Evidence Use in Ordinance Development and Legislative Service Responsiveness in Local Governance

Abstract

This study assessed how evidence use in ordinance development contributed to legislative service responsiveness in the Local Government Unit of Maddela, Quirino. Using an explanatory predictive cross-sectional design, data were obtained from 30 local government personnel directly involved in legislative preparation, documentation, committee support, coordination, implementation, and monitoring. The researcher-developed Evidence Use and Legislative Responsiveness Scale contained 32 items covering four dimensions of evidence use and four dimensions of legislative responsiveness. Composite means, standard deviations, bootstrap confidence intervals, bootstrap linear regression, and relative importance analysis were used. Evidence use was rated high overall (M = 3.72, SD = 0.43), with evidence integration into ordinance development obtaining the highest dimension mean (M = 3.91). Legislative service responsiveness was likewise high (M = 3.76, SD = 0.44), led by interoffice coordination (M = 3.90). Documentation and traceability and implementation-related feedback emerged as the comparatively weaker areas. Evidence use significantly predicted legislative service responsiveness, β = .638, p = .0002, explaining 40.6% of the variance. Among the evidence-use dimensions, integration into ordinance development accounted for the largest share of explained variance at 39.2%. The findings indicated that responsive legislative service depended not only on access to evidence but also on its actual integration into policy formulation. Strengthening evidence traceability and post-enactment feedback mechanisms may further support transparent, responsive, and adaptive local governance.