A Collaboratively-Derived Science-Policy Research Agenda

Abstract

The need for policy makers to understand science and for scientists to understand policy processes is widely recognised. However, the science-policy relationship is sometimes difficult and occasionally dysfunctional; it is also increasingly visible, because it must deal with contentious issues, or itself becomes a matter of public controversy, or both. We suggest that identifying key unanswered questions on the relationship between science and policy will catalyse and focus research in this field. To identify these questions, a collaborative procedure was employed with 52 participants selected to cover a wide range of experience in both science and policy, including people from government, non-governmental organisations, academia and industry. These participants consulted with colleagues and submitted 239 questions. An initial round of voting was followed by a workshop in which 40 of the most important questions were identified by further discussion and voting. The resulting list includes questions about the effectiveness of science-based decision-making structures; the nature and legitimacy of expertise; the consequences of changes such as increasing transparency; choices among different sources of evidence; the implications of new means of characterising and representing uncertainties; and ways in which policy and political processes affect what counts as authoritative evidence. We expect this exercise to identify important theoretical questions and to help improve the mutual understanding and effectiveness of those working at the interface of science and policy.

Priority research questions for the UK food system

“…The method for identifying priority research questions followed an iterative voting process previously applied in agricultural (Pretty et al 2010), conservation (Sutherland et al 2009), ecological (Sutherland et al 2013) and sciencepolicy (Sutherland et al 2012) settings, and described by Sutherland et al (2011). An initial long list of suggested research questions was reduced to 100 top priorities in four voting stages, and subsequently further refined to select the top priorities by theme and major stakeholder group (Table 1).…”

Towards linking environmental law and science

“…Collaboration among scientists and lawyers, government agencies, Indigenous peoples, and stakeholders can enable the early identification of specific data gaps or uncertainties that will be relevant to environmental policy windows (Sutherland et al 2012;Adams et al 2014;Cook et al 2014). For example, science and Haida laws brought attention to flaws in the federal government's management of herring.…”

The need for an integrated biodiversity policy support process – Building the European contribution to a global Biodiversity Observation Network (EU BON)

“…Currently, for biodiversity there is typically a mismatch between the knowledge requirements of policy makers and the information available to them (Sutherland et al 2011). …”