Schweber, L; Lees, T and Torriti, J (2015) Framing evidence: Policy design for the zero-carbon home. Building Research & Information, 43(4), pp. 420-434. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
In 2006 the UK Government announced a move to zero-carbon homes by 2016. The demand posed a major challenge to policy-makers and construction professionals entailing a protracted process of policy design. The task of giving content to this target is used to explore the role of evidence in the policy process. Whereas much literature on policy and evidence treats evidence as an external input, independent of politics, this paper explores the ongoing mutual constitution of both. Drawing on theories of policy framing and the sociology of classification, the account follows the story of a policy for Zero Carbon Homes from the parameters and values used to specify the target. Particular attention is given to the role of regulatory impact assessments (RIAs) and to the creation of a new policy venue, the Zero Carbon Hub. The analysis underlines the way in which the choices about how to model and measure the aims potentially transforms them, the importance of policy venues for transparency and the role of RIAs in the authorization of particular definitions. A more transparent, open approach to policy formulation is needed in which the framing of evidence is recognized as an integral part of the policy process.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | building regulations; energy policy; evidence-based policy; net-zero; policy design; policy formation; public policy; regulatory impact assessments; zero carbon |
| Index terms: | building regulation, politics, evidence-based policy, framing, energy policy, policy design, sociology, drawing, impact assessment, evidence, construction professional, policy formation, policy process, transparency, public policy |
| Subjects: | political science, regulatory law, professional development, social theory, technical documentation, public policy, conceptual models, policy studies, evaluation and assessment methods, value management |
| Topics: | Legal Issues, Design Practice, Project Management, Research Practice, Information Management, Governance |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCTA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here