Understanding how to improve the dissemination of scientific knowledge among political decision makers is crucial for economic and social progress. Despite global efforts to encourage the adoption of evidence-informed policies (OECD, 2020), a significant gap persists between the available evidence and the policies that are ultimately implemented (European Commission, 2022).

For such policies to be implemented, it is fundamental that the evidence reaches the decision makers, who are rarely in direct contact with scientists. This task of disseminating research findings is often carried out by think tanks, the media or academic institutions. In some cases, these institutions have – or are perceived to have – ideological affiliations; in others they do not. This poses two crucial questions: a) How is the adoption of evidence-informed policies affected by the ideological alignment between the institutions that disseminate the research – the informers of public policy – and the political decision makers who receive it?, and b) Are academic institutions without a clearly defined ideology the most effective when it comes to promoting evidence-informed policies?

In order to answer these questions, the researchers worked in collaboration with two Spanish think tanks of opposing ideologies (FAES and Fundación Alternativas), two newspapers of opposing ideologies (El Mundo and ElDiario.es), and a foreign university of recognised international prestige (London School of Economics and Political Science: LSE), without any clearly defined ideology. The main experiment consisted in sending local decision makers in 5,678 Spanish tourist municipalities a summary of the results of a study that shows that if certain changes are made to the Wikipedia page on the municipality concerned, an increase in tourist expenditure may occur in that municipality (Hinnosaar et al., 2022).
 

The decision makers received, at random, the same information, but disseminated through different institutions: a) a newspaper with the same ideology as their own; b) a newspaper with an ideology opposing their own; c) a think tank with the same ideology; d) a think tank with an opposing ideology; e) a foreign university, and f) no information. To understand how the alignment between the ideology of the information provider and the channel used (newspaper article vs. policy brief) affects the adoption of the recommended policy, the study compares whether changes are made to the Wikipedia page on the municipalities that receive information from the various different institutions.

Political decision makers who receive information from think tanks or media with the same ideology as their own are 65% more likely to adopt the recommended policy than those who do not receive this information.

Receiving information in the form of a policy brief from the London School of Economics and Political Science has an effect that is equivalent to approximately half that of receiving it from an ideologically affine think tank, although the effect is not statistically significant. In contrast, receiving information from a think tank or newspaper with an ideology in opposition to that of the decision maker does not increase the probability of the recommended policy being adopted. Lastly, the channel used to inform does not appear to be a determining factor: a newspaper article and a policy brief have almost identical effects on the probability of changes being made to the Wikipedia page.

The policy implementation process can be divided into three stages. In the first stage, decision makers seek information about the effectiveness of a public policy through the available evidence. In the second stage, if they consider the information to be trustworthy, they may modify their beliefs regarding the effectiveness of this public policy. And in the third stage, they may make the decision to implement the policy. This last stage might involve aspects that are unrelated to the effectiveness of the policy, such as party discipline, career development or other aspects of political economy.
At what point of the process does the ideology of the institution that supplies the information affect the adoption of public policies? On the basis of information about clicks on the links sent to provide information, the experiment suggests that decision makers seem to expose themselves equally to information coming from someone with the same ideology as to that coming from someone with an opposing ideology. In other words, ideological alignment does not affect exposure to the information.

To investigate the next step – that is, to what extent ideological alignment affects the trust decision makers place in the scientific evidence – an online experiment was conducted involving more than 1,600 local decision makers in Spanish municipalities. The experiment consisted of asking them about their beliefs regarding the effectiveness of a public policy before and after providing them with information about the results of a study evaluating its impact. Also in this case, the ideology of the institution providing the information varied. The results show that when the information is conveyed by an institution with the same ideology or a prestigious academic institution, rather than an institution with an opposing ideology, local decision makers are more likely to trust the results of the study.

Lastly, by comparing both experiments it is possible to analyse the last step: what leads decision makers to implement the policy? The study reveals that, although the trust placed in the scientific evidence is similar when the informer is an academic institution or an institution with the same ideology as the person concerned, this trust does not result in a similar effect when it comes to implementing the policy, the effect being greater when the generator of the policy is of the same ideology. This supports the idea that elements associated with the ideology of those who provide the information are also crucial in this final step.

For scientific evidence to be able to guide public policies, research results must be conveyed to those responsible for making those policies. This task of dissemination is carried out by think tanks, the media and other institutions that bridge the gap between academia and politics. The results of this study indicate that the ideology of the informer matters: think tanks and media with a clearly defined ideology can play an important role when it comes to disseminating the results of a research study among political decision makers with the same ideology, although they may have the opposite effect on those with an opposing ideology. The results also show that academic institutions have a more limited capacity to foster evidence-informed policies, despite their influence on the opinion of political decision makers. Understanding these issues is crucial for designing effective institutions that are capable of bridging the gap between politics and the academic world.

This study contributes to the debate around how to improve science communication. In a context where international institutions and governments invest resources and create institutions to promote evidence-informed policy making, designing institutions that are capable of disseminating this evidence effectively will be crucial to improve the adoption of such policies in a setting of growing political polarisation.

COMISIÓN EUROPEA (2022): Staff working document - Supporting and connecting policymaking
in the Member States with scientific research. 

HINNOSAAR, M.; T. HINNOSAAR; M. KUMMER; O. SLIVKO (2021): «Wikipedia matters», Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, vol. 32(3).  

OCDE (2020): Building Capacity for Evidence-Informed Policy-Making, Public Governance Reviews.