New development: Keeping evidence usable in parliaments under populist pressure

IMPACTSenior and middle managers in parliamentary administrations, including committee secretaries and heads of research, budget, legal, and information services, must support legislators with competing demands for evidence. This article offers practical ways to keep that support impartial, accessible, and usable under populist pressure. Managers can clarify advisory mandates, link analysis to legislative and scrutiny deadlines, allocate scarce research capacity through transparent criteria, disclose uncertainty in briefings, and preserve searchable records of evidence and decisions. These measures can begin with request protocols, concise evidence templates, collaborative quality checks, and shared repositories; they do not require new offices. Digital and AI-assisted tools can facilitate retrieval and summarization, provided staff verify sources, safeguard confidential material, and remain accountable for outputs. The aim is not to reduce political disagreement, but to make competing claims easier to trace, compare, and scrutinize.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Public Money & Management
Published
2026-10-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2026.2754023
Primary Topic
Public Policy and Administration Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

New development: Keeping evidence usable in parliaments under populist pressure

Jacob Junian Endiartia
2 links
Public Money & Management
Public Policy and Administration Research
article

New development: Keeping evidence usable in parliaments under populist pressure

Jacob Junian Endiartia
article en

Abstract

IMPACTSenior and middle managers in parliamentary administrations, including committee secretaries and heads of research, budget, legal, and information services, must support legislators with competing demands for evidence. This article offers practical ways to keep that support impartial, accessible, and usable under populist pressure. Managers can clarify advisory mandates, link analysis to legislative and scrutiny deadlines, allocate scarce research capacity through transparent criteria, disclose uncertainty in briefings, and preserve searchable records of evidence and decisions. These measures can begin with request protocols, concise evidence templates, collaborative quality checks, and shared repositories; they do not require new offices. Digital and AI-assisted tools can facilitate retrieval and summarization, provided staff verify sources, safeguard confidential material, and remain accountable for outputs. The aim is not to reduce political disagreement, but to make competing claims easier to trace, compare, and scrutinize.

Public Money & Management
House of Representatives (NL)
Peace, justice, and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Public Policy and Administration Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon
New development: Keeping evidence usable in parliaments under populist pressure — Jacob Junian Endiartia · Public Money & Management (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS