A research agenda for the science of actionable knowledge: Drawing from a review of the most misguided to the most enlightened claims in the science-policy interface literature

Kripa Jagannathan, Geniffer Emmanuel, James Arnott, Katharine J. Mach, Aparna Bamzai-Dodson, Kristen Goodrich, Ryan Meyer, Mark Neff, K. Dana Sjostrom, Kristin M.F. Timm, Esther Turnhout, Gabrielle Wong-Parodi, Angela T. Bednarek, Alison Meadow, Art Dewulf, Christine J. Kirchhoff, Richard H. Moss, Leah Nichols, Eliza Oldach, Maria Carmen LemosNicole Klenk

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

7 Scopus citations

Abstract

Linking science with action affords a prime opportunity to leverage greater societal impact from research and increase the use of evidence in decision-making. Success in these areas depends critically upon processes of producing and mobilizing knowledge, as well as supporting and making decisions. For decades, scholars have idealized and described these social processes in different ways, resulting in numerous assumptions that now variously guide engagements at the interface of science and society. We systematically catalog these assumptions based on prior research on the science-policy interface, and further distill them into a set of 26 claims. We then elicit expert perspectives (n = 16) about these claims to assess the extent to which they are accurate or merit further examination. Out of this process, we construct a research agenda to motivate future scientific research on actionable knowledge, prioritizing areas that experts identified as critical gaps in understanding of the science-society interface. The resulting agenda focuses on how to define success, support intermediaries, build trust, and evaluate the importance of consensus and its alternatives – all in the diverse contexts of science-society-decision-making interactions. We further raise questions about the centrality of knowledge in these interactions, discussing how a governance lens might be generative of efforts to support more equitable processes and outcomes. We offer these suggestions with hopes of furthering the science of actionable knowledge as a transdisciplinary area of inquiry.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)174-186
Number of pages13
JournalEnvironmental Science and Policy
Volume144
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2023

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Geography, Planning and Development
  • Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A research agenda for the science of actionable knowledge: Drawing from a review of the most misguided to the most enlightened claims in the science-policy interface literature'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this