This thesis describes what counts as evidence and what constitutes an evidence-informed approach to health policy development, particularly policy with an equity focus. While health policy is increasingly aiming to be ???evidence-based???, a narrow conceptualisation of this can neglect the importance of the powerful and dynamic context of public policy-making. An evidence-informed approach recognises and works with a broader range of contextual influences. The aim of this thesis was to extend and deepen understanding of how evidence informs policy that promotes health equity, through a tracer study of policy development in Australia. The objectives of the research were to examine influential types of evidence, their role and function; to investigate the context, processes and relationships that contributed to evidence informed health policy, and to gain a deeper understanding of how health equity, and evidence on equity, was conceptualised and considered in the policy process. Two Australian state government policy initiatives in the area of early childhood intervention were investigated through interviews with key policy actors in both states, and media, political and policy documentary analyses. A theory-informed framework was developed from the literature to guide this research. This thesis has led to the development of a number of theoretical models, insights and working principles to guide evidence-informed policy development. The models emerge from a conceptual framework that describes how clusters of information (contextual, expert opinion, scientific studies, policy audit, and economic) combine with a number of policy conditions (necessity, opportunity, capacity, relationships, actors and processes) to become a ???case for policy???. What follows seems to be several primary insights to the types of evidence that inform health policy; the identification of an ???adopt, adapt, apply??? phase in policy-making; and the existence of an ???equity policy gap??? ??? exposing the rare translation of equity principles into policy action. Findings from this study call for recognition of research as only one information source in policy development. The successful integration of research and policy is more likely if research evidence is seen within, and as a part of, a more complex policy development system.

This thesis describes what counts as evidence and what constitutes an evidence-informed approach to health policy development, particularly policy with an equity focus. While health policy is increasingly aiming to be ???evidence-based???, a narrow conceptualisation of this can neglect the importance of the powerful and dynamic context of public policy-making. An evidence-informed approach recognises and works with a broader range of contextual influences. The aim of this thesis was to extend and deepen understanding of how evidence informs policy that promotes health equity, through a tracer study of policy development in Australia. The objectives of the research were to examine influential types of evidence, their role and function; to investigate the context, processes and relationships that contributed to evidence informed health policy, and to gain a deeper understanding of how health equity, and evidence on equity, was conceptualised and considered in the policy process. Two Australian state government policy initiatives in the area of early childhood intervention were investigated through interviews with key policy actors in both states, and media, political and policy documentary analyses. A theory-informed framework was developed from the literature to guide this research. This thesis has led to the development of a number of theoretical models, insights and working principles to guide evidence-informed policy development. The models emerge from a conceptual framework that describes how clusters of information (contextual, expert opinion, scientific studies, policy audit, and economic) combine with a number of policy conditions (necessity, opportunity, capacity, relationships, actors and processes) to become a ???case for policy???. What follows seems to be several primary insights to the types of evidence that inform health policy; the identification of an ???adopt, adapt, apply??? phase in policy-making; and the existence of an ???equity policy gap??? ??? exposing the rare translation of equity principles into policy action. Findings from this study call for recognition of research as only one information source in policy development. The successful integration of research and policy is more likely if research evidence is seen within, and as a part of, a more complex policy development system.