AIMING FOR SUCCESS

Q2 Social Sciences World Affairs Pub Date : 2022-06-19 DOI:10.1177/00438200221107412
Noah S. Schwartz
{"title":"AIMING FOR SUCCESS","authors":"Noah S. Schwartz","doi":"10.1177/00438200221107412","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Despite the popularity of the Evidence-Based Policy Making paradigm, scholarly evidence often fails to have an impact in emotional or value-laden policy debates. Consequently, changes to Canada’s gun control laws in recent years have often failed to incorporate scholarly research. This is problematic given that the forces of path dependence impose costs on policy makers who seek to reverse established policies, even if they are dysfunctional. This article lays the theoretical foundations for a Firearms Policy Evaluation Framework, which can be used by scholars, policy makers, advocates, and the public to conduct preliminary evaluations of proposed firearms policies before they become law. The utility of the framework is then demonstrated with an evaluation of the 2020 assault-style weapons ban in Canada, which includes a systematic scoping review of the literature on the impact of assault-weapons bans.","PeriodicalId":35790,"journal":{"name":"World Affairs","volume":"185 1","pages":"442 - 470"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Affairs","FirstCategoryId":"1089","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00438200221107412","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Despite the popularity of the Evidence-Based Policy Making paradigm, scholarly evidence often fails to have an impact in emotional or value-laden policy debates. Consequently, changes to Canada’s gun control laws in recent years have often failed to incorporate scholarly research. This is problematic given that the forces of path dependence impose costs on policy makers who seek to reverse established policies, even if they are dysfunctional. This article lays the theoretical foundations for a Firearms Policy Evaluation Framework, which can be used by scholars, policy makers, advocates, and the public to conduct preliminary evaluations of proposed firearms policies before they become law. The utility of the framework is then demonstrated with an evaluation of the 2020 assault-style weapons ban in Canada, which includes a systematic scoping review of the literature on the impact of assault-weapons bans.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
追求成功
尽管基于证据的政策制定范式很受欢迎,但学术证据往往无法在情感或价值取向的政策辩论中产生影响。因此,近年来对加拿大枪支管制法的修改往往没有纳入学术研究。这是有问题的,因为路径依赖的力量会给寻求扭转既定政策的政策制定者带来成本,即使这些政策功能失调。本文为“枪支政策评估框架”奠定了理论基础,该框架可用于学者、政策制定者、倡导者和公众在枪支政策提案成为法律之前对其进行初步评估。然后通过对加拿大2020年攻击性武器禁令的评估来证明该框架的效用,其中包括对攻击性武器禁令影响的文献进行系统的范围审查。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
World Affairs
World Affairs Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: World Affairs is a quarterly international affairs journal published by Heldref Publications. World Affairs, which, in one form or another, has been published since 1837, was re-launched in January 2008 as an entirely new publication. World Affairs is a small journal that argues the big ideas behind U.S. foreign policy. The journal celebrates and encourages heterodoxy and open debate. Recognizing that miscalculation and hubris are not beyond our capacity, we wish more than anything else to debate and clarify what America faces on the world stage and how it ought to respond. We hope you will join us in an occasionally unruly, seldom dull, and always edifying conversation. If ideas truly do have consequences, readers of World Affairs will be well prepared.
期刊最新文献
EXTENDED COMMENTARY—Navigating the labyrinth of youth return to deoccupied territories in Ukraine: Stakeholders, strategies, and ethical imperatives Has Israel lost its way? Improving human rights NGO ethics and accountability: A critique of Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch and human rights utopianism China's role in the reconfiguration of Latin American peripheries: A case study of the Argentine provinces Four major challenges in modern diplomacy: How the specialist diplomatic hierarchy can help
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1