IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0031824.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Collaboratively-Derived Science-Policy Research Agenda

Author

Listed:
  • William J Sutherland
  • Laura Bellingan
  • Jim R Bellingham
  • Jason J Blackstock
  • Robert M Bloomfield
  • Michael Bravo
  • Victoria M Cadman
  • David D Cleevely
  • Andy Clements
  • Anthony S Cohen
  • David R Cope
  • Arthur A Daemmrich
  • Cristina Devecchi
  • Laura Diaz Anadon
  • Simon Denegri
  • Robert Doubleday
  • Nicholas R Dusic
  • Robert J Evans
  • Wai Y Feng
  • H Charles J Godfray
  • Paul Harris
  • Sue E Hartley
  • Alison J Hester
  • John Holmes
  • Alan Hughes
  • Mike Hulme
  • Colin Irwin
  • Richard C Jennings
  • Gary S Kass
  • Peter Littlejohns
  • Theresa M Marteau
  • Glenn McKee
  • Erik P Millstone
  • William J Nuttall
  • Susan Owens
  • Miles M Parker
  • Sarah Pearson
  • Judith Petts
  • Richard Ploszek
  • Andrew S Pullin
  • Graeme Reid
  • Keith S Richards
  • John G Robinson
  • Louise Shaxson
  • Leonor Sierra
  • Beck G Smith
  • David J Spiegelhalter
  • Jack Stilgoe
  • Andy Stirling
  • Christopher P Tyler
  • David E Winickoff
  • Ron L Zimmern

Abstract

The need for policy makers to understand science and for scientists to understand policy processes is widely recognised. However, the science-policy relationship is sometimes difficult and occasionally dysfunctional; it is also increasingly visible, because it must deal with contentious issues, or itself becomes a matter of public controversy, or both. We suggest that identifying key unanswered questions on the relationship between science and policy will catalyse and focus research in this field. To identify these questions, a collaborative procedure was employed with 52 participants selected to cover a wide range of experience in both science and policy, including people from government, non-governmental organisations, academia and industry. These participants consulted with colleagues and submitted 239 questions. An initial round of voting was followed by a workshop in which 40 of the most important questions were identified by further discussion and voting. The resulting list includes questions about the effectiveness of science-based decision-making structures; the nature and legitimacy of expertise; the consequences of changes such as increasing transparency; choices among different sources of evidence; the implications of new means of characterising and representing uncertainties; and ways in which policy and political processes affect what counts as authoritative evidence. We expect this exercise to identify important theoretical questions and to help improve the mutual understanding and effectiveness of those working at the interface of science and policy.

Suggested Citation

  • William J Sutherland & Laura Bellingan & Jim R Bellingham & Jason J Blackstock & Robert M Bloomfield & Michael Bravo & Victoria M Cadman & David D Cleevely & Andy Clements & Anthony S Cohen & David R , 2012. "A Collaboratively-Derived Science-Policy Research Agenda," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(3), pages 1-5, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0031824
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0031824
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0031824
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0031824&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0031824?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hulme,Mike, 2009. "Why We Disagree about Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521898690.
    2. Hulme,Mike, 2009. "Why We Disagree about Climate Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521727327.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ojha, Hemant & Regmi, Udeep & Shrestha, Krishna K. & Paudel, Naya Sharma & Amatya, Swoyambhu Man & Zwi, Anthony B. & Nuberg, Ian & Cedamon, Edwin & Banjade, Mani R., 2020. "Improving science-policy interface: Lessons from the policy lab methodology in Nepal's community forest governance," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    2. McKee, Martin & Altmann, Danny & Costello, Anthony & Friston, Karl & Haque, Zubaida & Khunti, Kamlesh & Michie, Susan & Oni, Tolullah & Pagel, Christina & Pillay, Deenan & Reicher, Steve & Salisbury, , 2022. "Open science communication: The first year of the UK's Independent Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(3), pages 234-244.
    3. Carol Morris & Minna Kaljonen & Kadri Aavik & Bálint Balázs & Matthew Cole & Ben Coles & Sophia Efstathiou & Tracey Fallon & Mike Foden & Eva Haifa Giraud & Mike Goodman & Eleanor Hadley Kershaw & Ric, 2021. "Priorities for social science and humanities research on the challenges of moving beyond animal-based food systems," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.
    4. Nibedita Mukherjee & William J Sutherland & Lynn Dicks & Jean Hugé & Nico Koedam & Farid Dahdouh-Guebas, 2014. "Ecosystem Service Valuations of Mangrove Ecosystems to Inform Decision Making and Future Valuation Exercises," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-9, September.
    5. Glen T. Hvenegaard & Elizabeth A. Halpenny & Jill N. H. Bueddefeld, 2021. "Towards Mobilizing Knowledge for Effective Decision-Making in Parks and Protected Areas," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-5, March.
    6. Clara-Jane Blye & Elizabeth A. Halpenny & Glen T. Hvenegaard & Dee Patriquin, 2020. "Knowledge Mobilization in the Beaver Hills Biosphere, Alberta, Canada," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-23, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Natalie Slawinski & Jonatan Pinkse & Timo Busch & Subhabrata Bobby Banerjeed, 2014. "The role of short-termism and uncertainty in organizational inaction on climate change: multilevel framework," Working Papers hal-00961226, HAL.
    2. Andreas Bjurström & Merritt Polk, 2011. "Climate change and interdisciplinarity: a co-citation analysis of IPCC Third Assessment Report," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 87(3), pages 525-550, June.
    3. Tammy Tabe, 2019. "Climate Change Migration and Displacement: Learning from Past Relocations in the Pacific," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-18, July.
    4. Felix J. Formanski & Marcel M. Pein & David D. Loschelder & John-Oliver Engler & Onno Husen & Johann M. Majer, 2022. "Tipping points ahead? How laypeople respond to linear versus nonlinear climate change predictions," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 175(1), pages 1-20, November.
    5. Kate Elizabeth Gannon, Mike Hulme, 2017. "Geoengineering at the ‘edge of the world’: exploring perceptions of ocean fertilization through the Haida Salmon Restoration Corporation," GRI Working Papers 280, Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment.
    6. Janet Judy McIntyre‐Mills, 2013. "Anthropocentrism and Well‐being: A Way Out of the Lobster Pot?," Systems Research and Behavioral Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 136-155, March.
    7. Markus Dressel, 2022. "Models of science and society: transcending the antagonism," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-15, December.
    8. Sanober Naheed & Salman Shooshtarian, 2021. "A Review of Cultural Background and Thermal Perceptions in Urban Environments," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-15, August.
    9. Hall, C. Michael & Amelung, Bas & Cohen, Scott & Eijgelaar, Eke & Gössling, Stefan & Higham, James & Leemans, Rik & Peeters, Paul & Ram, Yael & Scott, Daniel & Aall, Carlo & Abegg, Bruno & Araña, Jorg, 2015. "No time for smokescreen skepticism: A rejoinder to Shani and Arad," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 341-347.
    10. Nancy Menning, 2018. "Narrating climate change as a rite of passage," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 147(1), pages 343-353, March.
    11. Mercedes Bleda & Elisabeth Krull & Jonatan Pinkse & Eleni Christodoulou, 2023. "Organizational heuristics and firms' sensemaking for climate change adaptation," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(8), pages 6124-6137, December.
    12. Richard Matthew, 2014. "Integrating climate change into peacebuilding," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 123(1), pages 83-93, March.
    13. Chhetri, Netra & Ghimire, Rajiv & Wagner, Melissa & Wang, Meng, 2020. "Global citizen deliberation: Case of world-wide views on climate and energy," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    14. Hochachka, Gail, 2021. "Integrating the four faces of climate change adaptation: Towards transformative change in Guatemalan coffee communities," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    15. Terje Aven & Ortwin Renn, 2015. "An Evaluation of the Treatment of Risk and Uncertainties in the IPCC Reports on Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 35(4), pages 701-712, April.
    16. Robert, Christopher LeBaron & Zeckhauser, Richard Jay, 2010. "The Methodology of Positive Policy Analysis," Scholarly Articles 4450129, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    17. Georgina Endfield & Carol Morris, 2012. "Cultural spaces of climate," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 113(1), pages 1-4, July.
    18. George Ferns & Kenneth Amaeshi & Aliette Lambert, 2019. "Drilling their Own Graves: How the European Oil and Gas Supermajors Avoid Sustainability Tensions Through Mythmaking," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 158(1), pages 201-231, August.
    19. Laura Fogg-Rogers & Enda Hayes & Kris Vanherle & Péter I. Pápics & Tim Chatterton & Jo Barnes & Stephan Slingerland & Corra Boushel & Sophie Laggan & James Longhurst, 2021. "Applying Social Learning to Climate Communications—Visualising ‘People Like Me’ in Air Pollution and Climate Change Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-16, March.
    20. Friederike E. L. Otto & Petra Minnerop & Emmanuel Raju & Luke J. Harrington & Rupert F. Stuart‐Smith & Emily Boyd & Rachel James & Richard Jones & Kristian C. Lauta, 2022. "Causality and the fate of climate litigation: The role of the social superstructure narrative," Global Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 13(5), pages 736-750, November.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0031824. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.