Meeting the Challenges of Policy‐Relevant Science: Bridging Theory and Practice

Abstract

Ongoing public debate about the role of science in policy making signifies the importance of advancing theory and practice in the field. Indeed, assumptions about the science–policy nexus hold direct implications for how this interface is managed. A useful lens on contemporary themes is offered by the experience of a federal environmental science program that launched an ambitious effort to enhance capacity for policy relevance while protecting a commitment to sound, impartial scientific inquiry. This was achieved by developing an explicit conceptual model and implementing corresponding strategies that addressed critical gaps in capacity for policy‐relevant research, analysis, and communication while supporting existing capacities. This article describes and evaluates the capacity‐building effort from the dual perspectives of deepening an understanding of successful practice in the field and advancing a conceptual understanding of the science–policy nexus. It illustrates the challenges facing practitioners and the need for greater interaction between theory and practice.

Public Policy and Behavior Change

“…First, public administration scholars must collaborate more intensively with practitioners. This aligns with the broader call of public administration scholars to better connect science and society (Graffy ; Moynihan ), and with the development of PAR Viewpoint articles (Hall and Battaglio ). A fruitful way of collaborating would be to conduct experiments to test behavioral interventions in the field.…”

Deadly divide: Malawi’s policy debate on HIV/AIDS and condoms

“…Through framing the dimensions of public policy issues, scientists and policy analysts can generally shape public understanding, public discourse, and decision-making. Effective framing may also require a credible explanation of even incomplete states of knowledge and putting it into an understandable context (Graffy 2008;Wynne 1984) in order to promote a particular kind of problem definition, causal interpretation, and potential remedy (Epstein 1996).…”

Public Health Research: Lost in Translation or Speaking the Wrong Language?

“…For example, summary reports and systematic reviews that present results in plain language can be more useful than primary studies of any type. 15,16 CONCLUSIONS Public health actions involve making decisions about entire populations. Although differences in physiology and behaviors determine disease occurrence among individuals within a population, there are often far greater differences in disease incidence among populations (e.g., states, cities) because of variations in their size, environment, and social infrastructure.…”