Search This Blog

Wednesday, April 27, 2022

Voyager program

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Montage of planets and some moons that the two Voyager spacecraft have visited and studied, along with the artwork of the spacecraft themselves. The long antenna that extends out from the spacecraft and magnetometer boom can be seen. The planets shown include Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune. Only Jupiter and Saturn have been visited by spacecraft other than Voyager 2.

The Voyager program is an American scientific program that employs two robotic interstellar probes, Voyager 1 and Voyager 2. They were launched in 1977 to take advantage of a favorable alignment of Jupiter and Saturn, to fly near them while collecting data for transmission back to Earth. After launch the decision was taken to send Voyager 2 near Uranus and Neptune to collect data for transmission back to Earth.

As of 2022, the Voyagers are still in operation past the outer boundary of the heliosphere in interstellar space. They collect and transmit useful data to Earth.

Voyager did things no one predicted, found scenes no one expected, and promises to outlive its inventors. Like a great painting or an abiding institution, it has acquired an existence of its own, a destiny beyond the grasp of its handlers.

— Stephen J. Pyne

As of 2022, Voyager 1 was moving with a velocity of 61,185 kilometers per hour (38,019 mph), or 17 km/s, relative to the Sun, and was 23,252,000,000 kilometers (1.4448×1010 mi) from the Sun reaching a distance of 155.8 AU (23.3 billion km; 14.5 billion mi) from Earth as of February 10, 2022. On 25 August 2012, data from Voyager 1 indicated that it had entered interstellar space.

As of 2022, Voyager 2 was moving with a velocity of 55,335 kilometers per hour (34,384 mph), or 15 km/s, relative to the Sun, and was 19,350,000,000 kilometers (1.202×1010 mi) from the Sun reaching a distance of 130.1 AU (19.5 billion km; 12.1 billion mi) from Earth as of February 10, 2022. On 5 November 2019, data from Voyager 2 indicated that it also had entered interstellar space. On 4 November 2019, scientists reported that, on 5 November 2018, the Voyager 2 probe had officially reached the interstellar medium (ISM), a region of outer space beyond the influence of the solar wind, as did Voyager 1 in 2012.

Although the Voyagers have moved beyond the influence of the solar wind, they still have a long way to go before exiting the Solar System. NASA indicates "[I]f we define our solar system as the Sun and everything that primarily orbits the Sun, Voyager 1 will remain within the confines of the solar system until it emerges from the Oort cloud in another 14,000 to 28,000 years."

Data and photographs collected by the Voyagers' cameras, magnetometers and other instruments revealed unknown details about each of the four giant planets and their moons. Close-up images from the spacecraft charted Jupiter's complex cloud forms, winds and storm systems and discovered volcanic activity on its moon Io. Saturn's rings were found to have enigmatic braids, kinks and spokes and to be accompanied by myriad "ringlets".

At Uranus, Voyager 2 discovered a substantial magnetic field around the planet and ten more moons. Its flyby of Neptune uncovered three rings and six hitherto unknown moons, a planetary magnetic field and complex, widely distributed auroras. As of 2021 Voyager 2 is the only spacecraft to have visited the ice giants Uranus and Neptune.

In August 2018, NASA confirmed, based on results by the New Horizons spacecraft, the existence of a "hydrogen wall" at the outer edges of the Solar System that was first detected in 1992 by the two Voyager spacecraft.

The Voyager spacecraft were built at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Southern California and funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), which also financed their launches from Cape Canaveral, Florida, their tracking and everything else concerning the probes.

The cost of the original program was $865 million, with the later-added Voyager Interstellar Mission costing an extra $30 million.

History

Trajectories and expected locations of the Pioneer and Voyager spacecraft in April 2007
 
The trajectories that enabled the Voyager spacecraft to visit the outer planets and achieve velocity to escape the Solar System
 
Plot of Voyager 2's heliocentric velocity against its distance from the Sun, illustrating the use of gravity assist to accelerate the spacecraft by Jupiter, Saturn and Uranus. To observe Triton, Voyager 2 passed over Neptune's north pole, resulting in an acceleration out of the plane of the ecliptic and reduced its velocity away from the Sun.

The two Voyager space probes were originally conceived as part of the Mariner program, and they were thus initially named Mariner 11 and Mariner 12. They were then moved into a separate program named "Mariner Jupiter-Saturn", later renamed the Voyager Program because it was thought that the design of the two space probes had progressed sufficiently beyond that of the Mariner family to merit a separate name.

Interactive 3D model of the Voyager spacecraft

The Voyager Program was similar to the Planetary Grand Tour planned during the late 1960s and early 70s. The Grand Tour would take advantage of an alignment of the outer planets discovered by Gary Flandro, an aerospace engineer at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. This alignment, which occurs once every 175 years, would occur in the late 1970s and make it possible to use gravitational assists to explore Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto. The Planetary Grand Tour was to send several pairs of probes to fly by all the outer planets (including Pluto, then still considered a planet) along various trajectories, including Jupiter-Saturn-Pluto and Jupiter-Uranus-Neptune. Limited funding ended the Grand Tour program, but elements were incorporated into the Voyager Program, which fulfilled many of the flyby objectives of the Grand Tour except a visit to Pluto.

Voyager 2 was the first to be launched. Its trajectory was designed to allow flybys of Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune. Voyager 1 was launched after Voyager 2, but along a shorter and faster trajectory that was designed to provide an optimal flyby of Saturn's moon Titan, which was known to be quite large and to possess a dense atmosphere. This encounter sent Voyager 1 out of the plane of the ecliptic, ending its planetary science mission. Had Voyager 1 been unable to perform the Titan flyby, the trajectory of Voyager 2 could have been altered to explore Titan, forgoing any visit to Uranus and Neptune. Voyager 1 was not launched on a trajectory that would have allowed it to continue to Uranus and Neptune, but could have continued from Saturn to Pluto without exploring Titan.

During the 1990s, Voyager 1 overtook the slower deep-space probes Pioneer 10 and Pioneer 11 to become the most distant human-made object from Earth, a record that it will keep for the foreseeable future. The New Horizons probe, which had a higher launch velocity than Voyager 1, is travelling more slowly due to the extra speed Voyager 1 gained from its flybys of Jupiter and Saturn. Voyager 1 and Pioneer 10 are the most widely separated human-made objects anywhere since they are travelling in roughly opposite directions from the Solar System.

In December 2004, Voyager 1 crossed the termination shock, where the solar wind is slowed to subsonic speed, and entered the heliosheath, where the solar wind is compressed and made turbulent due to interactions with the interstellar medium. On 10 December 2007, Voyager 2 also reached the termination shock, about 1.6 billion kilometres (1 billion miles) closer to the Sun than from where Voyager 1 first crossed it, indicating that the Solar System is asymmetrical.

In 2010 Voyager 1 reported that the outward velocity of the solar wind had dropped to zero, and scientists predicted it was nearing interstellar space. In 2011, data from the Voyagers determined that the heliosheath is not smooth, but filled with giant magnetic bubbles, theorized to form when the magnetic field of the Sun becomes warped at the edge of the Solar System.

In June 2012, Scientists at NASA reported that Voyager 1 was very close to entering interstellar space, indicated by a sharp rise in high-energy particles from outside the Solar System. In September 2013, NASA announced that Voyager 1 had crossed the heliopause on 25 August 2012, making it the first spacecraft to enter interstellar space.

In December 2018, NASA announced that Voyager 2 had crossed the heliopause on 5 November 2018, making it the second spacecraft to enter interstellar space.

As of 2017 Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 continue to monitor conditions in the outer expanses of the Solar System. The Voyager spacecraft are expected to be able to operate science instruments through 2020, when limited power will require instruments to be deactivated one by one. Sometime around 2025, there will no longer be sufficient power to operate any science instruments.

In July 2019, a revised power management plan was implemented to better manage the two probes' dwindling power supply.

Spacecraft design

The Voyager spacecraft each weigh 773 kilograms (1,704 pounds). Of this total weight, each spacecraft carries 105 kilograms (231 pounds) of scientific instruments. The identical Voyager spacecraft use three-axis-stabilized guidance systems that use gyroscopic and accelerometer inputs to their attitude control computers to point their high-gain antennas towards the Earth and their scientific instruments towards their targets, sometimes with the help of a movable instrument platform for the smaller instruments and the electronic photography system.

A space probe with squat cylindrical body topped by a large parabolic radio antenna dish pointing left, a three-element radioisotope thermoelectric generator on a boom extending down, and scientific instruments on a boom extending up. A disk is fixed to the body facing front left. A long triaxial boom extends down left and two radio antennas extend down left and down right.
Voyager spacecraft diagram

The diagram shows the high-gain antenna (HGA) with a 3.7 m (12 ft) diameter dish attached to the hollow decagonal electronics container. There is also a spherical tank that contains the hydrazine monopropellant fuel.

The Voyager Golden Record is attached to one of the bus sides. The angled square panel to the right is the optical calibration target and excess heat radiator. The three radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs) are mounted end-to-end on the lower boom.

The scan platform comprises: the Infrared Interferometer Spectrometer (IRIS) (largest camera at top right); the Ultraviolet Spectrometer (UVS) just above the IRIS; the two Imaging Science Subsystem (ISS) vidicon cameras to the left of the UVS; and the Photopolarimeter System (PPS) under the ISS.

Only five investigation teams are still supported, though data is collected for two additional instruments. The Flight Data Subsystem (FDS) and a single eight-track digital tape recorder (DTR) provide the data handling functions.

The FDS configures each instrument and controls instrument operations. It also collects engineering and science data and formats the data for transmission. The DTR is used to record high-rate Plasma Wave Subsystem (PWS) data. The data are played back every six months.

The Imaging Science Subsystem made up of a wide-angle and a narrow-angle camera is a modified version of the slow scan vidicon camera designs that were used in the earlier Mariner flights. The Imaging Science Subsystem consists of two television-type cameras, each with eight filters in a commandable filter wheel mounted in front of the vidicons. One has a low resolution 200 mm (7.9 in) focal length wide-angle lens with an aperture of f/3 (the wide-angle camera), while the other uses a higher resolution 1,500 mm (59 in) narrow-angle f/8.5 lens (the narrow-angle camera).

Computers and data processing

There are three different computer types on the Voyager spacecraft, two of each kind, sometimes used for redundancy. They are proprietary, custom-built computers built from CMOS and TTL medium scale integrated circuits and discrete components. Total number of words among the six computers is about 32K. Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 have identical computer systems.

The Computer Command System (CCS), the central controller of the spacecraft, is two 18-bit word, interrupt type processors with 4096 words each of non-volatile plated wire memory. During most of the Voyager mission the two CCS computers on each spacecraft were used non-redundantly to increase the command and processing capability of the spacecraft. The CCS is nearly identical to the system flown on the Viking spacecraft.

The Flight Data System (FDS) is two 16-bit word machines with modular memories and 8198 words each.

The Attitude and Articulation Control System (AACS) is two 18-bit word machines with 4096 words each.

Unlike the other on-board instruments, the operation of the cameras for visible light is not autonomous, but rather it is controlled by an imaging parameter table contained in one of the on-board digital computers, the Flight Data Subsystem (FDS). More recent space probes, since about 1990, usually have completely autonomous cameras.

The computer command subsystem (CCS) controls the cameras. The CCS contains fixed computer programs such as command decoding, fault detection, and correction routines, antenna pointing routines, and spacecraft sequencing routines. This computer is an improved version of the one that was used in the Viking orbiter. The hardware in both custom-built CCS subsystems in the Voyagers is identical. There is only a minor software modification for one of them that has a scientific subsystem that the other lacks.

The Attitude and Articulation Control Subsystem (AACS) controls the spacecraft orientation (its attitude). It keeps the high-gain antenna pointing towards the Earth, controls attitude changes, and points the scan platform. The custom-built AACS systems on both craft are identical.

It has been erroneously reported on the Internet that the Voyager space probes were controlled by a version of the RCA 1802 (RCA CDP1802 "COSMAC" microprocessor), but such claims are not supported by the primary design documents. The CDP1802 microprocessor was used later in the Galileo space probe, which was designed and built years later. The digital control electronics of the Voyagers were not based on a microprocessor integrated circuit chip.

Communications

The uplink communications are executed via S-band microwave communications. The downlink communications are carried out by an X-band microwave transmitter on board the spacecraft, with an S-band transmitter as a back-up. All long-range communications to and from the two Voyagers have been carried out using their 3.7-meter (12 ft) high-gain antennas. The high-gain antenna has a beamwidth of 0.5° for X-band, and 2.3° for S-band. (The low-gain antenna has a 7 dB gain and 60° beamwidth.)

Because of the inverse-square law in radio communications, the digital data rates used in the downlinks from the Voyagers have been continually decreasing the farther that they get from the Earth. For example, the data rate used from Jupiter was about 115,000 bits per second. That was halved at the distance of Saturn, and it has gone down continually since then. Some measures were taken on the ground along the way to reduce the effects of the inverse-square law. In between 1982 and 1985, the diameters of the three main parabolic dish antennas of the Deep Space Network were increased from 64 to 70 m (210 to 230 ft) dramatically increasing their areas for gathering weak microwave signals.

Whilst the craft were between Saturn and Uranus the onboard software was upgraded to do a degree of image compression and to use a more efficient Reed-Solomon error-correcting encoding.

RTGs for the Voyager program

Then between 1986 and 1989, new techniques were brought into play to combine the signals from multiple antennas on the ground into one, more powerful signal, in a kind of an antenna array. This was done at Goldstone, California, Canberra, and Madrid using the additional dish antennas available there. Also, in Australia, the Parkes Radio Telescope was brought into the array in time for the fly-by of Neptune in 1989. In the United States, the Very Large Array in New Mexico was brought into temporary use along with the antennas of the Deep Space Network at Goldstone. Using this new technology of antenna arrays helped to compensate for the immense radio distance from Neptune to the Earth.

Power

Electrical power is supplied by three MHW-RTG radioisotope thermoelectric generators (RTGs). They are powered by plutonium-238 (distinct from the Pu-239 isotope used in nuclear weapons) and provided approximately 470 W at 30 volts DC when the spacecraft was launched. Plutonium-238 decays with a half-life of 87.74 years, so RTGs using Pu-238 will lose a factor of 1−0.5(1/87.74) = 0.79% of their power output per year.

In 2011, 34 years after launch, the thermal power generated by such an RTG would be reduced to (1/2)(34/87.74) ≈ 76% of its initial power. The RTG thermocouples, which convert thermal power into electricity, also degrade over time reducing available electric power below this calculated level.

By 7 October 2011 the power generated by Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 had dropped to 267.9 W and 269.2 W respectively, about 57% of the power at launch. The level of power output was better than pre-launch predictions based on a conservative thermocouple degradation model. As the electrical power decreases, spacecraft loads must be turned off, eliminating some capabilities. There may be insufficient power for communications by 2032.

Voyager Interstellar Mission

Voyager 1 crossed the heliopause, or the edge of the heliosphere, in August 2012.
Voyager 2 crossed the heliosheath in November 2018.

The Voyager primary mission was completed in 1989, with the close flyby of Neptune by Voyager 2. The Voyager Interstellar Mission (VIM) is a mission extension, which began when the two spacecraft had already been in flight for over 12 years. The Heliophysics Division of the NASA Science Mission Directorate conducted a Heliophysics Senior Review in 2008. The panel found that the VIM "is a mission that is absolutely imperative to continue" and that VIM "funding near the optimal level and increased DSN (Deep Space Network) support is warranted."

The main objective of the VIM is to extend the exploration of the Solar System beyond the outer planets to the outer limit and if possible even beyond. The Voyagers continue to search for the heliopause boundary which is the outer limit of the Sun's magnetic field. Passing through the heliopause boundary will allow the spacecraft to make measurements of the interstellar fields, particles and waves unaffected by the solar wind.

The entire Voyager 2 scan platform, including all of the platform instruments, was switched off in 1998. All platform instruments on Voyager 1, except for the ultraviolet spectrometer (UVS) have also been switched off.

The Voyager 1 scan platform was scheduled to go off-line in late 2000 but has been left on to investigate UV emission from the upwind direction. UVS data are still captured but scans are no longer possible.

Gyro operations ended in 2016 for Voyager 2 and in 2017 for Voyager 1. Gyro operations are used to rotate the probe 360 degrees six times per year to measure the magnetic field of the spacecraft, which is then subtracted from the magnetometer science data.

The two spacecraft continue to operate, with some loss in subsystem redundancy but retain the capability to return scientific data from a full complement of Voyager Interstellar Mission (VIM) science instruments.

Both spacecraft also have adequate electrical power and attitude control propellant to continue operating until around 2025, after which there may not be electrical power to support science instrument operation; science data return and spacecraft operations will cease.

Mission details

This diagram about the heliosphere was released on 28 June 2013 and incorporates results from the Voyager spacecraft.

By the start of VIM, Voyager 1 was at a distance of 40 AU from the Earth while Voyager 2 was at 31 AU. VIM is in three phases: termination shock, heliosheath exploration, and interstellar exploration phase. The spacecraft began VIM in an environment controlled by the Sun's magnetic field with the plasma particles being dominated by those contained in the expanding supersonic solar wind. This is the characteristic environment of the termination shock phase. At some distance from the Sun, the supersonic solar wind will be held back from further expansion by the interstellar wind. The first feature encountered by a spacecraft as a result of this interstellar wind–solar wind interaction was the termination shock where the solar wind slows to subsonic speed and large changes in plasma flow direction and magnetic field orientation occur.

Voyager 1 completed the phase of termination shock in December 2004 at a distance of 94 AU while Voyager 2 completed it in August 2007 at a distance of 84 AU. After entering into the heliosheath the spacecraft are in an area that is dominated by the Sun's magnetic field and solar wind particles. After passing through the heliosheath the two Voyagers will begin the phase of interstellar exploration.

The outer boundary of the heliosheath is called the heliopause, which is where the spacecraft are headed now. This is the region where the Sun's influence begins to decrease and interstellar space can be detected. Voyager 1 is escaping the Solar System at the speed of 3.6 AU per year 35° north of the ecliptic in the general direction of the solar apex in Hercules, while Voyager 2's speed is about 3.3 AU per year, heading 48° south of the ecliptic. The Voyager spacecraft will eventually go on to the stars. In about 40,000 years, Voyager 1 will be within 1.6 light years (ly) of AC+79 3888, also known as Gliese 445, which is approaching the Sun. In 40,000 years Voyager 2 will be within 1.7 ly of Ross 248 (another star which is approaching the Sun) and in 296,000 years it will pass within 4.6 ly of Sirius which is the brightest star in the night sky.

The spacecraft are not expected to collide with a star for 1 sextillion (1020) years.

In October 2020, astronomers reported a significant unexpected increase in density in the space beyond the Solar System as detected by the Voyager 1 and Voyager 2 space probes. According to the researchers, this implies that "the density gradient is a large-scale feature of the VLISM (very local interstellar medium) in the general direction of the heliospheric nose".

Telemetry

The telemetry comes to the telemetry modulation unit (TMU) separately as a "low-rate" 40-bit-per-second (bit/s) channel and a "high-rate" channel.

Low rate telemetry is routed through the TMU such that it can only be downlinked as uncoded bits (in other words there is no error correction). At high rate, one of a set of rates between 10 bit/s and 115.2 kbit/s is downlinked as coded symbols.

Seen from 6 billion kilometers (3.7 billion miles), Earth appears as a "pale blue dot" (the blueish-white speck approximately halfway down the light band to the right).

The TMU encodes the high rate data stream with a convolutional code having constraint length of 7 with a symbol rate equal to twice the bit rate (k=7, r=1/2)

Voyager telemetry operates at these transmission rates:

  • 7200, 1400 bit/s tape recorder playbacks
  • 600 bit/s real-time fields, particles, and waves; full UVS; engineering
  • 160 bit/s real-time fields, particles, and waves; UVS subset; engineering
  • 40 bit/s real-time engineering data, no science data.

Note: At 160 and 600 bit/s different data types are interleaved.

The Voyager craft have three different telemetry formats:

High rate

  • CR-5T (ISA 35395) Science, note that this can contain some engineering data.
  • FD-12 higher accuracy (and time resolution) Engineering data, note that some science data may also be encoded.

Low rate

  • EL-40 Engineering, note that this format can contain some science data, but not all systems represented.
    This is an abbreviated format, with data truncation for some subsystems.

It is understood that there is substantial overlap of EL-40 and CR-5T (ISA 35395) telemetry, but the simpler EL-40 data does not have the resolution of the CR-5T telemetry. At least when it comes to representing available electricity to subsystems, EL-40 only transmits in integer increments—so similar behaviors are expected elsewhere.

Memory dumps are available in both engineering formats. These routine diagnostic procedures have detected and corrected intermittent memory bit flip problems, as well as detecting the permanent bit flip problem that caused a two-week data loss event mid-2010.

The cover of the golden record

Voyager Golden Record

Both spacecraft carry a 12-inch (30 cm) golden phonograph record that contains pictures and sounds of Earth, symbolic directions on the cover for playing the record, and data detailing the location of Earth. The record is intended as a combination time capsule and an interstellar message to any civilization, alien or far-future human, that may recover either of the Voyagers. The contents of this record were selected by a committee that included Timothy Ferris and was chaired by Carl Sagan.

Pale Blue Dot

The Voyager program's discoveries during the primary phase of its mission, including new close-up color photos of the major planets, were regularly documented by print and electronic media outlets. Among the best-known of these is an image of the Earth as a Pale Blue Dot, taken in 1990 by Voyager 1, and popularized by Carl Sagan,

Consider again that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us....The Earth is a very small stage in a vast cosmic arena.... To my mind, there is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly and compassionately with one another and to preserve and cherish that pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known.

Exploration

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Professor G. A. Wallin (1811–1852), a Finnish explorer and orientalist, who is remembered for his journeys to the Middle East during the 1840s. Portrait of Wallin by R. W. Ekman, 1853.

Exploration is the act of searching for the purpose of discovery of information or resources, especially in the context of geography or space, rather than research and development that is usually not centred on earth sciences or astronomy. Exploration occurs in all non-sessile animal species, including humans. In human history, its most dramatic rise was during the Age of Discovery when European explorers sailed and charted much of the rest of the world for a variety of reasons. Since then, major explorations after the Age of Discovery have occurred for reasons mostly aimed at information discovery.

Concept

Exploration (like science more generally), particularly its understanding and use has been critically discussed as historically being framed and used, at the latest since the Age of Discovery up to the contemporary age of space exploration, for colonialistic ventures, discrimination and exploitation, by reinvigorating concepts such as the "frontier" (as in frontierism) and manifest destiny.

Notable historical periods of human exploration

Phoenician galley sailings

The Phoenicians (1550 BCE–300 BCE) traded throughout the Mediterranean Sea and Asia Minor though many of their routes are still unknown today. The presence of tin in some Phoenician artifacts suggests that they may have traveled to Britain. According to Virgil's Aeneid and other ancient sources, the legendary Queen Dido was a Phoenician from Tyre who sailed to North Africa and founded the city of Carthage.

Carthaginean exploration of Western Africa

Hanno the Navigator (500 BC), a Carthaginean navigator who explored the Western Coast of Africa.

Greek & Roman exploration of Northern Europe and Thule

Roman explorations

Africa Exploration

The Romans organized expeditions to cross the Sahara desert with five different routes:

All these expeditions were supported by legionaries and had mainly a commercial purpose. Only the one done by emperor Nero seemed to be a preparative for the conquest of Ethiopia or Nubia: in 62 AD two legionaries explored the sources of the Nile river.

One of the main reasons of the explorations was to get gold using the camel to transport it.

The explorations near the African western and eastern coasts were supported by Roman ships and deeply related to the naval commerce (mainly toward the Indian Ocean). The Romans also organized several explorations into Northern Europe, and explored as far as China in Asia.

30 BC-640 AD
With the acquisition of Ptolemaic Egypt, the Romans begin trading with India. The Romans now have a direct connection to the spice trade, which the Egyptians had established beginning in 118 BC.
100 AD-166 AD
Sino-Roman relations begin. Ptolemy writes of the Golden Chersonese (i.e. Malay Peninsula) and the trade port of Kattigara, now identified as Óc Eo in northern Vietnam, then part of Jiaozhou, a province of the Chinese Han Empire. The Chinese historical texts describe Roman embassies, from a land they called Daqin.
2nd century
Roman traders reach Siam, Cambodia, Sumatra, and Java.
161
An embassy from Roman Emperor Antoninus Pius or his successor Marcus Aurelius reaches Chinese Emperor Huan of Han at Luoyang.
226
A Roman diplomat or merchant lands in northern Vietnam and visits Nanjing, China and the court of Sun Quan, ruler of Eastern Wu

Chinese exploration of Central Asia

During the 2nd century BC, the Han dynasty explored much of the Eastern Northern Hemisphere. Starting in 139 BC, the Han diplomat Zhang Qian traveled west in an unsuccessful attempt to secure an alliance with the Da Yuezhi against the Xiongnu (the Yuezhi had been evicted from Gansu by the Xiongnu in 177 BC); however, Zhang's travels discovered entire countries which the Chinese were unaware of, including the remnants of the conquests of Alexander the Great (r. 336–323 BC). When Zhang returned to China in 125 BC, he reported on his visits to Dayuan (Fergana), Kangju (Sogdia), and Daxia (Bactria, formerly the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom which had just been subjugated by the Da Yuezhi). Zhang described Dayuan and Daxia as agricultural and urban countries like China, and although he did not venture there, described Shendu (the Indus River valley of Northwestern India) and Anxi (Parthian territories) further west.

Viking Age

Viking settlements and voyages

From about 800 AD to 1040 AD, the Vikings explored Iceland and much of the Western Northern Hemisphere via rivers and oceans. For example, it is known that the Norwegian Viking explorer, Erik the Red (950–1003), sailed to and settled in Greenland after being expelled from Iceland, while his son, the Icelandic explorer Leif Erikson (980–1020), reached Newfoundland and the nearby North American coast, and is believed to be the first European to land in North America.

Polynesian Age

Austronesian expansion map

Polynesians were a maritime people, who populated and explored the central and south Pacific for around 5,000 years, up to about 1280 when they discovered New Zealand. The key invention to their exploration was the outrigger canoe, which provided a swift and stable platform for carrying goods and people. Based on limited evidence, it is thought that the voyage to New Zealand was deliberate. It is unknown if one or more boats went to New Zealand, or the type of boat, or the names of those who migrated. 2011 studies at Wairau Bar in New Zealand show a high probability that one origin was Ruahine Island in the Society Islands. Polynesians may have used the prevailing north easterly trade winds to reach New Zealand in about three weeks. The Cook Islands are in direct line along the migration path and may have been an intermediate stopping point. There are cultural and language similarities between Cook Islanders and New Zealand Māori. Early Māori had different legends of their origins, but the stories were misunderstood and reinterpreted in confused written accounts by early European historians in New Zealand trying to present a coherent pattern of Māori settlement in New Zealand.

Mathematical modelling based on DNA genome studies, using state of the art techniques, have shown that a large number of Polynesian migrants (100–200), including women, arrived in New Zealand around the same time, in about 1280. Otago University studies have tried to link distinctive DNA teeth patterns, which show special dietary influence, with places in or nearby the Society Islands.

Chinese exploration of the Indian Ocean

The Chinese explorer, Wang Dayuan (fl. 1311–1350) made two major trips by ship to the Indian Ocean. During 1328–1333, he sailed along the South China Sea and visited many places in Southeast Asia and reached as far as South Asia, landing in Sri Lanka and India, and he even went to Australia. Then in 1334–1339, he visited North Africa and East Africa. Later, the Chinese admiral Zheng He (1371–1433) made seven voyages to Arabia, East Africa, India, Indonesia and Thailand.

European Age of Discovery

The Age of Discovery, also known as the Age of Exploration, is one of the most important periods of geographical exploration in human history. It started in the early 15th century and lasted until the 17th century. In that period, Europeans discovered and/or explored vast areas of the Americas, Africa, Asia and Oceania. Portugal and Spain dominated the first stages of exploration, while other European nations followed, such as England, Netherlands, and France.

Outward and return voyages of the Portuguese India run in the Atlantic and the Indian oceans, with the North Atlantic Gyre (volta do mar) picked up by Henry's navigators, and the outward route of the South Atlantic westerlies that Bartolomeu Dias discovered in 1488, followed and explored by the expeditions of Vasco da Gama and Pedro Alvares Cabral.

Important explorations during this period went to a number of continents and regions around the globe. In Africa, important explorers of this period include Diogo Cão (1452-1486) who discovered and ascended the Congo River and reached the coasts of present-day Angola and Namibia; and Bartolomeu Dias (1450–1500), the first European to reach the Cape of Good Hope and other parts of the South African coast.

Explorers of routes from Europe towards Asia, the Indian Ocean, and the Pacific Ocean, include Vasco da Gama (1460–1524), a navigator who made the first trip from Europe to India and back by the Cape of Good Hope, discovering the ocean route to the East; Pedro Álvares Cabral (c. 1467/1468 – c. 1520) who, following the path of Vasco da Gama, claimed Brazil and led the first expedition that linked Europe, Africa, America, and Asia; Diogo Dias, who discovered the eastern coast of Madagascar and rounded the corner of Africa; explorers such as Diogo Fernandes Pereira and Pedro Mascarenhas (1470–1555), among others, who discovered and mapped the Mascarene Islands and other archipelagos.

António de Abreu (1480-1514) and Francisco Serrão (14?–1521) led the first direct European fleet into the Pacific Ocean (on its western edges) and through the Sunda Islands, reaching the Moluccas. Andrés de Urdaneta (1498–1568) discovered the maritime route from Asia to the Americas.

In the Pacific Ocean, Jorge de Menezes (1498–1537) reached New Guinea while García Jofre de Loaísa (1490–1526) reached the Marshall Islands.

Discovery of America

Explorations of the Americas began with the initial discovery of America by Christopher Columbus (1451–1506), who led a Castilian (Spanish) expedition across the Atlantic, discovering America. After the discovery of America by Columbus, a number of important expeditions were sent out to explore the Western Hemisphere. This included Juan Ponce de León (1474–1521), who discovered and mapped the coast of Florida; Vasco Núñez de Balboa (c. 1475–1519), who was the first European to view the Pacific Ocean from American shores (after crossing the Isthmus of Panama) confirming that America was a separate continent from Asia; Aleixo Garcia (14?–1527), who explored the territories of present-day southern Brazil, Paraguay and Bolivia, crossing the Chaco and reaching the Andes (near Sucre).

Álvar Núñez Cabeza de Vaca (1490–1558) discovered the Mississippi River and was the first European to sail the Gulf of Mexico and cross Texas. Jacques Cartier (1491–1557) drew the first maps of part of central and maritime Canada; Francisco Vázquez de Coronado (1510–1554) discovered the Grand Canyon and the Colorado River; Francisco de Orellana (1511–1546) was the first European to navigate the length of the Amazon River.

The routes of Captain James Cook's voyages. The first voyage is shown in red, second voyage in green, and third voyage in blue.
Further explorations

Ferdinand Magellan (1480–1521), was the first navigator to cross the Pacific Ocean, discovering the Strait of Magellan, the Tuamotus and Mariana Islands, and achieving a nearly complete circumnavigation of the Earth, in multiple voyages, for the first time. Juan Sebastián Elcano (1476–1526), completed the first global circumnavigation.

In the second half of the 16th century and the 17th century exploration of Asia and the Pacific Ocean continued with explorers such as Andrés de Urdaneta (1498–1568), who discovered the maritime route from Asia to the Americas; Pedro Fernandes de Queirós (1565–1614), who discovered the Pitcairn Islands and the Vanuatu archipelago; Álvaro de Mendaña de Neira (1542–1595), who discovered the Tuvalu archipelago, the Marquesas, the Solomon Islands and Wake Island.

Explorers of Australia included Willem Janszoon (1570–1630), who made the first recorded European landing in Australia; Yñigo Ortiz de Retez, who discovered and reached eastern and northern New Guinea; Luis Váez de Torres (1565–1613), who discovered the Torres Strait between Australia and New Guinea; Abel Tasman (1603–1659), who explored North Australia, discovered Tasmania, New Zealand and Tongatapu.

In North America, major explorers included Henry Hudson (156?–1611), who explored the Hudson Bay in Canada; Samuel de Champlain (1574–1635), who explored St. Lawrence River and the Great Lakes (in Canada and northern United States); and René-Robert Cavelier, Sieur de La Salle (1643–1687), who explored the Great Lakes region of the United States and Canada, and the entire length of the Mississippi River.

The Modern Age

Long after the golden age of discovery, other explorers completed the world map, such as various Russians explorers, reaching the Siberian Pacific coast and the Bering Strait, at the extreme edge of Asia and Alaska (North America); Vitus Bering (1681–1741) who in the service of the Russian Navy, explored the Bering Strait, the Bering Sea, the North American coast of Alaska, and some other northern areas of the Pacific Ocean; and James Cook, who explored the east coast of Australia, the Hawaiian Islands, and circumnavigated Antarctica.

There were still significant explorations which occurred well into the modern age. This includes the Lewis and Clark Expedition (1804-1806), an overland expedition dispatched by President Thomas Jefferson to explore the newly acquired Louisiana Purchase and to find an interior aquatic route to the Pacific Ocean, along with other objectives to examine the flora and fauna of the continent. In 1818, the British researcher Sir John Ross was the first to find that the deep sea is inhabited by life when catching jellyfish and worms in about 2,000 m (6,562 ft) depth with a special device. The United States Exploring Expedition (1838-1842) was an expedition sent by President Andrew Jackson, in order to survey the Pacific Ocean and surrounding lands.

The extreme conditions in the deep sea require elaborate methods and technologies to endure them. In the 20th century, deep-sea exploration advanced considerably through a series of technological inventions, ranging from the sonar system, which can detect the presence of objects underwater through the use of sound, to manned deep-diving submersibles. In 1960, Jacques Piccard and United States Navy Lieutenant Donald Walsh descended in the bathyscaphe Trieste into the deepest part of the world's oceans, the Mariana Trench. In 2018, DSV Limiting Factor, piloted by Victor Vescovo, completed the first mission to the deepest point of the Atlantic Ocean, diving 8,375 m (27,477 ft) below the ocean surface to the base of the Puerto Rico Trench. With the advent of satellite imagery and aviation, exploration of the surface of Earth has largely ceased, however the culture of many disconnected tribes still remain undocumented and left to be explored. Urban exploration is the exploration of manmade structures, usually abandoned ruins or hidden components of the manmade environment.

Space exploration

Space exploration started in the 20th century with the invention of exo-atmospheric rockets. This has given humans the opportunity to travel to the Moon, and to send robotic explorers to other planets and far beyond.

Both of the Voyager probes have left the Solar System, bearing imprinted gold discs with multiple data types.

Behavioral trait

A 2015 study, performed on mobile phone data and on GPS tracks of private vehicles in Italy, demonstrated that individuals naturally split into two well-defined categories according to their mobility habits, dubbed "returners" and "explorers". "Explorers" showed a star-like mobility pattern: they have a central core of locations (composed by home and work places) around which distant core of locations gravitates.

Evidence-based policy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Evidence-based policy is an idea in public policy proposing that policy decisions should be based on, or informed by, rigorously established objective evidence. The implied contrast is with policymaking based on ideology, 'common sense,' anecdotes, and intuitions. It is the government equivalent of the effective altruism movement. Evidence-based policy uses a thorough research method, such as randomized controlled trials (RCT). Good data, analytical skills, and political support to the use of scientific information are typically seen as the crucial elements of an evidence-based approach.

Some have promoted particular types of evidence as 'best' for policymakers to consider, including scientifically rigorous evaluation studies such as randomized controlled trials to identify programs and practices capable of improving policy-relevant outcomes. However, some areas of policy-relevant knowledge may not be well served by quantitative research. This has led to a debate about the type of evidence to use. For instance, policies concerned with human rights, public acceptability, or social justice may require proof other than randomized trials provide. Also, policy evaluation may require moral philosophical reasoning in addition to considerations of evidence of intervention effect (which randomized trials are principally designed to provide). The purpose of evidence-based policy is to use scientific evidence in rigorously and comprehensively to inform decisions rather than to allow political processes to use them in a piecemeal, manipulated, or cherry-picked manner.

Some policy scholars now avoid using the term evidence-based policy, using others such as evidence-informed. This language shift allows continued thinking about the underlying desire to improve evidence use in terms of its rigor or quality while avoiding some of the key limitations or reductionist ideas at times seen with the evidence-based language. Still, the language of evidence-based policy is widely used and, as such, can be interpreted to reflect a desire for evidence to be used well or appropriately in one way or another – such as by ensuring systematic consideration of rigorous and high-quality policy-relevant evidence, or by avoiding biased and erroneous applications of evidence for political ends.

A related group is the rationalist community.

History

The move towards modern evidence-based policy has its roots in the larger movement towards evidence-based practice, which was prompted by the rise of evidence-based medicine in the 1980s. However, the term 'Evidence-based policy' didn't see use in medicine until the 1990s. The term wasn't used in social policy until the early 2000s. The earliest example of evidence-based policy was tariff-making in Australia. The legislation required tariffs to be educated by a public report issued by the Tariff Board. These reported on the tariff, industrial, and economic impacts.

History of Evidence-Based Medicine

The phrase evidence-based medicine (EBM) was coined by Gordon Guyatt. However earlier example of EBM trace to the early 1900s. Some argue that the earliest form of EBM occurred in the 11th century, when Ben Cao Tu Jing from Song Dynasty said, "In order to evaluate the efficacy of ginseng, find two people and let one eat ginseng and run, the other run without ginseng. The one that did not eat ginseng will develop shortness of breath sooner." Many scholars see the term evidence-based policy as evolving from "evidence-based medicine", in which research findings are used as the support for clinical decisions and evidence is gathered by randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which is comparing a treatment group with a placebo group to measure results. Even though the earliest published RCTs in medicine were during WWII and post-war era: 1940s and 1905s, the term 'evidence-based medicine' did not appear in published medical research until 1993. In 1993, the Cochrane Collaboration was established in the UK, and works to keep all RCTs up-to-date and provides "Cochrane reviews" which provides primary research in human health and health policy. The evolution of the appearance of the keyword EBM has increased since the 2000s and the effect of EBM has seen significant expansion to the field of medicine.

History of Evidence-Based Policy Making

Randomized Controlled Trials were late to appear in the social policy compared to the medical field. Although evidence-based approach can be traced as far back as the fourteenth century, it was more recently popularized by the Blair Government in the United Kingdom. The Blair Government said they wanted to end the ideological led-based decision-making for policy making. For example, a UK Government white paper published in 1999 ("Modernising Government") noted that Government must "produce policies that really deal with problems, that are forward-looking and shaped by evidence rather than a response to short-term pressures; that tackle causes not symptoms". There was then an increase in research and policy activists pushing for more evidence-based policy-making which led to the formation of the sister organization to Cochrane Collaboration, the Campbell Collaboration in 1999. The Campbell Collaboration conducts reviews on the best evidence that analyzes the effects of social and educational policies and practices.

The Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) became involved in the push for more evidence-based policymaking with its 1.3 million pound grant to the Evidence Network in 1999. The Evidence Network is a center for evidence-based policy and practice and is similar to both the Campbell and Cochrane Collaboration. More recently the Alliance for Useful Evidence has been established, with funding from ESRC, Big Lottery and Nesta, to champion the use of evidence in social policy and practice. The Alliance is a UK-wide network that promotes the use of high-quality evidence to inform decisions on strategy, policy and practice through advocacy, publishing research, sharing ideas and advice, and holding events and training.

People practice Evidence-based policy in different ways. For example, Michael Kremer and Rachel Glennerster had many theories about what would work best to improve students' test scores. Therefore, they conducted randomized controlled trials in Kenya. They tried new textbooks and flip charts, as well as smaller class sizes. However, they found that the only intervention that raised school attendance was treating intestinal worms in children. Based on their findings, they started the Deworm the World Initiative, which is rated by GiveWell as one of the best charities in the world for cost-effectiveness.

Recently questions have been raised about the conflicts of interest inherent to evidence-based decision-making used in public policy development. In a study of vocational education in prisons operated by the California Department of Corrections, Andrew J. Dick, William Rich, and Tony Waters found that political considerations inevitably intruded into “evidence-based decisions” which were ostensibly technocratic. They point out that this is particularly true where evidence is paid for by policymakers who have a vested interest in having past political judgments confirmed, evidence-based research is likely to be corrupted, leading to policy-based evidence making.

Methodology

There are many methodologies for evidence-based policy, however they all share the following characteristics:

  • Tests a theory as to why the policy will be effective and what the impacts of the policy will be if it is successful
  • Includes a counterfactual: what would have occurred if the policy had not been implemented
  • Incorporates some measurement of the impact
  • Examines both direct and indirect effects that occur because of the policy
  • Separates the uncertainties and controls for other influences outside of the policy that may affect the outcome
  • Should be able to be tested and replicated by a third party

The form of the methodology used with evidence-based policy fits under the cost-benefit framework. It is created to estimate a net payoff if the policy is implemented. Because there is a difficulty quantifying some effects and outcomes of the policy, it is mostly focused on whether benefits will outweigh costs, instead of using specific values.

Types of Evidence for Evidence-Based Policy Making

All kinds of data can be considered a piece of evidence. The Scientific Method effectively organizes this data into tests to strengthen or weaken specific beliefs or hypotheses. For example, the results of different tests can be more or less convincing to the scientific community, based on blind experiment type (i.e., blind vs. double-blind), sample size, and replication. However, supports of evidence-based policy attempt to combine what citizens want (within Maslow's Hierarchy of needs) with what the scientific method has shown will be the most likely produce it.

Quantitative Evidence

Numerical quantities from peer-reviewed journals, data from public surveillance systems, or individual programs are considered quantitative evidence for policymaking. Quantitative data can also be collected by the government or policymakers themselves through surveys. Qualitative evidence is widely used in EBM and evidence-based public health policy constructions.

Qualitative Evidence

Qualitative evidence includes nonnumerical data collected by methods that include observations, interviews, or focus groups. Qualitative evidence is widely used to create compelling stories to impact those in decision-making authority. Although the evidence can be divided according to their type, there is no hierarchical weight over qualitative vs. quantitative data. They are both efficient in acting as evidence in certain areas than others. Often, qualitative and quantitative evidence are combined in the process of policymaking.

Cause priorities

Some approach Evidence-based policy with cause neutrality: they first define the goal or human interest and use Evidence-based processes to identify the most effective method.cause neutrality. Examples of causes include providing food for the hungry, protecting endangered species, mitigating climate change, reforming immigration policy, researching cures for illnesses, preventing sexual violence, alleviating poverty, eliminating factory farming, or averting nuclear warfare. Many people in the effective policy movement have prioritized global health and development, animal welfare, and mitigating risks that threaten the future of humanity.

Global health and development

A poor family near Dadaab, Kenya

The alleviation of global poverty and neglected tropical diseases has been a focus of some of the earliest and most prominent organizations associated with the movement to use evidence to make decisions.

Charity evaluator GiveWell was founded by Holden Karnofsky and Elie Hassenfeld in 2007 to address poverty. GiveWell has argued that the marginal impact of donations is greatest for attacking global poverty and health. Its leading recommendations have been in these domains: malaria prevention charities Against Malaria Foundation and Malaria Consortium, deworming charities Schistosomiasis Control Initiative and Deworm the World Initiative, and GiveDirectly for direct unconditional cash transfers.

The Life You Can Save, which originated from Singer's book of the same name, works to alleviate global poverty by promoting evidence-backed charities, conducting philanthropy education, and changing the culture of giving in affluent countries.

While much of the initial focus has been on direct strategies such as health interventions and cash transfers, more systematic social, economic, and political reforms meant to facilitate larger long-term poverty reduction have also attracted attention. In 2011, GiveWell announced the creation of GiveWell Labs, which was later renamed the Open Philanthropy Project, for the purpose of research and philanthropic funding of more speculative and diverse causes such as policy reform, global catastrophic risk reduction and scientific research. It is a collaboration between GiveWell and Good Ventures.

Long-term future and global catastrophic risks

Global catastrophic risks, such as those arising from pandemics, are a priority.

Focusing on the long-term future, some believe that the total value of any meaningful metric (wealth, potential for suffering, potential for happiness, etc.) summed up over future generations, far exceeds the value for people living today. Some researchers have found it psychologically difficult to contemplate the trade-off; Toby Ord stated, "Since there is so much work to be done to fix the needless suffering in our present, I was slow to turn to the future." Reasons Ord gave for working on long-term issues include a belief that preventing long-term suffering is "even more neglected" than causes related to current suffering, and that the residents of the future are even more powerless to affect risks caused by current events than are current dispossessed populations".

Philosophically, assessing the suffering of future populations involves multiple considerations. First, humanity (and other animals) may not exist at all, in which cases there is no suffering to alleviate (presuming that the process of eliminating the population does not itself involve suffering). Second, the cost of an incremental reduction in suffering in the future may be higher (e.g., because of increasing healthcare costs) or lower (brought down, e.g., by the ever-crashing cost of computing or renewable energy). Third, the value of a benefit or cost is affected by the time preferences of the recipient and the payer. Fourth, future suffering may be alleviated by current spending, potentially at a lower cost. Fifth, alleviating suffering sooner may have a knock-on effect of reducing/increasing future suffering. Sixth, if investing money produces outsized returns, that may provide the ability to reduce total suffering by more than if the money is instead donated before it can accumulate. Seventh, future populations may be so much wealthier than the current population that, even if a particular reduction in suffering costs more than it does today, the population might still be better off by waiting. Singer argued that existential risk should not be "the dominant public face of the effective altruism movement" because he claimed that doing so would drastically limit the movement's reach.

In particular, the importance of addressing existential risks such as dangers associated with biotechnology and advanced artificial intelligence is often highlighted and the subject of active research. Because it is generally infeasible to use traditional research techniques such as randomized controlled trials to analyze existential risks, researchers such as Nick Bostrom have used methods such as expert opinion elicitation to estimate their importance. Ord offered probability estimates for a number of existential risks in his 2020 book The Precipice.

Organizations that work actively on research and advocacy for improving the long-term future are the Future of Humanity Institute at the University of Oxford, the Centre for the Study of Existential Risk at the University of Cambridge, and the Future of Life Institute. In addition, the Machine Intelligence Research Institute is focused on the more narrow mission of managing advanced artificial intelligence.

Evidence-based policy from Non-Government Organizations

The Overseas Development Institute

The Overseas Development Institute claims that research-based evidence can contribute to policies that dramatically impact lives. Success stories quoted in the UK's Department for International Development's (DFID) new research strategy include a 22% reduction in neonatal mortality in Ghana as a result of helping women begin breastfeeding within one hour of giving birth and a 43% reduction in deaths among HIV positive children using a widely available antibiotic.

After many policy initiatives, the Overseas Development Institute evaluated their evidence-based policy efforts. They identified specific reasons that policy is weakly informed by research-based evidence. Policy processes are complex and rarely linear or logical. Therefore, simply presenting information to policy-makers and expecting them to act upon it is very unlikely to work. These reasons include information gaps, secrecy, the need for speedy responses and slow data, political expediency (what is popular), and the fact that policy-makers are not interested in making the policy more scientific. When a gap is identified between the scientific and political process, those interested in shrinking the gap must choose between making their politicians use scientific techniques or their scientists use more political methods.

The Overseas Development Institute concluded that, with the lack of evidence-based policy progress, those with the data should move into the political and advertising world of emotion and storytelling to influence those in power. They replaced simple tools such as cost–benefit analysis and logical frameworks, with identifying the key players, being good storytellers, synthesizing complex data from their research into simple, compelling stories. The Overseas Development Institute did not advocate for re-making the system to support evidence-based policy but encouraged those with data to jump into the political process.

Further, they concluded that turning someone who 'finds' data into someone who 'uses' data in our current system involves a fundamental reorientation towards policy engagement rather than academic achievement. This focus requires engaging much more with the policy community, developing a research agenda focusing on policy issues rather than academic interests, acquiring new skills or building multidisciplinary teams, establishing new internal systems and incentives, spending much more on communications, producing a different range of outputs, and working more in partnerships and networks.

Based on research conducted in six Asian and African countries, the Future Health Systems consortium has identified a set of critical strategies for improving uptake of evidence into policy, including improving the technical capacity of policy-makers; better packaging of research findings; use of social networks; establishment of fora to assist in linking evidence with policy outcomes.

The Pew Charitable Trust

The Pew Charitable Trust is a non-governmental organization that has attempts to use data, science, and facts to serve the public good. Pew has a Results First initiative that works with the different US states to implement evidence-based policymaking in the development of their laws. This initiative has developed a framework may be seen as an example of how to implement evidence based policy.

Pew's 5 key components of Evidence-based policy are:

  • Program assessment. Systematically review available evidence on the effectiveness of public programs.
    • Develop an inventory of funded programs.
    • Categorize programs by their evidence of effectiveness.
    • Identify programs’ potential return on investment.
  • Budget development. Incorporate evidence of program effectiveness into budget and policy decisions, giving funding priority to those that deliver a high return on investment of public funds.
    • Integrate program performance information into the budget development process.
    • Present information to policymakers in user-friendly formats that facilitate decision-making.
    • Include relevant studies in budget hearings and committee meetings.
    • Establish incentives for implementing evidence-based programs and practices.
    • Build performance requirements into grants and contracts.
  • Implementation oversight. Ensure that programs are effectively delivered and are faithful to their intended design.
    • Establish quality standards to govern program implementation.
    • Build and maintain capacity for ongoing quality improvement and monitoring of fidelity to program design.
    • Balance program fidelity requirements with local needs.
    • Conduct data-driven reviews to improve program performance.
  • Outcome monitoring. Routinely measure and report outcome data to determine whether programs are achieving desired results.
    • Develop meaningful outcome measures for programs, agencies, and the community.
    • Conduct regular audits of systems for collecting and reporting performance data.
    • Regularly report performance data to policymakers.
  • Targeted evaluation. Conduct rigorous evaluations of new and untested programs to ensure that they warrant continued funding.
    • Leverage available resources to conduct evaluations.
    • Target evaluations to high-priority programs.
    • Make better use of administrative data—information typically collected for operational and compliance purposes—to enhance program evaluations.
    • Require evaluations as a condition for continued funding for new initiatives.
    • Develop a centralized repository for program evaluations.

The Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy

The Coalition for Evidence-Based Policy was a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, whose mission was to increase government effectiveness through the use of rigorous evidence about "what works." Since 2001, the Coalition worked with U.S. Congressional and Executive Branch officials and advanced evidence-based reforms in U.S. social programs, which have been enacted into law and policy. The Coalition claimed to have no affiliation with any programs or program models, and no financial interest in the policy ideas it supported, enabling it to serve as an independent, objective source of expertise to government officials on evidence-based policy.

Major new policy initiatives that were enacted into law with the work of Coalition with congressional and executive branch officials.

  • Evidence-Based Home Visitation Program for at-risk families with young children (Department of Health and Human Services – HHS, $1.5 billion over 2010-2014
  • Evidence-Based Teen Pregnancy Prevention Program (HHS, $109 million in FY14)
  • Investing in Innovation Fund, to fund development and scale-up of evidence-based K-12 educational interventions (Department of Education, $142 million in FY14)
  • First in the World Initiative, to fund development and scale-up of evidence-based interventions in postsecondary education (Department of Education, $75 million in FY14)
  • Social Innovation Fund, to support public/private investment in evidence-based programs in low-income communities (Corporation for National and Community Service, $70 million in FY14)
  • Trade Adjustment Assistance Community College and Career Training Grants Program, to fund development and scale-up of evidence-based education and career training programs for dislocated workers (Department of Labor – DOL, $2 billion over 2011-2014)
  • Workforce Innovation Fund, to fund development and scale-up of evidence-based strategies to improve education/employment outcomes for U.S. workers (DOL, $47 million in FY14).

Their website now says "The Coalition wound down its operations in the spring of 2015, and the Coalition’s leadership and core elements of the group’s work have been integrated into the Laura and John Arnold Foundation". In 2003 the Coalition published a guide on educational evidenced-based practices.

Critiques

Several critiques have emerged. Paul Cairney, professor of politics and public policy at the University of Stirling in Scotland, argues that supporters of the idea underestimate the complexity of policy-making and misconstrue the way that policy decisions are usually made. Cartwright and Hardie oppose emphasizing randomized controlled trials (RCTs). They show that the evidence from RCTs is not always sufficient for undertaking decisions. In particular, they argue that extrapolating experimental evidence into policy context requires understanding what necessary conditions were present within the experimental setting and asserting that these factors also operate in the target of considered intervention. Furthermore, considering the prioritization of RCTs, the evidence-based policy can be accused of being preoccupied with narrowly understood ‘interventions’ denoting surgical actions on one causal factor to influence its effect.

The definition of intervention presupposed by the movement of evidence-based policy overlaps with James Woodward’s interventionist theory of causality. However, policy-making encompasses also other types of decisions such as institutional reforms and actions based on predictions. The other types of evidence-based decision-making do not require having at hand evidence for the causal relation to be invariant under intervention. Therefore, mechanistic evidence and observational studies suffice for introducing institutional reforms and undertaking actions that do not modify the causes of a causal claim.

Moreover, evidence has emerged of front-line public servants, like hospital managers, making decisions that actually worsen patients' care in order to hit pre-ordained targets. This argument was put forward by Professor Jerry Muller of the Catholic University of America in a book called The Tyranny of Metrics. According to articles published in Futures, evidence based policy - in the form of cost-based or risk analyses, may entail forms of compression and exclusion of the issues under analysis, also in relation to power asymmetries among different actors in their capacity to produce evidence. A comprehensive list of critiques, including the fact that policies shown to be successful in one place often fail in others, despite reaching a gold standard of evidence, has been compiled by the policy platform Apolitical.

Hate speech

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ...