Course Description
The year 2020 has been like no other. The global spread of SARS-CoV-2 and the resulting respiratory disease COVID-19 has kept the world on tenterhooks, with no end to the pandemic in sight. The virus poses an extraordinary challenge to society, the economy and politics. Governments were quick to react. On the one hand, various measures were introduced to combat the resulting health threats. On the other hand, countries adopted aid packages aimed at countering the negative secondary effects of the pandemic and the health measures on the economy, society and the environment. At the same time, many governments have established scientific advisory councils to facilitate evidence-based policymaking (Cairney 2020). The purpose of these bodies is not only to help them understand the virus, but also to advise policymakers on how to make the right decisions in the face of the pandemic. Although science plays an important role in contemporary policymaking, evidence-informed policymaking has been challenged following the success of many populist movements and the possible onset of a post-truth era (Head & Banerjee 2020). Despite recent developments, science seems to have made a comeback during the COVID-19 pandemic. This course aims to enhance students' understanding of evidence-based policy making, scientific advice and crisis management from a scientific perspective. The course will discuss not only the recent Covid-19 crisis, but also other crises such as the climate change, the Eurozone crisis, and the rise of artificial intelligence.

Learning Outcomes
At the end of the course, students should …
• … understand the role of science in politics;
• … be capable to understand how political decisions are formed in times of crisis;
• … get familiar with most recent literature in the field of knowledge utilization;
• … understand and distinguish relevant concepts and tools in order to study the political making process;
• … apply these concepts and tools when analyzing and evaluating evidence-informed policy making.

Teaching Approach
The approach for this course will be a combination of lectures, readings, and discussions. Each session begins with a lecture that introduces the topic and key concepts. After the lecture, students will discuss the assigned readings that explore the topic in greater depth, so students must come to class prepared to discuss the text. During the discussion of each session, students are encouraged to share their perspectives and engage in critical thinking and analysis of the readings and course materials. The professor will facilitate the discussion and provide additional context and insight as needed. The course will also include opportunities for small group work and collaborative learning. For example, students will be assigned to small groups to analyze and present a particular aspect of regional identity or federalism. Assessment in this course will be based on a combination of participation in class discussions, an essay, and a written exam.

Evaluation Methods
The students’ grade will be composed of three pillars:
1. Class participation (20%)
2. Research essay (30%)
3. Written Exam (50%)
A mid-term grade will be communicated on the basis of the essay and the class participation.

Course Plan
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Session 1: Introduction
• The Policy Orientation
• The Concept of Knowledge
• Policy Sciences of Democracy
Compulsory Reading: Lasswell, H. D. (1951). The policy orientation. In D. Lerner & H. D. Lasswell (Eds.). The Policy Sciences. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press: 3-15.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Session 2: Understanding Science and Politics
• The use of social science
• Research use
• Political use
Compulsory Reading: Weiss, C. H. (1995). The haphazard connection: social science and public policy. International Journal of Educational Research, 23(2), 137-150.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Session 3: Evidence-Informed Policy Making
• From evidence-based to evidence-informed policy making
• Institutionalization of evidence
• Relationships, Communication, and Brokering
Compulsory Reading: Head, B. W. (2016). Toward more “evidence‐informed” policy making? Public Administration Review, 76(3), 472-484.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Session 4: Knowledge Use and Policy Learning
• Use of knowledge
• Political and policy learning
Compulsory Reading: Bundi, P., & Trein, P. (2022). Evaluation use and learning in public policy. Policy Sciences, 55(2), 283-309.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Session 5: Science Advisory Boards
• Policy advisory systems
• Science and political needs
• Science use in Germany, Switzerland, and Italy during Covid-19
Compulsory Reading: Hadorn, S., Sager, F., Mavrot, C., Malandrino, A., & Ege, J. (2022). Evidence-based policymaking in times of acute crisis: Comparing the use of scientific knowledge in Germany, Switzerland, and Italy. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 63(2), 359-382.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Session 6: Populism and Post-truth Politics
• Fake news and conspiracy theories
• Alternative facts
• Reorienting science-based policy expertise
Compulsory Reading: Fischer, F. (2022). Post-Truth Populism and Scientific Expertise: Climate and Covid Policies from Trump to Biden. International Review of Public Policy, 4(4: 1).
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Session 7: Science and Crisis Management
• Decision-making during black swan events
• Information asymmetry and processing when making decisions
• Making sense of information
Compulsory Reading: Phillips, W., Roehrich, J. K., & Kapletia, D. (2023). Responding to information asymmetry in crisis situations: innovation in the time of the COVID-19 pandemic. Public Management Review, 25(1), 175-198.
Session 8: Technocratic Attitudes
• From Technocracy to Technocratic Attitudes
• Technocratic, Populist, and Democratic Attitudes
Compulsory Reading: Bertsou, E., & Caramani, D. (2022). People haven't had enough of experts: Technocratic attitudes among citizens in nine European democracies. American Journal of Political Science, 66(1), 5-23.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Session 9: Health Crisis: The Covid-19 Pandemic
• Social context
• Science communications
• Individual and collective interest
Compulsory Reading: Bavel, J. J. V., et al. (2020). Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(5), 460-471.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Session 10: Environmental Crisis: Climate Change
• Scientific consensus messaging approach
• Public opinion and behavior
• In and Out-Groups
Compulsory Reading: Bayes, R., Bolsen, T., & Druckman, J. N. (2023). A research agenda for climate change communication and public opinion: The role of scientific consensus messaging and beyond. Environmental Communication, 17(1), 16-34.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Session 11: Economic Crisis: The Eurozone Crisis
• How to learn
• The European Semester
Compulsory Reading: Dunlop, C. A., & Radaelli, C. M. (2016). Policy learning in the Eurozone crisis: Modes, power and functionality. Policy Sciences, 49, 107-124.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Session 12: Information Crisis (?): Artificial Intelligence
• What is Artificial Intelligence
• Artificial Intelligence in Government
• Artificial Intelligence and Public Policy
Compulsory Reading: Valle-Cruz, D., Alejandro Ruvalcaba-Gomez, E., Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Ignacio Criado, J. (2019, June). A review of artificial intelligence in government and its potential from a public policy perspective. Proceedings of the 20th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: 91-99.

Bibliography
Adam, C., Steinebach, Y., & Knill, C. (2018). Neglected challenges to evidence-based policy-making: the problem of policy accumulation. Policy Sciences, 51(3), 269-290.
Baghramian, M. and Croce, M. (2021). Experts, public policy and the question of trust (pp.446-457). In: Hannon, M., & de Ridder, J. (Eds.). The Routledge Handbook of Political Epistemology. Routledge.
Bavel, J. J. V., et al. (2020). Using social and behavioural science to support COVID-19 pandemic response. Nature Human Behaviour, 4(5), 460-471.
Bayes, R., Bolsen, T., & Druckman, J. N. (2023). A research agenda for climate change communication and public opinion: The role of scientific consensus messaging and beyond. Environmental Communication, 17(1), 16-34.
Bertsou, E. (2020). Bring in the experts? Citizen preferences for independent experts in political decision‐making processes. European Journal of Political Research.
Bertsou, E., & Caramani, D. (2022). People haven't had enough of experts: Technocratic attitudes among citizens in nine European democracies. American Journal of Political Science, 66(1), 5-23.
Bourgeois, I., & Cousins, J. B. (2013). Understanding dimensions of organizational evaluation capacity. American Journal of Evaluation, 34(3), 299-319.
Bundi, P., & Trein, P. (2022). Evaluation use and learning in public policy. Policy Sciences, 55(2), 283-309.
Dunlop, C. A., & Radaelli, C. M. (2016). Policy learning in the Eurozone crisis: Modes, power and functionality. Policy Sciences, 49, 107-124.
Fischer, F. (2022). Post-Truth Populism and Scientific Expertise: Climate and Covid Policies from Trump to Biden. International Review of Public Policy, 4(4: 1).
Cairney, P. (2020). The UK government’s COVID-19 policy: Assessing evidence-informed policy analysis in real time. British Politics, 1-27.
Gilley, B. (2017). Technocracy and democracy as spheres of justice in public policy. Policy Sciences, 50(1), 9-22.
Hadorn, S., Sager, F., Mavrot, C., Malandrino, A., & Ege, J. (2022). Evidence-based policymaking in times of acute crisis: Comparing the use of scientific knowledge in Germany, Switzerland, and Italy. Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 63(2), 359-382.
Head, B. W. (2016). Toward more “evidence‐informed” policy making? Public Administration Review, 76(3), 472-484.
Head, B. W., & Banerjee, S. (2020). Policy expertise and use of evidence in a populist era. Australian Journal of Political Science, 55(1), 110-121.
Howlett, M. (2009). Policy analytical capacity and evidence‐based policy‐making: Lessons from Canada. Canadian Public Administration, 52(2), 153-175.
Lasswell, H. D. (1951). The policy orientation. In D. Lerner & H. D. Lasswell (Eds.). The Policy Sciences. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press: 3-15.
Janssen, M., & van der Voort, H. (2020). Agile and adaptive governance in crisis response: Lessons from the COVID-19 pandemic. International Journal of Information Management, 55, 102180.
Lancaster, K., Rhodes, T., & Rosengarten, M. (2020). Making evidence and policy in public health emergencies: Lessons from COVID-19 for adaptive evidence-making and intervention. Evidence and Policy, 16(3), 477-490.
Pattyn, V., & Bouterse, M. (2020). Explaining use and non-use of policy evaluations in a mature evaluation setting. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 7(1), 1-9.
Phillips, W., Roehrich, J. K., & Kapletia, D. (2023). Responding to information asymmetry in crisis situations: innovation in the time of the COVID-19 pandemic. Public Management Review, 25(1), 175-198.
Valle-Cruz, D., Alejandro Ruvalcaba-Gomez, E., Sandoval-Almazan, R., & Ignacio Criado, J. (2019, June). A review of artificial intelligence in government and its potential from a public policy perspective. Proceedings of the 20th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research: 91-99.
Weiss, C. H. (1995). The haphazard connection: social science and public policy. International Journal of Educational Research, 23(2), 137-150.

Last updated: May 10, 2023