Journal
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY
Volume 76, Issue -, Pages 146-152Publisher
ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.envsci.2017.07.005
Keywords
Science-policy interface; Policy process; Credibility; Legitimacy; Relevance
Categories
Funding
- Commonwealth of Australia through the Cooperative Research Centre program
- Australian Government Research Training Program Scholarship
Ask authors/readers for more resources
For more than a decade, a popular theory amongst scholars of science-policy interactions has been that research is most effective at informing policy and decision-making processes when it is credible, relevant and legitimate (CRELE) with multiple audiences simultaneously. In this paper, we argue that this triad reflects a primarily intra-scientific perspective, rather than the needs and considerations of policy-makers themselves. Using over seventy semi-structured interviews with policy-makers, we present alternative criteria for effective science-policy interactions based on experiences in the urban water sector. We find that applicability, comprehensiveness, timing and accessibility (ACTA) better summarises the most important aspects of scientific research when it comes to influencing decision-making, while finding that CRELE was a poor predictor of policy-maker concerns. Whilst the ACTA quartet effectively gives double-billing to the 'relevance' component of CRELE, credibility and legitimacy were much lower priorities for policy-makers interviewed. This article questions whether CRELE is a useful mindset for researchers interested in policy influence. These findings will be of interest to those engaged in debates related to effective science-policy interactions more broadly, and researchers that want to marshal policy influence more specifically.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available