This high-level panel brings together speakers from four continents working at the coal-face of robust evidence-based policy-making. They connect research, government, international institutions, journalism and science both into industry and society. Their common purpose is to examine what happens to our prized research findings and their social justice outcomes when the voice of science is muted at best, or silenced at worst. They outline the actions they are pioneering to counteract this at source. A clear focus is on their own first-hand career experiences and anecdotal evidence. Concrete case-studies will be given outlining progress made and obstacles met on the road to the SDGs and Agenda 2030 from North America to Latin America and the Caribbean, and from the Southern Africa region to the European Union.
Against the backdrop of over 50% of the world voting on often heavily-scientifically-influenced election manifestos in 2024, the panel weighs-up what a hard or even small shift to the right and increasing top-down ‘scientific certainty’ might mean for democracy itself and the institutions that underpin it. From pressing global issues related to innovation, climate or biodiversity and life-or-death imperatives such as access to vaccines, clean air or water etc., the availability of shared global research outcomes is of paramount importance to addressing them. This is the too obvious to mention. That said, perhaps never before has the scientific community come under such pressure to find, say or do what populist policy-makers and the national science systems they run, might think. Although trust in science remains high, vocal minorities readily access both regulated mainstream and unregulated social media with outreach to broad audiences. Many do so explicitly to challenge the research endeavour and erode that trust without sound arguments.
Speakers will give their regional perspectives on how concerned, or not, we ought to be about “evidence-based policy-making versus policy-biased evidence-making” and what this might mean for our varying systems of government. They will address if in our post-pandemic-world we are witnessing a scientific snap-back to a new-normal, a new protectionism and a new discourse where often the loudest and the most resourced wins. In this regard, the panel’s co-organisers will give important first insights into the conclusions of the International Network for Governmental Science Advice’s (INGSA) global biennial consultation event held in Rwanda, and the World Federation of Science Journalists’ (WFSJ) ongoing efforts amongst national chapters to champion more ethical science communication and journalism at all stages of the scientific process.
