The Imperative of Bridging Science and Policy
Science and technology are essential to humanity’s collective response to global challenges, yet the extent to which policymaking is shaped by scientific evidence and technological possibilities varies greatly across governments and societies. The COVID-19 pandemic has underscored the critical need to strengthen the interface between science and policy to effectively address complex, interconnected issues.
Throughout the pandemic, scientific assessments have guided policies to respond to COVID-19 in countries across the world. However, the timing and nature of these actions have differed considerably, reflecting variations in countries’ science-policy advisory systems. Recognizing these differences, there is a need to re-evaluate and bolster science-policy interfaces, particularly in developing countries where structural weaknesses have been long-standing.
Even in countries with well-established systems, the COVID-19 response has highlighted opportunities for improvement. Policymakers and chief science advisors must be able to draw upon a diverse range of scientific expertise, from natural and social sciences, to make informed decisions that balance trade-offs. Crucially, such scientific advice must be communicated transparently to maintain public trust.
Importance of Public Trust and Effective Communication
Public trust in science is essential for science-based policies to succeed. Clear and direct communication of scientific insights, tailored to reach all segments of the population, can drive behavior change and enable an effective response. However, navigating the challenges of a novel pandemic, where knowledge evolves rapidly, requires honestly explaining uncertainties and countering the spread of misinformation.
Prominent public figures and social media platforms have a vital role to play in promoting accurate, validated information from trusted sources. Collaborative “citizen science” initiatives can also improve public understanding and trust in science over time.
Accelerating Open Science and Collaboration
The pandemic has catalyzed remarkable advances in open science, with prominent academic journals dropping subscription barriers and researchers rapidly sharing data and preprints. This has fueled cross-disciplinary collaborations and allowed policymakers to tap into collective expertise. However, the rapid dissemination of unvalidated findings can also fuel misinterpretation and erode credibility, underscoring the need for coordinated efforts to ensure quality and universal access to practical solutions.
Multilateral initiatives, such as the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI), demonstrate how public-private partnerships can accelerate the development and equitable distribution of critical technologies like vaccines. The United Nations’ Technology Facilitation Mechanism (TFM) also plays a key role in facilitating the sharing of science-based solutions across countries.
Strengthening the Science-Policy-Society Interface
Despite these promising developments, deeper structural barriers, such as uneven global Internet access, can inhibit the widespread adoption of innovative solutions. International scientific collaborations and independent assessments can inform policymakers, but implementing their recommendations requires strengthening national capacities for evidence-based decision-making.
The COVID-19 pandemic is a tragic crisis, but also an opportunity to recognize and address shortcomings in current science-policy advisory systems and their interface with society. Initiatives like the TFM, working with partners, can help scale up efforts to facilitate the sharing of scientific knowledge, strengthen national capacities, and actively engage diverse stakeholders in disseminating findings to build public trust.
Bridging the Academic-Policy Divide
A critical challenge in strengthening the science-policy interface lies in the differences between the outputs and reward systems of academic science and those of policymaking. While academic success is often measured by discrete scholarly products, such as peer-reviewed publications, policy success depends on the creation and maintenance of institutional decisions, governance agreements, and information flows.
The inability of academia to sufficiently value the outputs of the policy process, or the expertise required to develop and sustain policy, limits the engagement of scientists in these crucial domains. Consequently, most academic scientists lack training in the policy process, exposure to science diplomacy, and the capacity to effectively deliver science advice.
Rethinking Academic Curricula and Incentives
To better prepare future generations of scientists to address global challenges, universities must rethink their curricula and reward structures. Teaching that promotes engagement with real-world issues, problem-solving, and interpersonal skills is needed, but remains underrepresented in STEM programs. Faculty can integrate policy, diplomatic, and legislative components into their courses, co-teach case studies with practitioners, and develop multidisciplinary problem-solving exercises.
Graduate and postdoctoral education should also include direct training in science policy, communication, and working with decision-makers. Universities can reward faculty who develop courses and research programs that foster collaboration across disciplines and engagement with policymakers and the public.
Valuing the Policy Process as Scholarship
Beyond teaching, academic institutions must reevaluate how they measure research progress and career advancement. New incentive structures that encourage, reward, and sustain efforts to expand scientific research beyond the ivory tower are essential to establish a more responsive science-policy interface.
This may involve revising promotion and tenure metrics to recognize time spent on public engagement, science advice, and policy collaborations. Hosting policymakers and legislators on campus, or offering paid sabbaticals for faculty to work in government, can also help bridge the academic-policy divide.
Ultimately, academic science, particularly within STEM disciplines, needs to critically examine the application and societal impact of scholarly activities. Broadening the definition of what counts as scholarship in academia can help mitigate public distrust and justify investment in research and discovery.
Conclusion: Seizing the Moment for Transformative Change
The COVID-19 pandemic has strained institutional budgets and sparked conversations about the future of academia. As we reevaluate which elements to maintain, rethink, and rebuild, the time is ripe for universities to reflect on more intentional engagement with the world outside the ivory tower.
Facilitating dynamic and bidirectional exchanges between science and policy, and recognizing the policy process as a valuable form of scholarship, can promote a healthier exchange between academia and society. By institutionalizing these changes, universities can better prepare students and faculty to address the complex, interconnected challenges facing our world.
