|
Speaking from perspective of
Social Researchers and the wider analytical community working within
the Scottish Executive who are responsible for providing the evidence
base to policy.
Quantitative data of the type Peter Elias has described is a core part
of that evidence base.
In response - few words around analytical planning in
the Executive and our own data infrastructure, and some reflections on
future challenges.
1. The demands of policy colleagues for robust evidence
to inform policy development, monitoring and evaluation have become more complex
and challenging in recent years as policies themselves seek
to address more complex and challenging problems. (This is going
to become even more apparent with post-election restructuring where senior
civil servants cross cutting roles working across Ministerial portfolios.)
Analytical capacity within the Executive has grown and
changed in response to these demands, including restructuring so
that most researchers now work within Analytical Service Divisions (ASDs)
in policy departments alongside statisticians and economists to provide
a more co-ordinated service.
Another way we have responded to this challenge - and
one that is particularly relevant to today's discussion - is
the creation of a new 3 year Strategy for Analytical Services designed
to increase the impact of all our work on policy formulation
and delivery.
Part of the Strategy deals with increasing the quality of analytical
services and products through continuous improvement
in data and methodology and the Action Plan attached to the
Strategy sets out how we will achieve this.
The sort of ideas set out in the National Strategy accord with our own
thinking on improved analytical planning. Our size and structures
make this a more practical prospect - unlike Whitehall.
2. I agree that it's important that we get the data infrastructure right.
We have our own substantial set of National Statistics.
Government on-line data - ONS, SCROL, GROS,
SE Stats, SIMD, Neighbourhood Stats
We invest heavily in a series of major household surveys including
the Scottish Household Survey, Scottish Health Survey, Scottish Crime & Victimisation
Survey, Scottish House Condition Survey and use data provided by a wide
range of UK or GB level surveys e.g. Labour Force Survey and as part
of our forward look we are starting to think about how these might be
better co-ordinated .
However we need to think about whether these meet all our current needs
and whether we have the right processes in place for identifying strategic
evidence gaps.
As an example … In recent preparatory work for the next
Spending Review where the rationale for our
policies and their impact on outcomes for the people of Scotland has
been assessed, a number of evidence gaps or weaknesses emerged
particularly around long term outcomes and policy evaluation.
Also, as I mentioned at the outset, the issue of increasing
complexity in policy requiring cross-cutting, often
multidisciplinary approaches, requires us to look afresh at this.
Priority topics identified in the National Strategy illustrate this
and chime with some of our current priorities - for example Ageing - recently
published All Our Futures - Planning for Scotland
with an Ageing Population backed up by a substantial evidence base.
Early Childhood - GIRFEC programme of work. Co-ordinated
service delivery requires understanding the multiple and complex needs
of vulnerable children and their families.
The Executive's Futures work identifies a long
list of challenges for Scotland - things like
-
inequality particularly in health and education
-
poverty and economic inactivity - especially among ‘hard
to reach' groups
-
Scotland's changing demographic make-up (particularly fertility,
migration and ageing); and
So we need to look beyond the statistical time
series and cross -sectional surveys to better understand
these challenges and develop responses.
One area longitudinal research. We have made a start on this with the
establishment last year of cross departmental Longitudinal Research & Analysis
Network
Recognise need for improved co-ordination but also championing longitudinal
research within the Executive.
I'd like to end with a slightly cautionary note on capacity.
The Data Strategy makes an important point about skills and knowledge
to analyse and interpret data (training)
Argue that the main problem may not be provision but capacity (Ref ESRC/SFC
project on quantitative capacity in social science).
Now is a good time to look ahead need to look ahead and I have briefly
sketched some activity in the Executive.
Also recognise we need to make progress in a number of areas identified
in the Strategy on admin data linkages (welcome case studies as a way
to make progress), business data, international data (welcome review) - but
these are best done at UK level
Data Strategy is a helpful framework and starting point.
(Published Online: 25 June 2007)
< return to introduction page
 back to top
|
