Boundary spanning at the science–policy interface: the practitioners’ perspectives

Abstract

Cultivating a more dynamic relationship between science and policy is essential for responding to complex social challenges such as sustainability. One approach to doing so is to “span the boundaries” between science and decision making and create a more comprehensive and inclusive knowledge exchange process. The exact definition and role of boundary spanning, however, can be nebulous. Indeed, boundary spanning often gets conflated and confused with other approaches to connecting science and policy, such as science communication, applied science, and advocacy, which can hinder progress in the field of boundary spanning. To help overcome this, in this perspective, we present the outcomes from a recent workshop of boundary-spanning practitioners gathered to (1) articulate a definition of what it means to work at this interface (“boundary spanning”) and the types of activities it encompasses; (2) present a value proposition of these efforts to build better relationships between science and policy; and (3) identify opportunities to more effectively mainstream boundary-spanning activities. Drawing on our collective experiences, we suggest that boundary spanning has the potential to increase the efficiency by which useful research is produced, foster the capacity to absorb new evidence and perspectives into sustainability decision-making, enhance research relevance for societal challenges, and open new policy windows. We provide examples from our work that illustrate this potential. By offering these propositions for the value of boundary spanning, we hope to encourage a more robust discussion of how to achieve evidence-informed decision-making for sustainability.

An introduction to achieving policy impact for early career researchers

“…An in-depth exploration of these issues is outside of the scope of this article, but can be found elsewhere (Boswell and Smith, 2017;Marcella et al, 2017;Sivertsen, 2017;Smith and Stewart, 2017;Stein, 2018) Our intention for this manuscript is to offer practical guidance specifically for ECRs who are interested in engaging with policy and practice to achieve "impact". Existing literature has provided advice for ECRs on communication (Christian, 2018;Kuehne et al, 2014), stakeholder engagement (Duchelle et al, 2009), and diverse opportunities to engage with policy both inside and outside of academia (Bednarek et al, 2018;Petes and Meyer, 2018;Pietri et al, 2013). However, these contributions rarely make explicit links to public policy theory and scholarship, which we seek to do here.…”

Navigating a just and inclusive path towards sustainable oceans

“…Bridging the science-policy-practice gaps might be facilitated by: a) improving the communication of social science research insights, b) increasing the attention paid to practical application, c) enhancing collaboration in the production of knowledge and solutions at all scales, and d) promoting communities-of-practice and knowledge-action networks to advance both knowledge and practice [102,106,[125][126][127]. First, efforts are needed to more clearly communicate the insights and implications of social science research to ocean-focused policy-makers and practitioners.…”

Communication, Relationships, and Relatability Influence Stakeholder Perceptions of Credible Science

“…Support from academic institutions and boundary organizations, such as nongovernmental organizations, could help overcome this hesitation by providing incentives or training, but many institutions are not yet prioritizing public engagement (Bednarek et al. ). Students and faculty often have no institutional incentives to evaluate the effectiveness of their communication efforts or the applicability of their results to the relevant stakeholder groups (Whitmer et al.…”