Avoiding decision-based evidence-seeking.

AuthorCirtwill, Charles
PositionThink Tank

Evidence-based decision-making is all the rage nowadays. Everyone, of every political stripe and every cause, claims to be advocating that decisions should reflect the "evidence." Of course, they tend to be a little picky about what they choose to cite as evidence and even more particular about how the evidence is presented. While governments at all levels are to be applauded for at least stating their intent to be driven by data and evidence, the proof, as they say, is in the pudding.

As an example, the federal government just announced, via twitter of all places, that small passenger jets would not be allowed to land at Billy Bishop airport in Toronto. This little tidbit matters to Northern Ontario for three reasons: 1) it impacts Bombardier, a big employer in the Northwest; 2) it affects air service into Northern Ontario (jets carry people faster and cheaper allowing more direct routes); and 3) evidence-based decision-making is important; if they don't use it here, they will be free to ignore it elsewhere. Say, in the Ring of Fire, for example, or where the investments to support a digital economy go.

According to Terrance Corcoran in the Financial Post, the decision about the jets was made sometime between 6 p.m. and 9 p.m. on a Thursday following a cabinet meeting. At 6 p.m., the new minister was "examining all the factors." By 9 p.m., he was tweeting that the "GofC position is the same as LPC commitment," i.e. no jets. The problem here is twofold. One, it is not clear that this in fact IS the LPC official position. Second, and more importantly, as Corcoran points out: "detailed environmental and traffic studies are underway. Data is being collected, evidence produced." The decision was made before the evidence was fully before cabinet.

That is not evidence-based decision-making; that is decision-based evidence-seeking. Decision-makers go looking for evidence that supports a decision already made, and ignore, or downplay, evidence that does not support their pre-existing position. Decision-based evidence-seeking is largely what passes for evidence-based decisions in many government circles. There is a simple test for those of us on the outside to decide which route government (or lobby and advocacy groups for that matter) have engaged in. Which comes first, the decision or the evidence?

In the case of the jets it is pretty clear, the decision came first. A similar example was raised by Ross McKitrick in the National Post in relation to...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT