Institutionalizing Science Advice to Governments - Report

Study on ‘Institutionalizing Science Advice to Governments’ Report on ‘Institutionalizing Science Advice to Governments’Published in 2023 by the National Academy of Science of Sri Lanka(NASSL)Vidya MawathaColombo 7Sri Lanka© NASSL 2023Email:nassl@sltnet.lk;nationalacademyofsciencessl@gmail.comWebsite:https://nassl.org/ ISBN:ISBN978-624-6473-00-6 Contents of this publication may be used with due citation of the source. Report on ‘Institutionalizing Science Advice to Governments’ ABBREVIATIONS Australian Academy of ScienceAssociation of Academies and Societies of Sciences in AsiaAsia Pacific EconomicCooperationAssociation of Southeast Asian nationsAcademy of Sciences Malaysia Science, Technology, Innovation PolicyScience, Technology and Innovation Advisory CommitteeTechnical advisory GroupTherapeutic Goods AdministrationTop Research Scientist MalaysiaTurkish Academy of Sciences Report on ‘Institutionalizing Science Advice to Governments’ ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This report is the outcome of thestudy conducted by the National Academy of SciencesSri Lanka (NASSL)on ‘institutionalizing science advice to governments’ withpartneragencies representing10countries in the Australasian region(in alphabetical order withrepresentativepartner academy or institute given within parenthesis):Australia(Australian Academy of Science), Bangladesh (Bangladesh Academy of Sciences), Bhutan(KG University of Medical Sciences), India (Asian Chapter oftheInternational Network ofGovernmentScience Advice),Korean Republic(Korean Academy of Science andTechnology), Malaysia (Academy of Sciences, Malaysia), Nepal (Nepal Academy of Scienceand Technology), Philippines (National Academy of Science and Technology, Philippines),Thailand (Science Society of Thailand)and Turkey (Turkish Academy of Sciences). The report is supported by proceedings of the workshopon ‘institutionalizing scienceadviceto governments’heldin Colombo, Sri Lanka from 6 to 8 July 2023 with theparticipation of representatives of thepartneragenciesanddiscussions on ‘situationanalysis’ of the status of science advicewithsubsequent drafting ofthe way-ahead indeveloping‘contextualized roadmaps’for science advice in partner countries. The surveyto gather data for the ‘situation analysis’was conducted and coordinated bythe NASSL spearheaded by the President, NASSLtogether witha core team of Councilmembers oftheNASSL.See detailed list in Annex1. The contribution and dedication of the team members, writers,editors,and advisors areappreciated.Assistance provided byProfessorLakmali Amarasiri, YPL scholarin compilingthe report isgreatly appreciated. Report on ‘Institutionalizing Science Advice to Governments’ LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Framework to describe the science policy process LIST OF TABLES Agencies of countries established to provide science adviceProcess to develop science adviceNetworks used within government science advice systemsEngagement of science advisors in original research and/or analysis of dataWhether science advisors of countries refer to original research papersWhetherexperts are consulted during gathering of evidenceWhether advisor’s knowledge and expertise is used for science adviceWhether advice states the limitations and uncertainties of the adviceIn-built consultativeprocesses followed during science adviceThe mechanisms that science advice is made publicThe process used to assess the impact of science advice Table 1:Table 2:Table 3:Table 4:Table 5:Table 6:Table 7:Table 8:Table 9:Table 10:Table 11: Report on ‘Institutionalizing Science Advice to Governments’ TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO EXECUTIVE SUMMARY8 CHAPTER 1:INTRODUCTION 13 1AIMS 2METHODOLOGY2.1DEVELOPMENT OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE2.2SELECTION OF RESPONDENTS1414 3FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS 3.1SCIENCE POLICY ADVICE PROCESS3.1.1ADVISORS3.1.2WHETHER APPOINTEES ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR A SPECIFIC AREA ORDISCIPLINE3.1.3APPOINTING AUTHORITY3.1.4STRUCTURES AND PROCESSESS(i)LAWS, REGULATIONS OR GOVERNMENT CIRCULARSTHAT HAVELEGITIMISED SCIENCE FOR POLICY IN COUNTRIES(ii)ORGANIZATIONS IDENTIFIED TO PROVIDE SCIENCE ADVICE FOR POLICY(iii)THE ROLEOFPOLICY MAKERS AND RELATIONSHIP WITH EXPERTADVISORS(iv)MECHANISMS TO AVOID CONFLICT OF INTEREST(v)IDENTIFICATION OF ISSUES THAT REQUIRE SCIENCE ADVICE BY THE END-USERS OR THE SCIENTIFIC EXPERTS(vi)FRAMING OF QUESTIONS FOR SCIENCE ADVICE(vii)PRESENCE OF STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES(viii)STRATEGIES TO CONVINCE POLICY MAKERS IN SCIENCE ADVICE(ix)NETWORKS USED IN THE GOVERNMENT SCIENCE ADVICE SYSTEMS(x)HOW EVIDENCE IS GATHERED(xi)WHETHER ADVICE STATES THE LIMITATIONS AND UNCERTAINTIES OFTHE ADVICE(xii)THE METHODS IN WHICH CONFLICTING SCIENCE ADVICE IS HANDLED(xiii)THE METHODS IN WHICH THE SCIENCE ADVISORY(xiv)PROCESSES ARE MADE TRANSPARENT(xv)COMMUNICATING SCIENCE ADVICE(xvi)BUDGETARY CONSTRAINTS(xvii)INDEPENDENCE FOR SCIENCE ADVISORS(xviii)INFLUENCE OF LEGISLATIVE BODIES ON THE PROCESS(xix)ASSSESSMENT OFTHEIMPACT OF SCIENCE ADVICE1516171718-50 Report on ‘Institutiona