Research and evidence strategy (SAFER Programme)

The SAFER programme’s research strategy is structured around two groups of fundamental questions, which provide a clear framework for evidence gathering and evaluation. These questions are designed in line with the Magenta Book principles, ensuring they are relevant, evaluable, and capable of informing policy decisions:

1. Building on existing evidence, how does system performance at national level translate to delivery in practice?

   1. Is the system working as intended at any level, and does it operate differently for different groups? (Different stakeholder groups, both direct and indirect, will be identified through a stakeholder mapping exercise.)

      This question addresses the core evaluative principle of assessing whether the system achieves its intended outcomes for all stakeholders and explores equity and consistency across different groups.

   2. What components of the current system are working for different groups?

      This focuses on identifying effective components and best practices, supporting continuous improvement.

   3. What are the challenges with the current system for different groups?

      This question seeks to uncover barriers and inefficiencies to inform system redesign

2. What changes could be made to improve how the system works?

   1. How do the approaches used by regulators in different countries differ, and which have proven most effective?

      This comparative question supports learning from international evidence and benchmarking, a key principle for robust policy development.

   2. What is viable in a food law delivery system in Scotland?

These research questions provide a structured framework for critically examining the four pillars of the SAFER programme. In addition to assessing the current system, the research has been designed to map emerging evidence explicitly to each pillar, ensuring that insights directly support the development of pillar-specific outcomes.

While the detailed outputs will evolve as the work progresses, this strategy is intentionally structured to surface the evidence needed for each pillar and to guide its development. This approach provides clear assurance that aligning the evidence with the four pillars is a deliberate and central part of the programme.