科学政策

第一天项目

Public Value Evidence for Public Value Outcomes: Integrating Public Values into Federal Policymaking

10.19.22 | 8分钟阅读 | 文字Mahmud Farooque和Michelle Govani和Nicholas Weller

概括

联邦政府 - 像White House Year of Evidence for Action––has made a laudable push to ensure that policy decisions are grounded in empirical evidence. While these efforts acknowledge the importance of social, cultural and Indigenous knowledges, they do not draw adequate attention to the challenges of generating, operationalizing, and integrating such evidence in routine policy and decision making. In particular, these endeavors are generally poor at incorporating the living and lived experiences, knowledge, and values of the public. This evidence—which we call evidence about public values—provides important insights for decision making and contributes to better policy or program designs and outcomes.

联邦政府应扩大机构的能力collect and integrate evidence on public values into policy and decision making. Specifically, we propose that the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP):

1. Provide a directive on the importance of public value evidence.
2. 开发一个实施路线图，将公共价值证据整合到联邦运营中（例如，描述将其整合到联邦决策中的最佳实践，为联邦雇员开发技能建设机会）。

Challenge and Opportunity

关于公共价值的证据为政策和计划提供了信息和改善

最简单地说，关于公共价值观的证据是有关人们优先考虑，关心或考虑特定问题的信息，这可能与专家优先考虑的思想不同。它包括通过焦点小组，讨论，公民审查小组和基于社区的研究或公众舆论调查收集的数据。其中一些方法依赖于单向信息流（例如调查），而另一些方法则优先考虑政策制定者和参与公众之间的信息交换（例如审议）。

Agencies facing complex policymaking challenges可以利用有关公共价值观的证据 - 以及基于专家和评估的证据 - 确保决策真正为更广泛的公共利益服务。如果作为决策过程的一部分收集，有关公共价值的证据可以实时为政策目标和计划提供信息，包括何时成形或部署程序。

Evidence about public values within the federal government: three challenges to integration

To fully understand and use public values in policymaking, the U.S. government must first broadly address three challenges.

首先,联邦政府不sufficiently value evidence about public values when it researches and designs policy solutions. Federal employees often lack any directive or guidance from leadership that collecting evidence about public values is valuable or important to evidence-based decision making. Efforts like the White House Year of Evidence for Action seek to better integrate evidence into policy making. Yet––for many contexts and topics––scientific or evaluation-based evidence is just one type of evidence. The public’s wisdom, hopes, and perspectives play an important mediating factor in determining and achieving desired public outcomes. The following examples illustrate ways public value evidence can support federal decision making:

1. 实施气候干预技术的努力（例如。，太阳能工程）可能在科学界的证据中得到充分的基础。但是，同样的策略可能不会考虑美国人对（i）如何管理这种研究的多种价值观，（ii）应该开发这些技术的人，以及（iii）是否应该使用它们。Public values are imperative for such complex, socio-technical decisions if we are to make good on the Year of Evidence’s dual commitment to scientific integrity (including expanded concepts of expertise and evidence) and equity (better understanding of “what works, for whom, and under what circumstances”).
2. Evidence about the impacts of rising sea levels on national park infrastructure and protected features has历史上很紧张。为了承认游戏中社会环境的复杂性，公园领导力努力包括专家评估和与公众的参与，以自身的风险承受能力，以实现各种缓解措施。这帮助官员们优先考虑有限的资源，因为他们考虑了如何以及如何继续保护各种公园特征和人工制品的艰难决定。

Second, the federal government lacks effective mechanisms for collecting evidence about public values. Presently, public comment periods favor credentialed participants—advocacy groups, consultants, business groups, etc.—who possess established avenues for sharing their opinions and positions to policy makers. As a result, these credentialed participants shape policy and other experiences, voices, and inputs go unheard. While the general public can contribute to government programs through platforms likeChallenge.gov，有资格的参与者仍然倾向于主导这些过程。将公共价值收集到决策或研究的有效机制通常仅限于大学，地方政府和社区环境。这些方法包括participatorybudgeting，方法usableor共同制作的科学， 和参与性技术评估。其中一些方法已开发并应用于复杂的科学技术政策问题，包括气候变化和金博宝正规网址various emerging technologies。它们在联邦机构的使用更加有限。即使机构可能寻求收集公共价值，也可能会受到监管障碍的阻碍，例如《减少文书工作法》（PRA），这可能会限制由于潜在的长时间批准的时间表而限制公共价值，思想或其他投入并认为数据收集负担为公众。累积地，这些因素阻止了机构准确估算 - 并且适应公共反应。

Third, federal agencies face challenges integrating evidence about public values into policy making. These challenges can be rooted in the regulatory hurdles described above, difficulties integrating with existing processes, and unfamiliarity with the benefits of collecting evidence about public values. Fortunately,studies在政策制定者和机构中发现了特定的属性，这些属性允许实施和使用机制来捕获公共价值。这些属性包括：

1. 领导者优先考虑公众参与并帮助解决行政不确定性。
2. An agency culture responsive to broader public needs, concerns, and wants.
3. Agency staff familiar with mechanisms to capture public values and integrate them in the policy- and decision-making process. The latter can help address translation issues, deal with regulatory hurdles, and can better communicate the benefits of collecting public values with regard to agency needs. Unfortunately, many agencies do not have such staff, and there are no existing roadmaps or professional development programs to help build this capacity across agencies.

Aligning public values with current government policies promotes scientific integrity and equity

白宫的行动证据年有机会解决主要的挑战 - 即缺乏明确的方向，收集方案和证据整合策略 - 目前阻碍了公共价值观证据在联邦政府中广泛使用。我们下面的建议与证据年份的核心承诺非常一致，其中包括：

• A commitment to scientific integrity.复杂的问题需要扩展的专业知识和证据概念，以确保重要的细节和公众关注不会丢失或忽视。
• A commitment to equity.We have a better understanding of “what works, for whom, and under what circumstances” when we have ways of discerning and integrating public values into evidence-based decision making. Methods for integrating public values into decision making complement other emerging best practices––such as the co-creation of evaluation studies and including Indigenous knowledges and perspectives––in the policy making process.

此外，该提案与行动年度证据的目标保持一致，以“共享和使用研究支持的知识，以更好，更公平地为全美提高成果……”和“……制定新的策略和结构来为在联邦政府内部促进一致的基于证据的决策。”

行动计划

要将公共价值纳入联邦政策制定，白宫管理与预算办公室（OMB）和白宫科学技术政策办公室（OSTP）应：

1. 为机构制定一项高级指令，内容涉及收集公共价值作为为政策制定的一种证据形式的重要性。
2. Oversee the development of a roadmap for the integration of evidence about public values across government, including pathways for training federal employees.

建议1。OMB and OSTP should issue a high-level directive providing clear direction and strong backing for agencies to collect and integrate evidence on public values into their evidence-based decision-making procedures.

鉴于将公共价值证据纳入科学和技术政策以及OSTP参与促进基于证据的政策的努力的潜在实用性，OSTP是与OMB一起制定该指令的自然合作伙伴。该指令应清楚地将公共价值证据与当前的政策环境联系起来。如上所述，诸如基于证据的政策制定法案（证据法案）和白宫行动证据年的努力为收集和整合公共价值的证据提供了有力的理由。长期的政策 - 包括Crowdsourcing and Citizen Science Act––provide further context and guidance for the importance of collecting input from broad publics.

Recommendation 2.作为指令的一部分，或作为后续的一部分，OMB和OSTP应该监督开发路线图，以整合整个政府的公共价值的证据。

The roadmap should be developed in consultation with various federal stakeholders, such as members of the评估官员委员会, representatives from theEquitable Data Working Group，客户体验战略家以及来自政府内部和外部的相关概念和方法专家。

全面的路线图将包括以下组件：

• Appropriate contexts and uses for gathering and integrating public values as evidence.公众价值观时应收集我的问题s one where scientific or expert evidence is necessary, but not sufficient to address the question at hand. This may be due to (i) uncertainty, (ii) high levels of value disagreement, (iii) cases where the societal implications of a policy or program could be wide ranging, or (iv) situations where policy or program outcomes have inequitable impacts on certain communities.
• Specific approaches to collecting and integrating public values evidence, accompanied by illustrative case studies describing how the methods have been used.尽管存在各种衡量和应用公共价值证据的方法，但一些其他条件可以帮助取得成功。其中包括对社会科学方法的知识渊博以及公共价值投入的重要性；监管要求的清晰度；并从代理领导中获得买入。这些可能包括：招募和召集多样化的公共参与者的实践；促进这些参与者之间的交流；将公共价值观与科学或专家证据进行比较；并确保将公共价值转化为可行的政策解决方案。

• 为联邦雇员设计的潜在培训计划。这些培训计划的目的应该是培养可以将公共价值证据纳入美国决策的劳动力。这些培训的参与者应了解将有关公共价值观与其他类型的证据以及将证据收集和整合到政策和计划的策略的重要性。这些培训计划应通过学习者的代理机构或部门通过应用的试点项目来促进积极的学习。
• 指定一个负责改进方法和工具的中心，以将有关公共价值的证据整合到联邦决策中。This center could exist as a public-private partnership, a federally-funded research and development center, or an innovation lab¹在代理机构内部。该中心可以对新的循证方法和工具进行正在进行的研究，评估和试点计划。这将确保随着代理商收集和应用有关公共价值的证据，他们使用最新的专业知识和技术来做到这一点。

结论

Collecting evidence about the living and lived experiences, knowledge, and aspirations of the public can help inform policies and programs across government. While methods for collecting evidence about public values have proven effective, they have not been integrated into evidence-based policy efforts within the federal government. The integration of evidence about public values into policy making can promote the provision of broader public goods, elevate the perspectives of historically marginalized communities, and reveal policy or program directions different from those prioritized by experts. The proposed directive and roadmap––while only a first step––would help ensure the federal government considers, respects, and responds to our diverse nation’s values.