From recognition to action: science-based policy advice

Munich, 30 October 2024

Whether it is about mobility transition, space travel, artificial intelligence (AI) or agriculture – science provides the basis and arguments for policymakers to make informed decisions. At acatech am Dienstag on 22 October at the acatech Forum in Munich, experts discussed how science-based policy advice works, where it is already successful – and where there is still room for improvement.

acatech President Jan Wörner welcomed the participants, including those from the Lernwerkstatt Technikkommunikation, to the acatech Forum. He emphasised how important the interplay between scientific knowledge and political decisions is for acatech in particular.

Constructive alliances between scientific truths and political majorities?

Peter Strohschneider was Chairman of the German Council of Science and Humanities and President of the German Research Foundation (DFG). As a contributor to and chairman of numerous policy advisory bodies and a member of several academies (including acatech), he has worked for decades in the field of tension between science and politics. In his keynote speech, he reminded the audience that scientific truths are independent of political majorities. Science is based on objective findings and methodical examination, whereas political majorities are often characterised by opinions and interests. In addition, in policy advice there are stakeholders such as associations, whose perspectives must be included in stakeholder dialogues, for example.

There is room for various forms of policy advice between science and politics. A naïve and misguided understanding of policy advice is based, for example, on the idea of ‘speaking truth to power’, which relies one-sidedly on the regime of unconditional truth without alternatives. So how do constructive alliances between scientific truths and political majorities succeed? How can expert knowledge be processed and formulated into alternative courses of action with possible consequences so that it can serve as a basis for political decision-making? According to Peter Strohschneider, it is important to maintain the integrity of science and not to be influenced by political currents. Scientific findings should serve as a basis for political decisions instead of political majorities instrumentalising science for their own purposes.

Opportunities and challenges of science-based policy advice

acatech member Veronika Grimm (Technical University of Nuremberg, member of the German Council of Economic Experts) emphasised the importance of scientific policy advice for well-founded political decisions. In order to facilitate the formation of judgements on economic policy issues, the German Council of Economic Experts also addresses the public. Committees such as the German Council of Economic Experts endeavour to to share the same view in their reports. However, disagreements can also be communicated openly and, in case of doubt, also published as so-called ‘minority votes’.

acatech Senator Andrea Martin (Chief Technology Officer Ecosystems and Associations / IBM DACH, member of the German Council of Science and Humanities) argued in favour of diversity: both in terms of disciplines and perspectives in policy advice. She herself stands for ‘business-based policy advice’ – be it as an expert in the AI Enquete Commission of the German Bundestag (2018-2020), in the Bavarian AI Council or at acatech. This approach is in line with ‘science-based policy advice’, but emphasises an independent perspective.

As the former Director General of the European Space Agency (ESA), acatech President Jan Wörner has first-hand experience of the different coordination systems of politics and science and emphasised that science cannot replace politics. Science conducts research and passes on its findings – to decision-makers, for example. It becomes dangerous when science is replaced by opinions and ideologies.

Discussing policy advice using concrete examples

The speakers entered into a discussion with the audience using examples such as the Building Energy Act or issues of competition for forms of land use. The role of the ‘expert’, who defines this role and fulfils it in what way, was critically reflected upon: it is certainly not always linked to clear quality criteria. The term is overused, but is nevertheless repeatedly utilised. Here, too, a plurality, i. e. a polyphonic and diverse input from experts, in policy advice seems absolutely appropriate.

Finally, the panellists focused on the term ‘evidence’, which is often used in the context of policy advice. It was agreed that the same thing is by no means evident for everyone – and that the problem of the knowledge base is merely shifted with this term.

---

Further information

Lernwerkstatt 2024

Guidelines for Advising Policymakers and the Public

„Wahrheiten und Mehrheiten. Kritik des autoritären Szientismus.“ (in German) By Peter Strohschneider.