1HlG51J

academies of science) or informal (e.g. policy workshopsaiming to bring together scientists and policy-makers fordiscussing research results or issues). They can be longtermand/or recurring (recurring global assessments suchas the IPCC assessment reports) or one-off events (e.g.Millennium Ecosystem Assessment). Their common featureis the potential for exchange of information, jointknowledge production and learning.Roles of the science-policy interfaceSPI mechanisms are established for a variety of purposesand fulfill many different functions. Table 1-1 outlinesfunctions or roles commonly attributed to them. Inpractice, the range of roles of SPIs is even broader than thistable suggests. Examples are detailed in boxes throughoutthe chapter.Box 1-1. Defining the science-policy interfaceSPIs are the many ways in which scientists, policy-makersand others link up to communicate, exchange ideas, andjointly develop knowledge to enrich policy and decisionmakingprocesses and/or research. SPIs involve exchange ofinformation and knowledge leading to learning, andultimately influencing decisions and changing behavior –i.e. doing something differently as a result of the learning.These changes may be made by policy-makers, local-leveldecision-makers, scientists, other stakeholders or citizens.As such SPIs can lead to many – sometimes surprising –practical impacts.Source: Young et al. (2013)Table 1-1. Common roles attributed to SPIsScientific In the absence of public concern, before an issue enters the policy cycle, scientific expertise can be used towarning and bring an issue to the attention of policy-makers. Scientific warnings can steer public attention to issues thatawareness form threats to human well-being and that imply policy intervention. Many environmental and healthraisingproblems (e.g. climate change, malaria, HIV/AIDS) were brought to the forefront of political attention througha process of awareness creation through scientific expertise.Defining or redefiningaproblemAssessingpolicy choicesor the impactsof differentpolicy optionsInforming thejudicial andlegal systemsMonitoringandimplementationSustainable development problems are usually “wicked problems”, as opposed to well-defined scientificquestions. In this context, it is not only the “solution” that is important, but as importantly the problemdefinition and the definition of goals, and the identification of the range of options and possible approachesthat should be considered to address it. In addition, a problem can be re-opened and redefined several timesduring the policy cycle so as to take into account dimensions or issues not adequately considered up front.Science and SPIs have a critical role to play in this regard.When defining a policy problem, it is usual to be faced with various policy options. Various scientific tools orapproaches are available to support choice among options including, inter alia, integrated impact assessmentsand scenario modelling. In addition, scientific expertise can play a role in validating or questioning existingpolicy choices by critically documenting their beneficial or harmful effects, their comparative advantage ordisadvantages, and their capacity or failure to achieve their stated goals. SPI can also play the role ofidentifying and assessing the potential and limits of collective action among parties participating in sustainabledevelopment, for example in relation to multilateral agreements.Science plays a role in informing legislation, at the national and international levels. In addition, the judicialsystem is increasingly faced with litigation cases that present complex issues of science and technology, andincreasingly requires access to sound science. One role of science is therefore to provide evidence on issuesthat are challenged or whose validity is questioned.Many policies cannot be properly implemented or do not yield the intended outcome unless they arescientifically monitored on a regular basis. This type of scientific expertise usually involves creating routineprocedures and methodologies. Once methodologies are established, the task ceases posing a scientificchallenge and the process of monitoring often falls to other parts of society. However, especially if the policyissue is still contested during implementation and if the success of the regulation depends on cooperation ofstakeholders with divergent interests, an independent scientific source may be crucial for a credible monitoringprocess.Source: Authors’ elaboration, based on Cash et al. (2003), Engels (2005), Treyer et al. (2012), White et al. (2001).27