Linda Lammensalo on writing a handbook for Finnish researchers

Mikel Landabaso, Director for Fair and Sustainable Economy in the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre, knows a fair few things about the role of science and technology innovation in informing regional development policy and promoting regeneration. In this episode, he talks to Toby Wardman about how it works, how his advice has been taken, and the strategies to adopt when policymakers or stakeholders aren't able to appreciate it on its own terms.

How do you bring scientists and policymakers together to generate creative solutions to thorny problems? How can you engineer a conversation on controversial issues that builds trust between allies rather than alienating opponents? And what's the secret to overcoming cynicism about either the process or the outcome?   With a background in history, business and journalism, Maggie Dugan has wisdom to share on all these questions and more!

The Finnish Academy of Science and Letters has been active in the science-for-policy space in Finland for decades, including in recent years playing a leading role in setting up an important science advice mechanism for the Finnish government. Now it has also published a comprehensive handbook for researchers, with advice and practical exercises to help guide them in their first steps in policy engagement. In this episode, Linda Lammensalo talks to Toby Wardman about what's in the handbook and why. Resources mentioned in this episode Finnish academy handbook: https://acadsci.fi/en/publications/a-new-handbook-provides-tools-for-researchers-in-the-science-policy-interface/ Science Europe guidance: https://www.scienceeurope.org/our-resources/guidance-science-for-policy/ 

What does our most advanced AI, trained on the sum total of all human knowledge, have to say about the challenges of the science-policy interface? And can it tell a good joke? (Hint: The answer to that one is no.)

Welcome to our 100th episode! This one comes to you complete with a live audience at the University of Helsinki, kindly hosted by the SRI Congress 2024. Debating questions Warm-up debates: (1) We should get rid of daylight saving time. (2) How would a dog wear trousers? Hind legs only, or all four legs on the bottom half of its body? (3) In which order do you put on socks and shoes? Sock sock shoe shoe, or sock shoe sock shoe?   Substantive debates: (1) Science advice organisations should welcome researchers who have connections to industry or campaign groups. (2) As a science advisor, I'm OK with my research being used by everyone in the policymaking process. (3) As a science advisor, it's OK to have private conversations with a policymaker. (4) As a science advisor, I should present only the evidence. Interpreting that evidence is the policymaker's job. (5) It's my duty as a scientist to lobby for changes in society, based on the evidence as I see it. (6) If a policymaker wants a simple answer from science, I should give them one. (7) When there isn't enough data for a robust evidence-based answer, I should give my best guess. (8) When scientists disagree on a controversial issue, I should present my own view on what the evidence says. (9) If the politicians make a decision which really goes against my advice, it's my duty to speak out publicly against it. (10) As a science advisor, I should try to present different stakeholder positions, such as those of affected communities.   Resources mentioned in this episode SRI Congress 2024: https://sricongress.org/home/about-sri2024/ The noble vibraslap, queen of percussion instruments: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibraslap Spotify playlist featuring the vibraslap: https://open.spotify.com/playlist/3pXPF32AkTNcRfNswxnaWq?si=bdb62b8d74dd4151 

There are many different ways to make policies, and many different ways for science and evidence to impact on those policies. In western liberal democracies, we tend to focus on our specific, forgetting that across the world and across history our specific way of doing things is not the only way.   Claudia Chwalisz, from the think-tank DemocracyNext, has spent a lot of time thinking about alternative ways to govern our societies, especially when it comes to dealing with challenges that are scientifically or morally complex. In this episode, she talks to Toby Wardman about how alternative decision-making processes could work, and whether they would strengthen or change the roles of science, evidence and expertise in deliberation.   Resources mentioned in this episode DemocracyNext: https://www.demnext.org/ 

In recent months, there's been a small explosion of guidelines and handbooks on how to do science advice. In today's episode, Toby Wardman takes a deep dive into Science Europe's recent guidance for research-funding and research-performing organisations, in conversation with their author, Nicola Dotti.

This is probably the last podcast in the world to get round to talking about how AI is changing the world -- but we wanted to wait until we had the right people in the room to talk specifically about AI in relation to science, policy, and science-for-policy. If you like this conversation with Professor Andrea Rizzoli and Manuel Kugler -- and you will like it! -- stay tuned in the coming months, because we've got more AI-themed episodes up our sleeves.

It's sometimes easy to forget that even the most well-designed science advice institution, and even the most persuasive advisor, are still operating as part of a broad ecosystem in which both policymakers and the general public are exposed to vast quantities of ostensibly factual information of varying quality, much of it mediated through algorithms. In this episode, Caitlin Chin-Rothmann from the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington DC talks us through this broader context and how science advisors can adapt to it.

Why does evidence sometimes land and sometimes not? Why do some policies fail even though the evidence suggests they should succeed?  And what can we do about it? Saying "it's all about the context" is easy, but what does this actually mean? And more importantly, how can we make that into a useful insight in advance, rather than just a post-hoc justification for things not working out? Vanesa Weyrauch and Leandro Echt have looked into this question in some detail, and their organisation, Purpose & Ideas, created a framework to tackle exactly these questions. In this episode, they discuss with Toby Wardman of the SAM not just why context matters, but what that actually means and what we can do about it.   Resources mentioned in this episode Context Matters framework: https://www.purposeandideas.org/post/context-matters-but-are-we-prepared-to-build-on-this