Tapping into science advisers’ learning

Abstract

The art and craft of science advice is not innately known by those scientists who choose to step out of the lab or the university to engage with the world of policy. Despite a wealth of literature on the 'science of science advice', in nearly every situation there is no 'teacher' of science advice; it is a typical case of learning on the job. Within that context, the learning of scholars engaging in expert advice is always situated and can sometimes be transformative. To date, however, there has been no systematic, in-depth research into expert advisers' learning-instead focusing mostly on policymakers' and publics' learning about science. In this article, I suggest that such a research programme is timely and potentially a very fruitful line of inquiry for two mains reasons. First, in the case of environmental and climate issues-the focus of the paper-it has become ubiquitous to talk about the need for transformative change(s) towards sustainable futures. If scholars are going to advocate for and inform transformations beyond academia, then in doing so they ought to also take a harder look at how they themselves are transforming within. Specifically, the article illustrates how qualitative research on advisers' learning can contribute to our understanding of how experts are adapting to changing circumstances in science-policy interactions. Second, it is argued that research on advisers' learning can directly contribute to: (i) guidance for present and future advisers (especially early-career researchers wishing to engage with policy) and organisational learning in science-policy organisations; and (ii) improving policy-relevance of research and the design of impact evaluations for research funding (e.g. Research Excellence Framework). With the hope of stimulating (rather than closing off) innovative ideas, the article offers some ways of thinking through and carrying out such a research programme. As the nature of both science and policymaking continues to change, the learning experiences of expert advisers is a bountiful resource that has yet to be tapped into.

COVID-19 and science advice on the ‘Grand Stage’: the metadata and linguistic choices in a scientific advisory groups’ meeting minutes

“…Other such records may be the advisors’ attendance at public briefings, interactions with traditional and social media, or (interview) contributions to institutional reports and STC evidence sessions. To continue a thought from Obermeister ( 2020 ), the scientific advisors not only had to learn how to advise and influence policymakers in the specific situation of a public health crisis (COVID-19) but also to negotiate their role while increasingly being in the public spotlight. We thus investigate the metadata and linguistic choices during a period in which SAGE’s minutes switched from the ‘backstage’ to the ‘front stage’.…”

Science Advisors and “Good Evidence”: A Case Study

“…It is unclear how they generate 'new knowledge' which is immediately translated in the realities of the political world. Many are required to undergo some transformation, as Obermeister (2020) says "they become 'policy literate'." In other words, they must move between the intricacies of political mechanisms and the generation of scientific evidence, while at the same time, they are also inevitably influenced by their own personal experiences, beliefs, values and cultural backgrounds (Spruijt et al 2014;Porter and Dessai 2017).…”

Trouble in the trough: how uncertainties were downplayed in the UK’s science advice on Covid-19

“…None of this is straightforward to navigate, with trite slogans such as "follow the science" telling us nothing about the tricky business of producing and using scientific knowledge to inform decision-making (Bacevic, 2020). Rather, the unprecedented stress test of Covid-19 provides an important opportunity to learn lessons and strengthen the science advice system in preparation for future emergencies (Obermeister, 2020).…”