A purple patch for evidence-based health policy?
- Publisher:
- CSIRO Publishing
- Publication Type:
- Journal Article
- Citation:
- Australian Health Review, 2021, 45, (1), pp. 74-76
- Issue Date:
- 2021-01-01
Open Access
Copyright Clearance Process
- Recently Added
- In Progress
- Open Access
This item is open access.
Full metadata record
Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Cormack, M | |
dc.contributor.author | Boxall, A-M | |
dc.contributor.author | Hullick, C | |
dc.contributor.author | Booth, M | |
dc.contributor.author | Gruen, RL | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2022-02-22T01:50:18Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-01-12 | |
dc.date.available | 2022-02-22T01:50:18Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2021-01-01 | |
dc.identifier.citation | Australian Health Review, 2021, 45, (1), pp. 74-76 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1449-8944 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1449-8944 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10453/154760 | |
dc.description.abstract | The global focus on nation states' responses to the COVID-19 pandemic has rightly highlighted the importance of science and evidence as the basis for policy action. Those with a lifelong passion for evidence-based policy (EBP) have lauded Australia's and other nations' policy responses to COVID-19 as a breakthrough moment for the cause. This article reflects on the complexity of the public policy process, the perspectives of its various actors, and draws on Alford's work on the Blue, Red and Purple zones to propose a more nuanced approach to advocacy for EBP in health. We contend that the pathway for translation of research evidence into routine clinical practice is relatively linear, in contrast to the more complex course for translation of evidence to public policy - much to the frustration of health researchers and EBP advocates. Cairney's description of the characteristics of successful policy entrepreneurs offers useful guidance to advance EBP and we conclude with proposing some practical mechanisms to support it. Finally, we recommend that researchers and policy makers spend more time in the Purple zone to enable a deeper understanding of, and mutual respect for, the unique contributions made by research, policy and political actors to sound public policy. | |
dc.format | ||
dc.language | eng | |
dc.publisher | CSIRO Publishing | |
dc.relation.ispartof | Australian Health Review | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | 10.1071/ah21016 | |
dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | |
dc.subject | 1110 Nursing, 1117 Public Health and Health Services, 1605 Policy and Administration | |
dc.subject.classification | Public Health | |
dc.subject.mesh | Australia | |
dc.subject.mesh | COVID-19 | |
dc.subject.mesh | Evidence-Based Practice | |
dc.subject.mesh | Guidelines as Topic | |
dc.subject.mesh | Health Policy | |
dc.subject.mesh | Humans | |
dc.subject.mesh | Pandemics | |
dc.subject.mesh | Public Health | |
dc.subject.mesh | SARS-CoV-2 | |
dc.subject.mesh | Humans | |
dc.subject.mesh | Public Health | |
dc.subject.mesh | Health Policy | |
dc.subject.mesh | Australia | |
dc.subject.mesh | Guidelines as Topic | |
dc.subject.mesh | Evidence-Based Practice | |
dc.subject.mesh | Pandemics | |
dc.subject.mesh | COVID-19 | |
dc.subject.mesh | SARS-CoV-2 | |
dc.title | A purple patch for evidence-based health policy? | |
dc.type | Journal Article | |
utslib.citation.volume | 45 | |
utslib.location.activity | Australia | |
utslib.for | 1110 Nursing | |
utslib.for | 1117 Public Health and Health Services | |
utslib.for | 1605 Policy and Administration | |
pubs.organisational-group | /University of Technology Sydney | |
pubs.organisational-group | /University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health | |
pubs.organisational-group | /University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health/Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation | |
utslib.copyright.status | open_access | * |
pubs.consider-herdc | false | |
dc.date.updated | 2022-02-22T01:50:17Z | |
pubs.issue | 1 | |
pubs.publication-status | Published | |
pubs.volume | 45 | |
utslib.citation.issue | 1 |
Abstract:
The global focus on nation states' responses to the COVID-19 pandemic has rightly highlighted the importance of science and evidence as the basis for policy action. Those with a lifelong passion for evidence-based policy (EBP) have lauded Australia's and other nations' policy responses to COVID-19 as a breakthrough moment for the cause. This article reflects on the complexity of the public policy process, the perspectives of its various actors, and draws on Alford's work on the Blue, Red and Purple zones to propose a more nuanced approach to advocacy for EBP in health. We contend that the pathway for translation of research evidence into routine clinical practice is relatively linear, in contrast to the more complex course for translation of evidence to public policy - much to the frustration of health researchers and EBP advocates. Cairney's description of the characteristics of successful policy entrepreneurs offers useful guidance to advance EBP and we conclude with proposing some practical mechanisms to support it. Finally, we recommend that researchers and policy makers spend more time in the Purple zone to enable a deeper understanding of, and mutual respect for, the unique contributions made by research, policy and political actors to sound public policy.
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Download statistics for the last 12 months
Not enough data to produce graph