EuSANH

The process of science advising

Distinct from the accumulation of more or less isolated scientific investigations or the more routinely collected data and information, as discussed above, science advice is always steered by the explicit need of a policy action or decision. This need should then be translated by the decision maker into a very explicit question or problem definition. In reality, this task is often initiated by the science advisor himself, based on evident societal needs and ideally, is a dialogue with the policy maker. In general, the process of science advice can be described as a process consisting of three steps.[1]

Formulating the question. The need for science advice is detected and made explicit. This can be done either by the demand side (user of science advice) or by the supply side (science advisors).  The question or problem definition would reflect a health issue in society for which a policy position or decision is required, and in which scientific knowledge is expected to be helpful. The decision makers will often be national or regional policy makers, but they may also be health professionals or interest groups in society. In fact, it is one of the responsibilities of health policy makers to promote the use of science advice by the other actors in the health field and by policy makers of other economic sectors.

Producing the science advice. This includes choosing the working structure, the way of collecting the background material, the selection of experts and other persons involved, and the process of writing and reviewing the advice. Science advice has to use specific and sound methodologies for analysing and synthesising existing knowledge, and for presenting the results in an appropriate format that is accessible to the receptors of the advice. An explicit discussion of ethical and societal values that may underpin or complement ‘scientific’ opinions is often a necessary element.

Publishing and disseminating the advice. This would include the active communication of the science advisory report not only to the persons who asked the question, but also to other parties involved in the issue, and often the wider health community. At the same time, policy makers and other target groups receive the advisory report amongst many other inputs in their process of taking decisions. Timing is important: science advice has to be available at the right moment in the decision-making process.

This cycle is shown by the bold arrows and grey areas in figure 2. Science advisors have a direct relationship with advisory questions provided by policy makers (direct cycle). They have a relation to society in providing information and openness to signals. Science advisors can also have an influence on research policy, determining some of the research questions, but formally this influence is not direct, but mediated by research policy makers, for instance pointing out gaps in knowledge. The EuSANH network will focus on the direct cycle.

[1] Committee for Survey and Analysis of Science Advice on Sustainable Development to International Organisations. Knowledge and Diplomacy. Science advice in the United Nations System. Washington D.C.. The National Academies Press, 2002. http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=10577&page=13, accessed 7.02.08.