专题:智库循证决策与国际比较研究

科学决策的“默契”与“共识”:英国循证决策治理体系建构与演化*

展开
  • (1.徐州医科大学管理学院   江苏徐州   221004)
    (2.徐州医科大学卫生健康中国式现代化研究院   江苏徐州   221004)
    (3.江苏省中医院   江苏南京   210029)
    (4.南京大学信息管理学院   江苏南京   210023)
    (5.南京大学中国智库研究与评价中心   江苏南京   210023)
吕诚诚(1993-),女,徐州医科大学管理学院讲师,研究方向:智库建设与评价、健康信息行为与决策科学、情报科学理论与方法研究;郭红玉(1984-),女,江苏省中医院主任中医师,讲师,研究方向:循证医学、循证卫生决策;李刚(1969-),男,南京大学信息管理学院教授,博士生导师,研究方向:智库评价理论与方法、智库信息系统与知识管理、社会科学评价理论与方法、图书馆与档案学理论基础。

收稿日期: 2025-04-09

  网络出版日期: 2025-05-10

基金资助

*本文系国家社会科学基金重大项目“循证社会科学的理论体系、国际经验与中国路径研究”(项目编号:19ZDA142)研究成果之一。

The "Tacitness" and "Consensus" of Scientific Decision-Making: Construction and Evolution of British Evidence-Based Decision-Making Governance System

Expand

Received date: 2025-04-09

  Online published: 2025-05-10

摘要

循证决策作为政府解决复杂社会问题、应对重大危机与风险决策、提升自身决策能力与公信力的一种重要治理手段和工具,备受以英国为代表的发达国家关注和推崇。文章以英国为例,依据循证决策治理相关政策、数据与案例,剖析循证决策治理在政治、经济、社会等方面的实践价值,构建出英国循证决策治理体系的理论框架,并进行结构、要素、特征和机制分析,为我国循证决策治理体系的构建提供国际经验证据。研究发现英国循证决策工作正在以更加规范、更具特色、更为深入的发展态势全力推进,以政府主导的决策主体、专家主导的支撑主体和公众主导的受益主体在协同共治过程中正在逐渐达成一种科学决策的“默契”和“共识”,确保多方利益诉求得到满足。

本文引用格式

吕诚诚 郭红玉 李 刚 . 科学决策的“默契”与“共识”:英国循证决策治理体系建构与演化*[J]. 图书与情报, 2025 , 45(02) : 22 -36 . DOI: 10.11968/tsyqb.1003-6938.2025017

Abstract

Evidence-based decision-making, as an important governance means and tools for the government to solve complex social problems, respond to major crises and risk decisions, and improve its own decision-making ability and credibility, has attracted much attention and respected in developed countries represented by the UK. The article takes the UK as an example. Based on the relevant policies, data and cases of evidence-based decision-making governance, this article analyzes the practical value of evidence-based decision-making governance in politics, economy, and society, builds the theoretical framework of the British evidence-based decision-making governance system, and analyzes structure, elements, characteristics and mechanisms to provide international experience evidence for the construction of the evidence-based decision-making governance system in China. The article finds that the British evidence-based decision-making work is promoted with a more standardized, more distinctive, and more in-depth development situation. The government-led decision-making subjects, expert support subjects, and public-dominated beneficiaries are gradually reaching “tacitness” and “consensus” of scientific decision-making to ensure that the interests of multi-party interests are met.
文章导航

/