The use of evidence by public authorities in the EU’s smallest member state

This paper explores the use of evidence in formulating public policies in the context of the EU’s smallest member state, Malta. Not much has been written about the use of evidence in small jurisdictions. This context is characterised by policy transfer, limited resources dedicated to research and public officers who often are responsible for a myriad of areas as opposed to a specialised segment within a policy field. The small size of the country facilitates proximity with the political actors who inevitably are exposed to the various conflicting interests, often vociferously expressed by constituted bodies and interest groups, that are very present and evident in Malta’s policy-making environment. This context places particular challenges for the use of evidence for policy-making. This raises the question ‘What procedures, structures and conditions underpin the use of evidence by public authorities in a small EU member state?’ This paper identifies the systems, structures and conditions wherein evidence is used to formulate policy. Past circumstances of evidence use and existing procedures and structures are examined. Five policy fields, namely tourism, environment, transport, enterprise and health were explored. These fields can be categorised as market-oriented or as science-oriented. Interviews with bureaucratic actors, primarily past and current policy directors within ministries and/or authorities, were conducted to generate narratives about the use of evidence for policy-making in their respective fields. Thematic analysis will be carried out. Themes will be identified and patterns in the public authorities’ choices relating to the use of evidence will be detected. The research will explore whether (i) political actors and bureaucrats responsible for science-oriented policy fields tend towards evidence-based policy-making more than market-oriented policy areas; (ii) in the presence of high risk and uncertainty when addressing a policy issue, more evidence is sought to inform the policy decision; (iii) once evidence is shared, expert bodies and interest groups demand it if it supports their cause; (iv) where structures for research are in place there is a greater tendency to use evidence; and (v) systems facilitate the sharing of knowledge, making the use of evidence more timely. The findings will be examined against the three theoretical models of evidence use by public authorities: the rational model, the bureaucratic model and the government politics model. The research may identify procedures, structures and conditions which reinforce these models. Theoretical conjectures might emerge from this research. This paper aims to contribute to the existing literature on the use of evidence for policymaking as it focuses on a small jurisdiction, exploring what characterises the use of evidence and providing some empirical evidence about what facilitates and hinders the use of evidence in such a context. Secondly, this paper provides a comparative assessment about the use of evidence in different policy areas distinguishing between science-oriented and market-oriented policy fields. Thirdly, a contribution to the theoretical dimension of the debate on the use of evidence might emerge in the form of a theoretical conjecture relating to the models of evidence use.