-
Abstract
Experiments within the jurisdiction / lessons from other jurisdictions.
Information on a topic or issue that was formally requested by the legislature or produced to the legislature under oath or under the penalties of perjury.
Studies / information provided by a government agency.
Expert or scientific studies.
Economic or mathematical models and statistics.
Information provided by special interests.
Stories, apocrypha and uncorroborated tales.
As evidence-based legislation develops, and as technology puts more information at our fingertips, there should be a better understanding of what exactly constitutes reliable evidence. Robert and Ann Seidman devoted their professional careers to developing the evidence-based Institutional Legislative Theory and Methodology and teaching it to legislative drafters around the world. Although ILTAM was firmly grounded in – and driven by – evidence, the question becomes what evidence is reliable and a worthy input for the methodology. Further, how can the drafter avoid the misuses of evidence such as confirmation bias and naïve beliefs? We aim to give a guide for using evidence by offering examples of evidence-based legislation in practice and through a proposed hierarchy of evidence from most to least reliable:
We hope that this hierarchy provides a starting point for discussion to refine and improve evidence-based legislation.
European Journal of Law Reform |
|
Article | The Reliability of Evidence in Evidence-Based Legislation |
Keywords | evidence-based legislation, Institutional Legislative Theory and Methodology (ILTAM), reliable evidence, Professor Robert Seidman |
Authors | Sean J. Kealy en Alex Forney |
DOI | 10.5553/EJLR/138723702018020001005 |
Author's information |
Purchase access
You can purchase online access to this article. You will receive 24 hrs access @ € 17,50 (excl. VAT).
24 hrs access | € 17,50 (excl. VAT) |
Activate your code
If you have an access code, please activate it here.