This article is written by Lara Cowen, Executive Officer at the International Network for Government Science Advice.

In the early 1990s, homicides were the leading cause of death in Cali, Colombia.

Rather than pursuing reactive policy measures, the mayor, Dr Rodrigo Guerrero, brought together an expert taskforce to gather data on preventable risk factors of violence. Since the country was embroiled in the War on Drugs, many had presumed that cocaine and the drug trade was the source of the violence, but the results pointed to another surprising culprit: alcohol. Within three years of an enforced late night ban on liquor sales, homicide rates had fallen by 50%.

Despite the apparent simplicity of this intervention, achieving such a profound impact is not easy. Policy-making is complex because it is about making choices between different options, which affect people in different ways, many of which are uncertain. Today’s growing number of public policy challenges, from crime and emerging disease threats to urbanisation and food insecurity, demand policy decisions at an ever faster pace. And while there are many factors that contribute to how policy decisions are made, as the Cali homicide example shows us, expert advice can help clarify the nature of the problem and thereby point to better response options.

Building bridges to the expert community

Expert advice is not simply about delivering well-packaged and cleverly crafted messages. Rather it is about building over time a system that routinely seeks and generates advice.

So while governments are increasingly demanding that the research communities they support produce policy-relevant knowledge and are more accountable to society, it is equally important to have mechanisms in place through which knowledge can be accessed and deployed.

Understanding which experts to engage is a science in itself. A transdisciplinary approach to evidence advice is more important than leaning on just one expert

The good news is that the research community is responding. The fact that more than half of the members of the International Network for Government Science Advice (INGSA) are researchers, illustrates a strong desire to engage. Yet they are only one part of the system. A more comprehensive approach would focus on supply, demand, delivery, reception and use of evidence. Bringing it all together is complex.

So, here are some thoughts on how to not only build that bridge between expert and policy making communities, but also make it easier and more desirable to use expertise and evidence to enhance policy outputs.

1. Work together to understand the problem

The first step in seeking expert advice is framing your questions; interaction with experts can be valuable even at this preliminary stage. Is there a central problem or a constellation of interlinked problems? Are there other areas from outside your sector contributing to this issue that need exploring? It may be helpful to brainstorm the challenge with the experts you plan to engage in order to articulate what information you really need. It is important both parties understand the context, audience and timeline of response.

Evidence-informed framing and continual expert engagement throughout policy formation can improve outcomes. Once experts have helped with problem definition and identifying options, do not close the door on them. Consistent expert advice can be incredibly useful in evaluating the impact of a policy and provide circular input into policy reviews.

2. Look for experts in databases, national academies and research funders

Wondering how to make these connections? Expert databases provide a mechanism for governments, the business sector, the research sector, and other decision-makers to easily access the expertise they need to inform their decision-making.

Not every country will have expert databases, but if the policy community shows demand, it could be the spark needed for establishing one. Also, science is international. Consider making use of expert databases in multilateral bodies or of other countries. Alternatively, a request to your national academy or research funder could introduce you to the expert advice you need.

In my experience, what public servants find most challenging when working with experts is working off different time scales to evidence providers and bridging different lingo i.e. experts conveying technical concepts in everyday language

Understanding which experts to engage is a science in itself. A transdisciplinary approach to evidence advice is more important than leaning on just one expert. Quality of expertise depends on the individual's experience, local knowledge, communicating what they know but also what they don’t know, honesty/trust, international context etc.

Example: In response to Covid-19 the Australian Academy of Sciences has created a Covid-19 Expert Database. Experts are searchable and include all fields of expertise. It is however critical to avoid the danger of cherry picking experts especially in complex and contested areas.

3. Build Relationships with National Academies, learned societies and networks

Another way to find relevant experts is to develop strong relationships with scientific academies who are well equipped to provide policy advice on key domestic issues. National academies are independent and apolitical communities of leading researchers, who explore, discover and share knowledge to benefit society. You could also try learned societies and expert networks.

Example: In Africa, the INGSA consensus study showed that national academies are increasingly becoming important sources of science advice, strengthened further through coalitions of national academies such as the Network of African Science Academies.

4. Breed science policy exchange into your organisation

In my experience, what public servants find most challenging when working with experts is working off different time scales to evidence providers and bridging different lingo, i.e. experts conveying technical concepts in everyday language. In addition to building relationships, there are things we can do at the organisational level to create a better understanding of how to effectively work with experts.

Hosting informal staff and expert gatherings with guest speakers from both sides can be transformative. This offers an opportunity for inclusive knowledge exchange

Some countries successfully run science and technology policy fellowship programs to provide opportunities for scientists and engineers to contribute to federal or sub-national policy-making, giving both parties first-hand experience at the intersection of science and policy.

Example: In 2019, the Government of Mexico City launched a program for improving the design of programs and policies through a program of Science-Policy Interface fellowships, with fellows assigned to different agencies within the city government.

5. Create formal opportunities for exchange...

Active person-to-person mechanisms, such as policy dialogue events and thematic workshops provide a context for sharing ideas between expert communities and policymakers. The Canadian Institutes of Health Research hold Best Brains Exchanges, which are invitation only meetings bringing senior policymakers, researchers and implementation experts together to discuss high priority, health-related topics of shared interest.

6. ... But create informal opportunities too

Hosting informal staff and expert gatherings with guest speakers from both sides can be transformative. This offers an opportunity for inclusive knowledge exchange. Talking over issues of the day or indeed the future could very well be a lightbulb moment for pathways ahead. In a time of crisis, these informal contacts will be an instant and responsive community of practice.

The advice above is something all public servants can follow, regardless of their job title. Sure, you may have more leverage to forge connections if you’re a senior decision maker, but even junior public servants can reach out to experts and help shape their organisation’s culture.

But if we want to really move the dial, we also need the highest levels of government to get involved. That’s what my last two pieces of advice focus on.

7. Enhance general mechanisms for expert advice

Creating networks or formal infrastructures for science advice ensures that regardless of the time sensitivity of the challenge, a system exists and is ready to respond.

There are any number of formats with different degrees of institutional formality, but some countries have established offices of Chief Science Advisers to serve as an accessible conduit between the science community and government (e.g. Canada, the UK, India, Cuba, Czech Republic, Ireland, Malaysia, Australia and New Zealand). The UK and New Zealand extend this system in a structured and coordinated manner to individual ministries to enhance important horizontal interactions through a forum of Ministerial level departmental science advisers.

Such Science Advisers provide advice on specific topics to government officials and create a trusted bridge between science, society and government. They may be able to see issues or ask questions not necessarily seen by the policy community or siloed response agencies, and can interpret options to senior decision makers.

8. Establish Advisory Committees for specific issues

Policymakers may also turn to specialised committees, made up of individuals with relevant expertise, to provide advice on specific issues of concern on either long-term issues or task force teams for specific projects. The composition and terms of reference of such committees is important – in particular, is the evidential input independent of other considerations.

Whether looking at formal or informal mechanisms, the door exists for powerful knowledge exchange between experts and policy practitioners; sometimes you just need to knock and wedge the door open. — Lara Cowen

(Picture credit: Unsplash)