A Framework to Decide ?What Works? in Prevention Policy
Professor Paul Cairney and Emily St Denny of University of Stirling and ESRC Scottish Centre on Constitutional Change outline the decision-making processes in prevention policy in a report to the Scottish Government. Key Points include: - The practical meaning of ?prevention? is not clear. It can be interpreted in markedly different ways for a range of different audiences. Issues include: defining the type of prevention; identifying the root causes of problems; the ethics of early intervention in each case; the incentive to pursue incremental, as well as decisive, shifts in policy; and, the balance between aims - such as to reduce inequalities or reduce costs. - A clear definition and set of clear aims aids engagement with policymaking partners. It helps produce a common and detailed set of expectations. It helps maximise policy learning from pilot projects and international schemes. Without a clear set of aims, we have no reference point to identify projects which have a comparable experience from which to draw lessons. Nor do we have no way to gauge success and failure in comparable projects. - To a large extent, we can identify a clear Scottish Government approach to prevention, even if it does not always define it. More importantly, the National Performance Framework provides a way to define and measure the success of prevention (and other) policies. This aids a systematic search for evidence of what works.
