Scientific Policy Advice Research Articles

Scientific policy advice during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic – a comparison of 25 democratic countries

Abstract Background The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic required rapid and effective policy responses from governments worldwide, especially in the realm of public health. Due to the global impact of the pandemic, it is important to compare country-specific approaches. A systematic analysis of the role and institutionalization of different bodies of scientific policy advice during the pandemic was conducted to gain insights into scientific policy advice structures and to inform future solutions. Methods We contacted the governments of 35 democratic countries about the role and institutionalization of bodies of scientific advisory advice during the pandemic. Data collection took place between September 2023 and March 2024. We analyzed primary data provided by the governments by qualitative systematic document analysis. Results We received feedback from 25 countries within the research period (including 19 European countries). The results were divided into three main categories: (1) temporality, (2) structure, function, & composition, and (3) transparency. Further sub-categories emerged that helped to compare and classify the countries’ approaches, such as initiation, financing, selection, expertise, and diversity of members, systematics of documentation. For example, some used existing structures from ministries, research institutions or the private sector while others were entirely newly established. National bodies of scientific policy advice mostly developed ad hoc, were temporary, and showed several differences between countries. Conclusions Different types of bodies of scientific policy advice were identified in terms of e.g. initiation, function, expertise, and institutionalization. The results demonstrate a significant variation regarding the role and impact of scientific policy advice during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Our study can help to identify essential aspects of scientific policy advice and to formulate recommendations for future health crises. Key messages • The innovative methodological approach and the data which was collected from 25 countries give new insights into an important field of research. • National bodies of scientific policy advice mostly developed ad hoc, were temporary, and showed several structural differences between countries.

Scientific policy advice on sustainable development: lessons learned from the Dialogue between Scientific Councils in Germany

Scientific policy advice on sustainable development: lessons learned from the Dialogue between Scientific Councils in Germany

An innovative visual approach to the simultaneous study of two dimensions of progress in longevity: an application to French and German regions

BackgroundBoth enhancing life expectancy and decreasing inequalities in lifespan between social groups are significant goals for public policy. To date, however, methodological tools to study progress in both dimensions simultaneously have been lacking. There is also a consensus that absolute and relative inequalities in lifespan must be studied together.MethodsWe introduce a novel graphical representation that combines national mortality rates with both absolute and relative measures of social inequality in mortality. To illustrate our approach, we analyze French and German data stratified by place of residence.ResultsFor all-age mortality, in France we find a steady pace of decline in both mortality and in regional inequalities in mortality over recent decades. In Germany, substantial progress was made in the 1990s, mostly driven by convergence between eastern and western Germany, followed by a period of slower progress. Age-specific analyses for Germany reveal a worrying divergence in regional trends at ages 35–74 in recent years, which is particularly pronounced among women.ConclusionOur novel visual approach offers a way to simultaneously examine two dimensions of progress in longevity, and facilitates meaningful comparisons between populations, even when their current mortality rates differ. The applied methods can be easily reproduced in any country for which long-term mortality series stratified by region, or any relevant socioeconomic characteristic, are available. It is useful for both scientific analysis and policy advice.

Assessing Hydropower Potential under Shared Socioeconomic Pathways Scenarios Using Integrated Assessment Modelling

The world is facing a global sustainability crisis affecting environmental systems and society. Addressing these issues requires a multi-dimensional approach that can integrate energy, water, and environment Systems, as well as provide scientific policy advice. In this study, an updated version of an Integrated Assessment Model (IAM) was used, together with new data compatible with Shared Socioeconomic Pathways (SSPs) projections, to significantly improve the work developed before. SSP climate data (temperature, precipitation, and total radiative forcing) and socioeconomic data (population and GDP) were loaded into the IAM, together with different scenario parameters. By analyzing varying socioeconomic scenarios, mitigation efforts, and adaptation strategies, this study assesses their impact on primary energy demand and, consequently, their impact on hydropower potential production. Our results show diverse energy paths, strongly dependent on the future scenario. Energy demand could increase up to 160%; however, several projections foresee a decline in hydropower production to minus 46% due to both climate change and socioeconomic transformation. Our findings highlight the importance of considering a range of potential future scenarios in energy planning and policy development. The varied outcomes across the considered scenarios emphasize the need for flexibility in strategies to accommodate for uncertainties and address the challenges posed by divergent trajectories in hydropower use and renewable energy shares.

Beraten und Prognostizieren. Unsicheres Wissen in der institutionellen vs. der massenmedialen Politikberatung

Scientific policy advice provides a special framework for processing scientific uncertainties. Socio-political decisions often require a reliable scientific basis that can be used as orientation and legitimation for political decisions. On the one hand, policy advice takes place institutionalized (e. g. by the Office of Technology Assessment at the German Bundestag [TAB] and the National Academy of Sciences Leopoldina), but also in public media discourse, when scientists give interviews or inform about scientific topics in talk shows. The need for advice concerns future actions and is thus closely linked to uncertain knowledge and the providing of forecasts, i. e. a look into the future. In this article, we focus on the practices of consulting and forecasting in the context of policy advice and capture them in their differentiations as well as show what role uncertain knowledge plays in their argumentation. In addition, we analyze to what extent the formulation of prognoses and advice is influenced by the genre and media context of the statement (expert opinion vs. interview / talk show, i. e. also: written and oral contexts).

‚Nützliches‘ Wissen in der wissenschaftlichen Politikberatung?: Ein linguistisch-erkenntnistheoretisches Projekt

Scientific policy advice is a special, hybrid type of scientific activity: science in its advisory function faces the conflict of having to present content in a scientifically credible, unbiased, and value-free form and, at the same time, to prepare it in a politically effective way, i.e., in a way that guides action and is publicly comprehensible. The resulting texts are therefore particularly interesting for approaching scientific research practices with regard to the question of how the struggle for epistemic quality and social legitimacy is reflected in their language and content in the (co-)construction of knowledge. Using exemplary cases, a current interdisciplinary DFG project investigates the practice of scientific policy advice in Germany in terms of form, content, and function from a linguistic and epistemological perspective.

Scientific Policy Advice on the Strategy for Sustainability

Scientific Policy Advice on the Strategy for Sustainability

From where do legislators draw scientific knowledge? Organizations as scientific authorities in four countries' parliamentary debates.

Organizations far beyond traditional academic institutions have become prolific science producers, with many now providing evidence-based advice for national governments and policy-makers. Neo-institutional sociology explains organizations' growing investment in research activities and research-based policy advice by the all-embracing scientization and the expansion of the educated population, phenomena observable throughout the world. There is, however, considerably less knowledge about how the organizations' increased knowledge production and the supply of science-based policy advice are reflected in national policy-making, including the legislative work of parliaments, and to what extent distinct organizations are deemed authoritative in different countries. In this paper, we examine how different organizations are used as scientific authorities in parliamentary debates over new legislation. Drawing on analyses of 576 parliamentary debates from Australia, Finland, Kenya, and the United Kingdom, we study what organizations are acknowledged as scientific authorities and the relative weight of different organization types in the context of political debates over new legislation. The results reveal that while organizations in general are frequently evoked as scientific authorities in all four countries, there is remarkable variation in the types of organizations considered authoritative in different national contexts. We elaborate these findings by analysing ways in which politicians evaluate organizations as sources of scientific authority. While the same set of evaluative schemas are used in all four countries, each is typically applied to certain types of organization. The results suggest that both the supply of scientific policy advice and political culture shape legislators' rhetorical practices when drawing on organizations' scientific authority.

“Are You a TA Practitioner, Then?” – Identity Constructions in Post-Normal Science

:Technology assessment (TA) is a paradigmatic case for the manifold and, at times, ambiguous processes of identity formation of researchers in inter- and transdisciplinary settings. TA combines the natural, technical, and social sciences and follows the multiple missions of scientific analysis, public outreach, and policy advice. However, despite this diversity, it also constitutes a genuine community with its own discourses, conferences, and publications. To which extent “being a TA practitioner” also provides for a genuine scholarly identity is still unclear. Building on interviews with technology assessment practitioners at an academic TA institute, we ask what inter/trans/disciplinary identification patterns emerge in this field. Our analysis shows that TA practitioners adopt multiple identities, from “enthusiastic TA practitioner” to “strong interdisciplinarian” or “disciplinarian” – with distinct identity troubles inherent in all these options. We find that generational affiliation plays a vital role in identity formation. It relates to different primary orientations (towards research or advisory practices), inter/disciplinary backgrounds, contracting modes, and lengths of time spent at the TA institute. We conclude firstly, that disciplinary categories figure strongly in transdisciplinary identities; secondly, that the relation of chronos and identity warrants more substantial consideration: as time spent at a transdisciplinary institute as or as perceived options for “futuring one’s identity”; thirdly, that our understanding of academic generations could profit from a more sociological conception; and, fourthly, that TA’s multidisciplinary setup and threefold orientation towards science, society, and policy result in multiplying possible identities and thus making it difficult to form a stable community.

Scientific policy advice: An attempt to structurize types of organizations on the international level

Scientific policy advice: An attempt to structurize types of organizations on the international level

Datenmangel und andere Probleme der wirtschaftswissenschaftlichen Politikberatung in Deutschland

AbstractThe relationship between politics and scientific policy advice is still characterized by misunderstandings on both sides. A major point of criticism from the political arena is repeatedly the lacking concern for reality in economics. This problem, however, is at least partly homemade, as the data situation is not good in many areas in Germany, even for research purposes. In addition to other reasons — such as incentives to publish in top international journals, which in turn seems to be easier with U.S. topics or data than with issues relevant to other countries — the lack of data availability also contributes to the fact that economists in the D/A/CH area deal less with “local” topics than would be possible.

Technocratic Decision-Making in Times of Crisis? The Use of Data for Scientific Policy Advice in Germany’s COVID-19 Management

COVID-19 has demonstrated the importance of data for scientific policy advice. Mechanisms by which data is generated, shared, and ultimately lead to policy responses are crucial for enhancing transparency and legitimacy of decisions. At the same time, the volume, complexity and volatility of data are growing. Against this background, mechanisms, actors, and problems of data-driven scientific policy advice are analysed. The study reveals role conflicts, ambiguities, and tensions in the interaction between scientific advisors and policy-makers. The assumption of a technocratic model, promoted by well-established structures and functioning processes of data-driven government, cannot be confirmed. Reality largely corresponds to the pragmatic model, in parts also the decisionist model, albeit with dysfunctional characteristics.

Extended Peer Review as Quality Assurance in Scientific Policy Advice

Extended Peer Review as Quality Assurance in Scientific Policy Advice

Extended Peer Review as Quality Assurance in Scientific Policy Advice

Extended Peer Review as Quality Assurance in Scientific Policy Advice

Goodbye Expert-Based Policy Advice? Challenges in Advising Governmental Institutions in Times of Transformation

The global transformation towards sustainability has not only increased the demand for anticipatory and reflexive knowledge to support decision making, but also raises three challenges common to all forms of scientific policy advice: to appropriately consider societal norms and values (challenge of normativity), to integrate different forms of knowledge (challenge of integration) and to organize the participation of stakeholders (challenge of participation). While new forms of scientific policy advice in the field of sustainability research (SR) have emerged in response, the role of established actors such as the Office of Technology Assessment at the German Bundestag (TAB) is increasingly scrutinized. One of the fundamental characteristics of TAB’s model of scientific policy advice is a rigid boundary arrangement between politics and science that places a high value on the objectivity and authority of scientific knowledge. Based on a content analysis of digitalization-related TAB reports spanning three decades, we describe how a rather technocratic institution such as TAB has dealt with the challenges of normativity, integration, and participation, and we compare its approach with that of SR institutions. TAB has partly adapted its working mode to the new challenges, e.g., by trying out new methods to foster a stronger dialogue with stakeholders. However, TAB’s response to the challenges distinctly differs from the forms of transformative research conducted in the SR community. We argue that this is not only a necessary precondition to maintain its reputation as a trustworthy actor towards the Parliament but gives TAB and similar expert-based institutions a special role in the governance of societal transformation.

What Does Good Science-Based Advice to Politics Look Like?

I address options for providing scientific policy advice and explore the relation between scientific knowledge and political, economic and moral values. I argue that such nonepistemic values are essential for establishing the significance of questions and the relevance of evidence, while, on the other hand, such social choices are the prerogative of society. This tension can be resolved by recognizing social values and identifying them as separate premises or as commissions while withholding commitment to them, and by elaborating a plurality of policy packages that envisage the implementation of different social goals. There are limits to upholding the value-free ideal in scientific research. But by following the mentioned strategy, science can give useful policy advice by leaving the value-free ideal largely intact. Such scientific restraint avoids the risk of appearing to illegitimately impose values on the public and could make the advice given more trustworthy.

Aesthetic Expertise for Sustainable Development: Envisioning Artful Scientific Policy Advice

Unsustainable developments will continue to be a significant challenge from the global to local level. The United Nations Transformation Agenda 2030 reflects the breadth and depth of the task and serves as a central reference point. The participation and collaboration of state and non-state actors are considered necessary to make progress in this context. However, politics and policy-making play a central role for guiding and shaping sustainable development. In order to secure societal acceptance for the targeted sustainability transformation, this article claims that policy-making for sustainable development should aim to bring about well-being-oriented transformations. In this regard, besides cognitive insight into the need for change, the multisensory dimensions of human existence in general as well as in everyday social practices in particular should be taken into account more systematically. It is argued that the presented approach of artful scientific policy advice may enable sensory-informed and creative policy-making by providing aesthetic expertise.

Nonpartisan advice for the U.S. Congress matters

As in all democratically constituted states, scientific policy advice to the legislature in the U. S. is faced with the challenges of this time: What can good advice look like given the rapidly developing new technologies and their far-reaching implications for society? Despite decades of collaboration between consultants and advisors, mutual trust must be won over and over again. Against this background, it is particularly interesting to take a closer look at current developments in the U. S.: Timothy M. Persons, GAO’s Chief Scientist, gives insights into the work of the U. S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), which advises the U. S. Congress. It becomes clear that balanced results of technology assessment and other GAO products arise when not only the majority but also the minority party is heard when prioritizing congressional inquiries. The research questions must be impartial and meet congressional requirements. The interview was conducted by Constanze Scherz (ITAS-KIT).

Historical, Philosophical, and Sociological Perspectives on Earth System Modeling

AbstractWith the advent of climate change as a major challenge of our time, Earth system modeling has become highly policy‐relevant regulatory science. In this situation, the social mechanisms that play a role in any scientific endeavor become particularly exposed. By discussing historical, philosophical, and sociological (HPS) aspects of the field's current “cultures of prediction” together with the physical science community in a physical science journal, we aim to provide an entry point into HPS reasoning for climate scientists interested in reflecting on their field and science in general. This paper, first, introduces our perspective on “science as culture” and climate modeling as “regulatory science” and, second, highlights and connects relevant ideas from the three commentaries that follow it. In so doing, we hope to give a fuller picture of climate science, the interplay it engenders between HPS and the physical sciences, the distinctions that it gives rise to as compared to some of the more traditional, exact, sciences in which it is rooted and its place in society including its role in scientific policy advice.

The Quantification and Evolution of Military-Civilian Integration Policy in China

Discussion about the military-civilian integration policy in China has so far only focused on qualitative analysis. Therefore, this article attempts to bridge the gap by quantifying the changes in the military-civilian integration policy promulgated by policy-making bodies. It does so by using grounded theory and a text mining method to analyse the content of military-civilian integration policy promulgated by Chinese authorities over the past 16 years. It is found that Chinese military-civilian integration policy focuses on some areas, such as military equipment, emerging industry and other fields, but focuses less on education, finance and social services. This article can offer some reasonable scientific policy advice to improve the modernization level of the military-civilian integration policy formulation.