New ANZSOG Report sheds light on how to use Public Opinion Data to shape effective policy
30 October 2024
● News and media
The latest publication from ANZSOG’s Research Model project, Trust, Transparency and the Use of Data in Informing Policy Responses, co-funded by the Australian Public Service Commission (APSC) and undertaken by Monash University’s Sustainable Development Institute, looks at practical applications of public opinion data in policymaking during the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond. Public Opinion Data and Policymaking During COVID-19 and Beyond: Insights from Interviews Across Policy and Politics is the third in a series of four reports from the project. The final report will be released in November and will provide practical guidance for public servants looking to incorporate public opinion data in their evidence-based policymaking.
During the COVID Pandemic in 2021, the Australian Government was under pressure to make decisions with little time to consult widely and collect evidence. A feature of its approach to inform decision making was a survey of Australian attitudes and behaviours about public health strategies including vaccination. This form of public opinion data (POD) – that is, the results of representative studies of individuals’ self-reported attitudes, beliefs, and behaviours regarding a particular topic – can be a powerful tool for evidence-based policymaking, and particularly during crises, as explained by a previous report from this research project: Use of Public Opinion Data to Inform COVID Policymaking
But as our follow up report reveals, work is needed to develop frameworks and practices to support its use. Designing, collecting, and disseminating POD requires clearly defined objectives, engagement of key stakeholders, and rigorous methods to make POD fit for purpose and its insights actionable.
Public Opinion Data and Policymaking During COVID-19 and Beyond: Insights from Interviews Across Policy and Politics is written by Peter Bragge and Alejandra Mendoza Alcántara of the Monash Sustainable Development Institute for ANZSOG and the APSC. It addresses the emerging question of how the public sector can best make use of POD, both in crises and business-as-usual scenarios.
The report is based on interviews with eight senior policymakers and social researchers. Participants gave rich insights into how POD worked alongside public health advice to influence policymaking in Australia during the COVID-19 pandemic and what that might mean for integrating POD into policymaking more broadly.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, POD was a crucial source of information about how the public was responding to government policy. Senior public servants interviewed for the report agreed that POD about vaccine hesitancy and other public health measures was used to test their own assumptions about public attitudes and this informed advice to ministers. In turn, this shaped ministers’ messages to the public. Participants cited POD as helping build social licence for pandemic measures as well as identifying and reaching out to overlooked communities.
But the public sector now faces the questions of whether and how to adapt these practices post-pandemic. On this, the report finds that public opinion data has three main uses in policymaking in crisis and normal scenarios:
- Understanding community beliefs and attitudes to inform policy development
- Supporting the development of behaviour change strategies
- Testing social licence by gauging the public acceptance of policy
The report’s authors write:
“Although the theoretical purpose of POD is well-defined, its practical application can raise perceived tensions between its impartial use for policy development and its political use. This often results in a lack of transparency in how POD is utilised and reported.
Moreover, political considerations may deter ministers from using or disseminating POD. For instance, participants noted that during the COVID-19 context, the use of POD was rarely publicly recognised as an evidence input in decision-making. These findings underscore the necessity to foster a deeper understanding of how to effectively integrate and acknowledge POD in public decision-making processes.”
Participants agreed that public opinion data is rarely, if ever, the decisive factor. Instead, it sits alongside other sources of evidence. But importantly, the interviews revealed the different emphases placed on the role of POD by those on either side of the policy/politics divide.
Politicians and pollsters consider public opinion data as useful for shaping communications as part of realising their policy agenda. As one participant put it, POD goes towards answering “[W]hat’s the best way you can pitch an argument or a theme or a direction of policy… and at the same time, clearly how can you maintain momentum for the policy and political agenda you’re trying to run?”
By contrast, public servants emphasise the usefulness of POD for policy design and advising ministers about their policy options. According to another participant, POD serves as “a proxy for implementation facility [and] for acceptability… beyond just the interest of an individual or the noisiest squeakiest advocacy wheel”. In general, public servants will avoid being involved in discussions about the political viability of policy or politicians’ strategic communication priorities.
For this reason, the perception of POD politicising the policymaking process was seen to be a major risk in its use. It was noted that this perception had led during the pandemic to some reluctance among policymakers to admit being influenced by POD and public attitudes. One participant held that “[I]t would’ve been good to have recognised that it was more nuanced than just the public health advice”.
Managing these risks turns on how POD is collected and communicated. Participants suggested that POD studies should be designed for specific policy objectives and that collection is done in a valid and impartial way. Specialist Public sector capability is required to undertake or commission this kind of survey research and analyse it reliably.
These findings about the importance of targeted and robust survey design support earlier ANZSOG research on how the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet’s COVID-19 pulse survey was used by policymakers.
The report concludes that POD has a continuing, legitimate, and valuable role in policymaking beyond crisis contexts, noting the need for careful management of political and communication risks inherent in its use.
This report is the third in a series of four publications from ANZSOG’s Research Model project: Trust, Transparency and the Use of Data in Informing Policy Responses, co-funded by the Australian Public Sector Commission (APSC) and undertaken by Monash University’s Sustainable Development Institute.
Use of Public Opinion Data to inform COVID-19 policy-making is a rapid evidence review on the utility of public opinion data within the context of decision-making during the COVID crisis. It examined approximately 20 studies to address the question: How was public opinion data (POD) used to inform policy responses during the COVID-19 pandemic?