Policy is something related to actions or decisions, but the question is: on what basis is this policy designed? One thing to note is that in a modern governed society there are other actors and perspectives involved in the process. This means that more resources can actually be used and taken into account in designing policies to achieve a common outcome effectively. That's when knowledge and evidence shed light on how to bridge these perspectives. The evidence-based movement in modern public policy is therefore the latest version of the search for usable and relevant knowledge to help address and solve problems (Head 2008: 2). Furthermore, without evidence, politicians must resort to intuition, ideology, or conventional wisdom – or, at best, theory alone (Banks 2009: 3). Therefore, it is necessary to consider the existence of knowledge and evidence when designing a targeted policy. This essay will reflect on the knowledge and evidence used in e-cigarette legislation in the Indonesian case and what can be improved by using comprehensive knowledge and evidence as an important tool that can shape better policy. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get Original EssayAccording to Indonesian Excise Law Number 39 (2007), excise tax is imposed on some selected goods with particular characteristics where the consumption of goods needs to be controlled, the distribution of goods needs to be monitored, the use of certain goods can have a negative impact on society and the environment and a revenue tool must be implemented in the name of balance and justice. A tobacco product is classified as one of the selected goods to be subject to excise duty and the extension of other forms of tobacco production, based on improved technology or market preferences, such as the electronic cigarette. E-cigarettes, the most common form of Electronic Nicotine Delivery System (ENDS), are devices that do not burn or use tobacco leaves but vaporize a solution that the user then inhales (WHO 2017). The process of why it is considered necessary to regulate the e-cigarette in Indonesia started from a historical approach to the development of the e-cigarette over a period of time. The study included the origin of the creation of the e-cigarette to the extent that its form has transformed over time and the comparison of the legislative status in most countries (IndonesiaDGCE 2017). In order not to neglect the government, the chemical components contained in the product were also taken into account. From the research conducted by Indonesian Customs Laboratory in 2017, it can be seen that e-cigarette contains dangerous and toxic substances which can lead the user to suffer from health problems. The research also conducted comparative studies on which countries legalize, including the implementation of policy instruments, or completely ban the consumption of e-cigarettes. On the one hand, it is assumed to offer a potential alternative to help reduce the tendency to smoke. On the other hand, negative aspects play a more important role in considerations to limit consumption, such as the possibility of violating the no-smoking zones policy or inviting new young smokers or even creating a dual-use smoker. Stakeholder voices also need to be taken into account to get a bigger picture. Therefore, a meeting was held in 2017 to gather the views of industrial actors regarding the upcoming policy. Consequently, thee-cigarette is subject to a 57% excise tax based on the government retail price. To summarize, in order to design a policy instrument on e-cigarette legislation in Indonesia, the government has already taken into consideration knowledge and provided evidence from multiple studies and backgrounds, from historical to comparative study, from medical to ideological consideration , from professional knowledge to that of interested parties and also from the regulatory approach. However, I personally think that there are still some gaps in outlining this policy. First, the government still remains the crucial actor in the public policy process, like other political elites. In a more particular sense, there are three important types of knowledge that are particularly salient for politics, one of them is political knowledge with the purpose is the know-how, analysis and judgment of the political actor which includes several evidence-relevant vital elements: policy-based – how to consider and adapt strategies or tactics; undertake agenda setting; determine priorities; undertake persuasion and advocacy activities; communicate key messages and ideological thrusts; and so on (Head 2008: 5). This is the first thing that I realize is missing in this particular politics, the attribute of political knowledge. This can be seen from the case where the government prioritizes the outcome it wants to achieve, whether it is raising revenue or protecting society from harmful goods, especially tobacco products. If the goal is to control the consumption of tobacco products, then why have they implemented the maximum excise tax amount on e-cigarettes while the excise tax for the more conventional form of tobacco products remains lower. One can speculate whether the government's preference is to maintain the habit of smoking or to protect the conventional tobacco industry by disadvantaging the other. Furthermore, this is in contradiction to what they raised in the research, which is the belief that e-cigarettes can help change the smoking habit. The role of ENDS in reducing or exacerbating population-level morbidity and mortality due to tobacco products is said to remain highly contested (Meernik et al. 2017). Therefore, agenda setting remains unclear. The next thing to note in this particular case is that although the politician has provided a lot of information related to the e-cigarette, I believe there is a missing link in the proposed data, namely the statistical data. analysis that correlates the connection between the habit of smoking conventional tobacco products and the trend of e-cigarettes over a period of time. This information can help further think about which options the government should choose. The trend will show a significant increase in e-cigarette smoking habit while it will show a decreasing trend in the older form of tobacco smoking habit, so the possible proposal would be to guarantee e-cigarette consumption? Or will the graph show an increasing number in the trend of new smokers while the number of conventional tobacco smokers also continues to increase, so that it can lead to a conclusion about the type of dual-use smoker? If that were the case, the government could probably look at increasing excise taxes on both conventional and modern tobacco products or even banning them altogether. This case can indeed be taken as an opportunity to examine how scientific evidence can be used in the policy-making process while both objective and subjective forms of knowledge are unclear or unavailable (Newman 2017: 2). Here.