Bridging Knowledge and Governance through Institutionalized Science-Policy Interfaces

Abstract

The interaction between expertise and policy has been a matter of debate at least since Plato’s Republic but is of utmost importance given the multiple crises the world is facing today which require evidence-based solutions. The question ‘To what extent institutionalized Science Policy Interfaces (SPIs) could be pivotal for solving these crises’ is the topic of the proposed panel. SPIs are ‘initiatives purposively set up to support interaction processes facilitating connectivity between science and other governance contexts’ (Sarkki et al., 2020). Prominent examples are the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) or the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), but SPIs often vary in type and scale. Next to expert groups, like the IPCC and IPBES, we also find that the literature considers research projects, state agencies and interest groups as SPIs, situated across multiple decision-making levels. The role of these institutionalised knowledge platforms at different levels for creating impact in governance is discussed by a transdisciplinary panel from academia and policy. The panel will focus on three key topics related to the discourse: (1) the general role of knowledge in policymaking, (2) the desired and documented impacts of SPIs in environmental governance and (3) the related factors contributing to the effectiveness of SPIs. Firstly, the panel will delve into the potential tension between expertise and democracy: To what extent is the rule of the people in democracies conflictive with the rule of the knowers? Ways to harmonise the potential conflicts between expertise and democracy will be explored under the second topic, specifically the desired and actual impact of SPIs in environmental governance. For this discussion point, we ask what the impacts of SPIs in governance scholars have documented and to what extent these impacts are normatively desirable? Moving from the types of impacts SPIs can create to how they can make an impact in policy and society, the third topic of the panel discusses factors related to the effectiveness of SPIs. Are the widely established criteria for SPI effectiveness – namely credibility, relevance, and legitimacy – helpful for creating impact? Or should SPIs adopt new criteria to guide their operations, such as applicability, comprehensiveness, timing, and accessibility proposed by Dunn et al. (2017)? What are stories of success or failure when it comes to the institutional design of SPIs and what can we learn from this? This is the question we hope to answer at the end of the panel to gain further insights on how knowledge can be used and shared effectively in diverse forms of governance systems. In sum, this panel will provide a platform for a discourse and knowledge exchange on the multiple approaches to and experiences of institutionalizing science-policy interactions. We will highlight the success stories of SPIs achieving an impact on policies, while also identifying cases we can learn from as more countries begin to regularly include scientists and other knowledge holders in decision-making in a context where global crises can only be effectively addressed collectively.

Title	Details
Scientific policy advice in times of crisis – comparing the financial crisis, the Fukushima accident, and the Covid pandemic	View Paper Details
Effectiveness Factors and Impacts on Political Decisions of Science-Policy Interfaces in the Environmental Sustainability Context	View Paper Details
Strategic science-policy interfacing to close the knowledge – action gap for sustainable use of biodiversity	View Paper Details
The Politics of Institutionalizing International Science-Policy Interfaces. The Case of Climate Change	View Paper Details