Millegipärast püüan vältida sõna teaduslik. See tundub kuidagi ülepingutatud või -tähtsustatud. Tegemist on lihtsalt süsteemse, metodoloogiliselt asjakohase ja teoreetilisest lähtepunktist mõtestatud teadmusega. Aga, olgu, mis seal ikka.

Siinviidatud vabalevis olev tekst on väärtuslik lugemine nendele, kes mõtlevad otsustamisele, poliitikakujundamisele ning teaduslikult loodud teadmusele. Lisaks võiks see tekst huvi pakkuda tudengitele-uurijatele ka näiteks metoodika ja andmete kogumise aspektist.

Kontekstiks:

From the start of the pandemic, governments were expected to play the leading role in crisis management. They were expected to manage the health risks and mitigate the socio-economic impacts (Gill & Dalton, 2022).

Kolm kriisijuhtimise elementi:

A growing body of policy literature examining various aspects of how governments have handled the COVID-19 crisis, suggests that at least three elements are critical for effective crisis management: (1) coordination at multiple levels of government (Boin et al., 2017; Christensen et al., 2016); (2) timely access to expert and diverse knowledge, advice and information (Donovan et al. 2020); and (3) effective and transparent communication to the population (Comfort et al. 2020, Mintrom & O’Connor, 2020).

Nõunikesüsteem:

Donovan (2021) and Head (2010) emphasize the need for policy advisory systems to include a diverse range of perspectives, disciplines and fields of expertise. They identify important forms of knowledge other than rigorous scientific research – for example, practitioner expertise, stakeholder experience, and political judgement concerning feasibility and support.

Julgustav näide metoodikast:

Firstly we reviewed recent literature on policymaking and expert advice during COVID-19 through Google Scholar and Web of Science.

Lugemishuvi suurendamiseks:

First of all, this article has shown how two federal countries’ institutional arrangements influenced the crisis response by national and sub-national leaders. […] Secondly, the different historical institutional framework of both countries has influenced how the consideration of relevant expert knowledge and perspectives was enabled. […] Thirdly, the different modes of embedding expertise within the institutional framework influenced the way measures were communicated towards the public.

Easton, M., De Paepe, J., Evans, P., W Head, B., & Yarnold, J. (2022). Embedding expertise for policy responses to COVID-19: comparing decision-making structures in two federal democraciesPublic Organization Review, 1-18.