Science Outside the Lab: Helping Graduate Students in Science and Engineering Understand the Complexities of Science Policy

Bernstein, Michael J.; Reifschneider, Kiera; Bennett, Ira; Wetmore, Jameson M.

doi:10.1007/s11948-016-9818-6

Cited by 17 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The sense of job satisfaction reported by participants arose from the learning opportunities associated with working in a diverse team, as well as a sense of personal achievement from observing tangible impacts of science on policy and practice. Indeed, previous studies have shown that while many environmental scientists, particularly early career scientists, are driven by a personal goal of achieving impacts on policy and practice, they are not skilled or trained in how engage with decision-makers, nor understand the complexities of policy processes [ 8 , 55 ]. This can lead to reduced career satisfaction among early-career scientists, making them less likely to pursue a long-term career in science [ 56 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building university-based boundary organisations that facilitate impacts on environmental policy and practice

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Responding to modern day environmental challenges for societal well-being and prosperity necessitates the integration of science into policy and practice. This has spurred the development of novel institutional structures among research organisations aimed at enhancing the impact of environmental science on policy and practice. However, such initiatives are seldom evaluated and even in cases where evaluations are undertaken, the results are rarely made publicly available. As such there is very little empirically grounded guidance available to inform other organisations in this regard. To help address this, the aim of this study is to evaluate the Baltic Eye Project at Stockholm University–a unique team consisting of researchers from different fields, science communicators, journalists and policy analysts–working collectively to support evidence-informed decision-making relating to the sustainable management of the Baltic Sea environment. Specifically, through qualitative interviews, we (1) identify the impacts achieved by the Baltic Eye Project; (2) understand the challenges and barriers experienced throughout the Baltic Eye Project; and (3) highlight the key features that are needed within research organisations to enhance the impact of science on policy and practice. Results show that despite only operating for three years, the Baltic Eye Project has achieved demonstrable impacts on a range of levels: impacts on policy and practice, impacts to individuals working within the organisation and impacts to the broader University. We also identify a range of barriers that have limited impacts to date, such as a lack of clear goals at the establishment of the Baltic Eye Project and existing metrics of academic impact (e.g. number of publications). Finally, based on the experiences of employees at the Baltic Eye Project, we identify the key organisational, individual, financial, material, practical, political, and social features of university-based boundary organisations that have impact on policy and practice. In doing so this paper provides empirically-derived guidance to help other research organisations increase their capacity to achieve tangible impacts on environmental policy and practice.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Building university-based boundary organisations that facilitate impacts on environmental policy and practice

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the pursuit of developing scientists who understand and can effectively engage with policy processes (Tyler, 2017), many organisations now offer formal opportunities for scientists to learn about and experience policymaking in practice (AAAS, 2017;Bernstein et al, 2017;Kuehne et al, 2014;Petes and Meyer, 2018). These provide important avenues for ECRs to gain firsthand experience of operating at the interface of science and policy.…”

Section: Institutionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite this academic progress, however, the practicalities of how to successfully influence policy processes that are laden with diverse ideas, values and norms can remain elusive to many scientists. This is particularly pertinent among early career researchers (ECRs), with evidence showing that while achieving policy impact is an important personal goal for many ECRs (including postgraduate students), they are not always skilled or trained in how to engage with decision-makers, nor understand the complexities of policy processes (e.g., Bernstein et al, 2017;Cvitanovic, Hobday, van Kerkhoff and Marshall, 2015;Marcella et al, 2017). Further, ECRs must not only navigate trade-offs inherent in balancing science-policy work with their research (Sarkki et al, 2014), but to do so in a highly insecure career stage characterised by short-term contracts and extreme mobility (Kellard and Śliwa 2016;Phillips and Heywood-Roos, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An introduction to achieving policy impact for early career researchers

Evans

Cvitanovic

2018

Palgrave Commun

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Scientists are increasingly required to demonstrate the real world tangible impacts arising from their research. Despite significant advances in scholarship dedicated to understanding and improving the relationships between science, policy and practice, much of the existing literature remains high level, theoretical, and not immediately accessible to early career researchers (ECRs) who work outside of the policy sciences. In this paper, we draw on the literature and our own experiences working in the environmental sciences to provide an accessible resource for ECRs seeking to achieve policy impact in their chosen field. First, we describe key concepts in public policy to provide sufficient background for the non-expert. Next, we articulate a number of practical steps and tools that can help ECRs to identify and enhance the policy relevance of their research, better understand the policy world in practice and identify a range of pathways to achieving impact. Finally, we draw on our personal experiences to highlight some of the key individual characteristics and values that are needed to operate more effectively at the interface of science, policy and practice. Our hope is that the information and tools provided here can help to empower ECRs to create their own pathways to impact that best suit their individual goals, circumstances, interests and strengths.

show abstract

“…SOtL is typically held in Washington, DC and brings together approximately 14 science and engineering doctoral students. Over the course of one or two weeks, the students meet dozens of people who work at the interface of engineering, policy, and society including policymakers, regulators, funders, lobbyists, lawyers, and museum professionals (Bernstein et al 2016).…”

Section: Science Outside the Labmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconnecting Engineering with the Social and Political Sphere

Wetmore

2018

Engineering a Better Future

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Many students choose to study engineering because they want to make the world a better place. They have skills in math and the sciences and they want to use those skills to create technologies that solve problems. They want to make people's lives easier and they want to find answers to society's most pressing dilemmas. The promise that engineering can address many of the world's "Grand Challenges" gives them a sense of direction and purpose. All too often, however, as students progress through their undergraduate programs, this vision and purpose get clouded. A recent study has argued that engineering programs foster a "culture of disengagement" and that the public welfare concerns of students enrolled in them decrease over time (Cech 2014). There are likely many factors for this. The focus of the first two years of most engineering programs is on math and science courses and these are rarely linked to engineering practice, let alone social needs. Ethics courses are rare, and when they are taught they typically focus on microethics-local responsibilities-rather than the broader social questions covered in macroethics (Herkert 2005). And even design courses, which are supposed to help students think independently and connect different sets of expertise, rarely include significant attention to the social and political aspects of the problems being addressed. Students often enter engineering programs with broad social goals, but as they navigate through the details of a technical education their perspective and aspirations can narrow significantly. I frequently see this firsthand when I teach engineering undergraduates. I usually find that the ethical dilemmas that are typically presented to engineering students distract them from the most important ethical questions. But occasionally I will ask them one. For instance, I have asked groups of students what they would do if their boss asked them to design a technology that they knew would put hundreds of people

show abstract

Science Outside the Lab: Helping Graduate Students in Science and Engineering Understand the Complexities of Science Policy

Cited by 17 publications

References 48 publications

Building university-based boundary organisations that facilitate impacts on environmental policy and practice

Building university-based boundary organisations that facilitate impacts on environmental policy and practice

An introduction to achieving policy impact for early career researchers

Reconnecting Engineering with the Social and Political Sphere

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About