António Moniz

Despite increasing calls for evidence-based policies, knowledge about the practical use of evidences remains limited. This paper studies the process of construction of evidences in decisions of innovation policy to understand how evidences were used. It analysis the use of indicators and other evidences through interviews conducted to inquire about the two decisions: an electric mobility policy and a nanotechnology laboratory. Results show indicators and other evidences were brought to decision processes according to their availability and capacity to support the different interests of the actors and
the stakeholders. Their role was influenced by the particular situation of the decision makers. More importantly, the use of persuasive analytical evidences appears to be related with the adversity of the policy context. In addition, research suggests that indicators are one tool among others to foster innovation decisions. In fact, the relatively minor instrumental role of indicators suggests that indicators are mostly a complementary instrument of decision. When used relevantly, indicators can offer support to a decision. But there are other significant influences that need to be taken into account to understand the specific role indicators and other evidences play, such as the social relations of the decision makers and their emotional-intuitive decisions.