Policy evaluation has long been a heavily studied subject within political science. Whilst much scholarly attention has been put to conducing evaluation of certain policies or assessing the quality of a few evaluations, the possibilities of cross-section design studying a multitude of evaluations within one area of politics has been surprisingly neglected. Studying the case of innovation policies in Sweden this thesis aims to contribute to a better understanding of how evaluations are commonly conducted and wich actors are involved in evaluation. Specifically, a novel dataset is created describing the evaluations of innovation policy with regards to methods used, data utilized, judgements past and involved actors. The data is then used to demonstrate that evaluation consultants are significantly more prone to pass favorable judgement on an evaluated policy compared to other evaluating actors. The significant result holds true when a number of variables, including used methods, are controlled for. In addition to establishing this significant correlation the study contributes to empirical research on public evaluations through suggesting this novel quantitative approach to studying them. Keywords: Evaluation, policy evaluation, consultants, consultocracy, principal-agent-theory, principal-steward-theory.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:uu-432908 |
| Date | January 2020 |
| Creators | Collin, Elias |
| Publisher | Uppsala universitet, Statsvetenskapliga institutionen |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.2054 seconds