The scientization of public policy and politics: A new approach to conceptualizing and identifying the phenomenon.

We know that deep scientization (DS)—the misrepresentation of political issues as technical/scientific ones best handled by experts—can unduly limit public deliberation and lead to policy misdesign. Yet, tools for investigating DS remain lacking. This article develops a new approach to diagnosing DS that works by identifying where experts have used their discretion to construct policy claims that contravene existing, shared epistemic standards. This approach's value is demonstrated through a case study of U.S. chronic fatigue syndrome (CFS) policy. The study shows that, whereas government experts originally developed CFS as a research construct, they have since used their discretionary power to recast CFS as a serious disease requiring new policy interventions. This epistemically unjustified transformation of CFS has limited public discussion of important value‐laden policy questions and arguably yielded poor policy outcomes. The approach developed here can also be used to uncover DS in other policy areas. Related Articles: Carlsson, Lars. 2017. "Policy Science at an Impasse: A Matter of Conceptual Stretching?" Politics & Policy 45(2): 148–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12196. Lemire, Sebastian, Laura R. Peck, and Allan Porowski. 2023. "The Evolution of Systematic Evidence Reviews: Past and Future Developments and Their Implications for Policy Analysis." Politics & Policy 51(3): 373–96. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12532. Luján, José Luis. 2023. "Evidence‐based Policies: Lessons from Regulatory Science." Politics & Policy 51(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12543. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]