What constitutes globalised evidence? Cultural tensions and critical reflections of the evidence-based movement in New Zealand

Abstract

The evidence-based movement is grounded in a well-intentioned desire to ensure resources are invested in high quality initiatives that generate the intended impact. Nevertheless, recent critiques contest the appropriateness of translating an approach rooted in a medical model to socially complex initiatives. Globalized notions of evidence can also be damaging for programs operating in small, culturally diverse countries with limited resources. Given these polemic views, our aim was to examine local perceptions of the evidence-based movement in New Zealand, a small, vibrant, bi-cultural society with a mix of homegrown and imported programs. Using a snowball sampling approach, 79 professionals working in the education and social sectors completed an anonymous online survey that contained a series of closed and open-ended questions. The results show that although participants positively endorsed a variety of quality evidence markers, traditionally positivist methodological leanings received lower and more varied endorsements compared to more inclusive and pluralistic approaches. Many also expressed concern that the evidence-based movement emphasizes a narrow and colonized view of evidence that does not align with Māori and Pacific worldviews, and undermines innovation. We discuss the implications as an avenue for advancing intervention and social programming research in an increasingly multicultural and globalized world.