Policy evaluation has two main functions: it should lead to policy oriented learning and facilitate accountability. Rendering account is considered an important democratic duty but is not very popular with politicians and, hence, public officials. Learning is popular, but in practice it is often difficult to organize or, indeed, witness.
This contribution addresses the question how, in both functions, policy evaluation could be better utilized. As a starting point we the tension between scientific and political rationality and the barriers associated with these different worlds to the development of knowledge.
As indispensable for sound and productive knowledge management in government the article outlines the importance of societal values, policy effectiveness as a research angle, and the independence of researchers at major evaluations. In addition, relevant research questions, high methodological quality, responsiveness, good timing, and clear and accessible reporting are indispensable. It is argued that these are by no means abstract notions but can be brought into real day-to-day practice.
The conclusion is that a knowledge agenda for policy evaluation that is based on the search for effective policy interventions and societal values can help to bridge politics and science.

One of the classic issues in literature on policy evaluation is that of utilization: how can we make sure the results of evaluative inquiry are used more and better? Traditionally, the answer to this question is often searched in improvement of evaluation quality (accuracy, reliability, independence of the researcher) or evaluation processes (more interaction and responsiveness). Although these are and remain crucial elements for any evaluation, the focus remains on the supply side of evaluation. The psychological insight that people tend to learn more from positive feedback and success is not taken into account.
In this article, we ask whether and how a more positive form of evaluation may contribute to a more effective cycle of learning and accountability. What if – instead of failure, compliance, and accountability – the main focus of monitoring and evaluative inquiry would be to identify and foster achievements that were successful and effective? How would such a positive approach look like and how can it help the actual utilization and usefulness of evaluation? On the basis of theory and international case studies the article describes how focusing on the positive elements of policy and/or implementation may contribute to the demand for and utilization of evaluations.

The Netherlands enjoys a long-standing reputation in the field of road safety. Following the ‘Sustainable Road Safety’ program of the 1990s, the infrastructural layout considerably reduces the risk of accidents while at the same time many measures are in place to improve road user behavior. In recent years, however, there have been several developments that may affect the success of the approach. In addition to an ageing population, urbanization, and the rise of new technologies, there is a combination of decentralization, policy integration, and budgetary restraints.
This contribution presents the philosophy behind the sustainable road safety program and describes its key elements. It discusses policy and societal developments, and the continuing need to improve road safety, especially at a decentralized level. The article argues in favor of a continued systematic approach towards safer road traffic, also in periods of decentralization and limited budgets. It presents a concrete perspective of the role of policy analysis and policy evaluation to develop a proactive approach to road safety under the new conditions. In this, evidence-based interventions, an active use of safety performance indicators, and a focus on success are key elements.