Inequalities and Education Action Zones’ in C. Pantazis and D. Gordon (eds) Tackling Inequalities: Where We Are Now and What Can be Done Bristol: doi
  22. (2001). Evaluation and Evidence-led Crime Reduction Policy and Practice’
  23. (2000). Evaluation in Complex Policy Systems’, Evaluation. doi
  24. (2000). Evidence and the Policy Process doi
  25. (2001). Evidence Based Policy: Proceed with doi
  26. (2001). Evidence Based Policy: Whence it Came and Where it's Going Working Paper No. 1 London: ERSC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice. Available online at: (accessed 23
  27. (2003). Evidence-based Youth Justice? Some Valuable Lessons from an Evaluation for the Youth Justice Board’, doi
  28. (2004). Evidence-Led Policy or Policycled Evidence? Cognitive Behavioural Programmes for Men who are Violent Towards Women’ doi
  29. (2002). Funding and Implementing Crime Reduction Initiatives RDS Online Report No 10/02. London: Home Office. Available online at: (checked 19
  30. (1976). IMPACT: Intensive Matched Probation and After-Care Treatment:
  31. (2003). Independent Advisory Group on Teenage Pregnancy (IAGTP) doi
  32. (2000). Influence or Irrelevance: Can Social Science Improve Government?
  33. (2004). Information Overload within the Health Care System: A Literature Review’ Health Information and Libraries doi
  34. (2000). Introducing Evidence-based Policy and Practice in Public Services’ doi
  35. (2004). Investing to Deliver: Reviewing the Implementation of the UK Crime Reduction Programme London: Home Office.
  36. (2007). Ipsos MORI Political Monitor doi
  37. (2005). Is your Evidence Robust enough? doi
  38. (2001). Joined up but Fragmented: Contradiction, Ambiguity and Ambivalence at the Heart of New Labour's “Third Way”’
  39. (1974). Judgement Under Uncertainty:
  40. (2000). Learning if Policy Will Work: The Case of New Deal for Disabled People’, doi
  41. (2001). Learning to Listen: Core Principles for the Involvement of Children and Young People London:
  42. (2005). Lifetime effects: The High/Scope Perry Preschool study through age 40. doi
  43. (1999). Modernising Government London: Cabinet Office. Available online at: (accessed 5th
  44. (1979). New Findings, New Views: A Note of Caution Regarding Sentencing Reform’,
  45. (1985). Offending Behaviour: Skills and Stratagems for Going Straight London: doi
  46. (2001). Penal Policy and Criminological Challenges in the New Millennium’, The Australian and New Zealand doi
  47. (1959). Penal Practice in a Changing Society Cmnd 645
  48. (1986). Planning, Need and Scarcity London: Allen and Unwin. doi
  49. (1991). Policy Research? Data, Ideas or Arguments?’
  50. (2001). Power, Knowledge and ‘What Works’ doi
  51. (2004). Pretend it Works: Evidence and Governance in the Evaluation of the Reducing Burglary Initiative’, doi
  52. (1997). Preventing Crime: What Works, What Doesn't, What's Promising doi
  53. (1998). Principled Sentencing (2nd ed.)
  54. (1985). Property Marking: A Deterrent to Burglary? Crime Prevention Unit Paper 3 London: Home Office.
  55. (1993). Qualitative Interviewing’ in N. Gilbert (ed) Researching Social Life London:
  56. (2005). Qualitative Research and the Evidence Base of Policy: Insights from doi
  57. (2005). Rapid Assessment of Powers to Close ‘Crack Houses’ Home Office Development and Practice Report 42 Available online at:
  58. (1998). Reconviction Research: A 50 Year Review’,
  59. (1978). Reforms as Experiments’ doi
  60. (1990). Research and Policy: Is There a Link? The Psychologist
  61. (1975). Residential Treatment and its Effects on Delinquency Home
  62. (2005). Science and Innovation Strategy 2005-08 London: Home Office.
  63. (1985). Sentencing Theory, Law and Practice
  64. (1998). Social Policy and Social Enquiry: Reopening Debate’ doi
  65. (1977). Social Roles, Social Control and Biases in Social Perception Processes’ doi
  66. (1974). Social Work in Prisons: An Experiment in the Use of Extended Contact with Prisoners Home
  67. (2001). Some Considerations on the Validity of Evidence-based Practice doi
  68. (1998). The Cochrane Collaboration: Evaluation of Health Care and Services using Systematic Reviews of the Results of Randomized Controlled Trials’ Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology doi
  69. (2001). The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society Oxford: doi
  70. (2000). The Economic and Social Costs of Crime Home Office Research Study 217 London: Home Office. doi
  71. (1976). The Effectiveness of Sentencing Home
  72. (2003). The Foresters' Dilemma: The Influence of Police Research on Police Practice’ in L. Zedner and A. Ashworth (eds) The Criminological Foundations of Penal Policy: Essays in Honour of Roger Hood Oxford:
  73. (2003). The Home Office and Random Allocation Experiments’, doi
  74. (2000). The Limits of Positivism Revisited Paper presented at Theorising Social Work Conference
  75. (2007). The Politics of Criminological Research inR.
  76. (2000). The Production, Mediation and Use of Professional Knowledge Among Teachers and Doctors, A Comparative Analysis’
  77. (1986). The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending. doi
  78. (2000). The Relevance of Systematic Reviews to Educational Policy and Practice’ Oxford Review of Education doi
  79. (2006). The Reversal Test: Eliminating Status Quo Bias in doi
  80. (2005). The Validity of Reconviction Studies. DPhil Thesis.
  81. (1994). Victim Meets Offender Monsey:
  82. (2002). Viewfinder: A Policy Maker’s Guide to Public Involvement London: Cabinet Office.
  83. (1986). What Can We Learn From Implementation Studies?’ In
  84. (1999). What is Evidence-based Education?’ doi
  85. (1974). What works? - Questions and Answers about Prison Reform’,
  86. (1991). with the assistance of
  87. (2001). Youth Offending Teams, Partnerships and Work with Victims of Crime’, doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.