Scientific advice and public policy: expert advisers' and policymakers' discourses on boundary work

Robertus Hoppe

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

65 Citations (Scopus)
54 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This article reports on considerable variety and diversity among discourses on their own jobs of boundary workers of several major Dutch institutes for science-based policy advice. Except for enlightenment, all types of boundary arrangements/work in the Wittrock-typology (Social knowledge and public policy: eight models of interaction. In: Wagner P (ed) Social sciences and modern states: national experiences and theoretical crossroads. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991) do occur. ‘Divergers’ experience a gap between science and politics/policymaking; and it is their self-evident task to act as a bridge. They spread over four discourses: ‘rational facilitators’, ‘knowledge brokers’, ‘megapolicy strategists’, and ‘policy analysts’. Others aspire to ‘convergence’; they believe science and politics ought to be natural allies in preparing collective decisions. But ‘policy advisors’ excepted, ‘postnormalists’ and ‘deliberative proceduralists’ find this very hard to achieve.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)235-263
Number of pages22
JournalPoiesis & praxis
Volume6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2008

Keywords

  • IR-104340
  • METIS-252577

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Scientific advice and public policy: expert advisers' and policymakers' discourses on boundary work'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this