Background: Public service practitioners on all levels aim to solve increasingly complex policy problems by making use of different forms of evidence. While there are many complex models of knowledge mobilisation, not enough attention is paid to the types of knowledge that are mobilised for public service reform. Ward (2017) has returned to Aristotle’s knowledge types; empirical, technical and practice wisdom, to address this gap. Aims and objectives: This paper applies the theoretical work of Ward (2017) and Flyvbjerg (2001) to the everyday work and practice of frontline public service providers with the aim of identifying core elements of knowledge mobilisation in the practice of public service reform in the context of local governance. Methods: The data is from a case study of a Scottish local authority conducted as part of the What Works Scotland research programme. The paper derives insights from 16 qualitative interviews with service providers in housing, waste management, policing and greenspace services, and 12 observations, analysed using thematic analysis. Findings The findings suggest that empirical or technical knowledge is not sufficient on its own for sustainable solutions to localised policy problems. The practice wisdom of service providers, balancing ethical concerns with diverse perspectives, is a form of knowledge that is not fully valued or recognised in public service reform. Discussion and conclusions: Future research should aim to understand how the integration of empirical, technical and practice knowledge might be achieved through more co-productive relationships between researchers, knowledge mobilisers and service providers.

中文翻译：

---

公共服务改革中的知识动员：整合经验、技术和实践智慧

背景：各级公共服务从业人员旨在通过使用不同形式的证据来解决日益复杂的政策问题。虽然知识动员有许多复杂的模型，但对为公共服务改革动员的知识类型却没有给予足够的重视。Ward (2017) 又回到了亚里士多德的知识类型；经验、技术和实践智慧，以解决这一差距。目的和目标：本文将 Ward (2017) 和 Flyvbjerg (2001) 的理论工作应用到一线公共服务提供者的日常工作和实践中，目的是确定公共服务改革实践中知识动员的核心要素。地方治理的背景。方法：数据来自苏格兰地方当局的案例研究，该研究作为 What Works Scotland 研究计划的一部分进行。该论文从对住房、废物管理、警务和绿地服务领域的服务提供商进行的 16 次定性访谈以及 12 次观察中得出见解，并使用主题分析进行了分析。调查结果 调查结果表明，经验或技术知识本身不足以为本地化的政策问题提供可持续的解决方案。服务提供者的实践智慧、平衡道德关切与不同观点，是一种在公共服务改革中并未得到充分重视或认可的知识形式。讨论和结论：未来的研究应该旨在了解如何整合经验，