Association for Public Policy Analysis & Management

A popular position in the policy literature argues that analysts should be “change-makers,” who construct a narrative, build a coalition of opponents, and advocate for a policy solution that they believe is in the public interest. This article argues that unelected, unappointed governmental analysts must reject this position and remain neutral as a matter of efficient and legitimate institutional design. However, neutrality does not entail a reliance on purely technical or objective evidence. Rather, neutrality should be understood in a comprehensive sense, giving analysts reason to collect evidence on all reasons that citizens find relevant. This standard requires analysts to look outward to the values and perspectives of democratic citizens, rather than to their own personal values. These ethical obligations should be debated as a profession and enforced as a code of professional ethics.