ON-MERRIT D5.1 Scoping Report: Open Science Outputs in Policy-Making and Public Participation

Reichmann, Stefan; Wieser, Bernhard; Ross-Hellauer, Tony

doi:10.5281/zenodo.3875055

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The way in which science and research have engaged with government has undergone a considerable evolution in the second half of the 20th century (Reichmann, Wieser and Ross-Hellauer, 2020). As the science-policy interface evolved, so did conceptual models developed by social and political scientists (Gluckman, Bardsley and Kaiser, 2021).…”

Section: A Bit Of History: Phases Of the Science-policy Interfacementioning

confidence: 99%

“…in terms of changing relationships between academia and the larger society in the triple-helix-model (Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff, 1990), which similarly constitutes a shift away from linear models of the sciencesociety relationship. It should be noted that the linear model of the science-policy (and society) relationship is not an invention of post-war science popularisation (Reichmann, Wieser and Ross-Hellauer, 2020). However, this type of science communication is still around, thereby perpetuating the deficit model (Felt, 2003, p. 19) developed from the 1950s onwards.…”

Section: A Bit Of History: Phases Of the Science-policy Interfacementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This work is based upon and significantly extends a project deliverable prepared for the European Commission under Grant Agreement No. 824612 (ON-MERRIT -Observing and Negating Matthew Effects in Responsible Research and Innovation Transition) (Reichmann et al 2020). For the deliverable, a systematic literature review was performed in SCOPUS and Web of Science.…”

Section: Introduction: the Role Of Science In Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Open Science at the Science-policy Interface: Bringing in the Evidence?

Reichmann¹,

Wieser²

2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Part of the current enthusiasm about Open Science stems from its promises to reform scientific practicein service of the common good, to ensure that scientific outputs will be found and reused more easily,and to enhance scientific impact on policy and society. With this article, we question this optimism byanalysing the potential for Open Science practices to enhance research uptake at the science-policyinterface. Science advice is critical to help policy makers make informed decisions. Likewise, someinterpretations of Open Science hold that making research processes and outputs more transparent andaccessible will also enhance uptake of results by policy and society at large. However, we argue thatthis hope is based on an unjustifiably simplistic understanding of the science-policy interface that leaveskey terms (“impact”, “uptake”) undefined. We show that this understanding – based upon linear modelsof research uptake – likewise grounds the influential "evidence-policy gap" diagnosis which holds thatto improve research uptake, communication and interaction between researchers and policymakers needto be improved. The overall normative stance of both discussions has side-lined empirical descriptionof the science-policy interface, ignoring questions about the underlying differences between the policydomain and academia. Importantly, both Open Science and literature on closing the evidence-policy gaprecommend improving communication (either in terms of the content or the means) as a viable strategy.To correct some of these views, we combine insights from policy theory with a systematic review of theliterature on the evidence-policy gap in the health domain and find that removing barriers to access byitself will not be enough to foster research uptake.

show abstract

Section: A Bit Of History: Phases Of the Science-policy Interfacementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Bit Of History: Phases Of the Science-policy Interfacementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introduction: the Role Of Science In Policymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Open Science at the Science-policy Interface: Bringing in the Evidence?

Reichmann¹,

Wieser²

2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Open science at the science–policy interface: bringing in the evidence?

Reichmann

Wieser

2022

Health Res Policy Sys

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Part of the current enthusiasm about open science stems from its promises to reform scientific practice in service of the common good, to ensure that scientific outputs will be found and reused more easily, and to enhance scientific impact on policy and society. With this article, we question this optimism by analysing the potential for open science practices to enhance research uptake at the science–policy interface. Science advice is critical to help policy-makers make informed decisions. Likewise, some interpretations of open science hold that making research processes and outputs more transparent and accessible will also enhance the uptake of results by policy and society at large. However, we argue that this hope is based on an unjustifiably simplistic understanding of the science–policy interface that leaves key terms (“impact”, “uptake”) undefined. We show that this understanding—based upon linear models of research uptake—likewise grounds the influential “evidence–policy gap” diagnosis which holds that to improve research uptake, communication and interaction between researchers and policy-makers need to be improved. The overall normative stance of both discussions has sidelined empirical description of the science–policy interface, ignoring questions about the underlying differences between the policy domain and academia. Importantly, both open science and literature on closing the evidence–policy gap recommend improving communication (in terms of either the content or the means) as a viable strategy. To correct some of these views, we combine insights from policy theory with a narrative review of the literature on the evidence–policy gap in the health domain and find that removing barriers to access by itself will not be enough to foster research uptake.

show abstract

ON-MERRIT D5.1 Scoping Report: Open Science Outputs in Policy-Making and Public Participation

Cited by 2 publications

References 0 publications

Open Science at the Science-policy Interface: Bringing in the Evidence?

Open Science at the Science-policy Interface: Bringing in the Evidence?

Open science at the science–policy interface: bringing in the evidence?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About