This has important implications for EBPM in that opinions and preferences appear to make their way into assessments of methodological reliability.
Again, this has profound implications for EBPM in that intuition based on experience and perceived knowledge and evidence might point in different policy directions, and overconfidence appears to make one tilt towards policy options unsubstantiated by evidence.
What this overview of recent finding shows is the great potential to unpack key factors in explaining how evidence is used and processed by drawing on a behavioural lens in EBPM scholarship.
There is an opportunity to take the Canadian public administration research field in that broad direction (Doberstein 2017b) and, I would argue, to put insights from behavioral and psychological methods to good use in studying EBPM, specifically.
In this paper, we theoretically and empirically study pilot projects to deepen understanding of how they can contribute to EBPM and which limitations and problems may arise when realizing EBPM.
Which factors and mechanisms influence the realization of EBPM through pilot projects?
We identify to what extent those pilot projects contributed to EBPM and we discuss factors and mechanisms influencing the realization of EBPM (section 5).
The analysis of pilot projects in relation to the realization of EBPM for this paper consists of three major steps.
Bearing in mind the importance of 'what works when' objective of EBPM (Solesbury 2001), we focus mainly on diffusion of knowledge gained in pilot projects.
The pilot project was initiated from the 'classical' EBPM point of view, meaning that this was the first application of a policy program and results were expected to provide the evidence of whether the innovation worked or not (Pawson and Tilley 1997, Cabinet Office 2003).
Third, we elicit factors and mechanisms of importance in the realization of EBPM from the pilot projects.
Similarly, we identify that pilot projects can be used for three different purposes in EBPM.