Four propositions to narrow the gap between science and policy for climate change adaptation: Insights and evidence from Aotearoa New Zealand

IF 5.2 2区 环境科学与生态学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
Angela Halliday , Joanna Fountain , Anita Wreford , Nicholas A. Cradock-Henry
{"title":"Four propositions to narrow the gap between science and policy for climate change adaptation: Insights and evidence from Aotearoa New Zealand","authors":"Angela Halliday ,&nbsp;Joanna Fountain ,&nbsp;Anita Wreford ,&nbsp;Nicholas A. Cradock-Henry","doi":"10.1016/j.envsci.2025.104239","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The scale and complexity of global challenges and the growing pressure on researchers to demonstrate ‘impact’, has prompted considerable investigation into the relationship between science, policy and decision-making. This is especially evident in the field of climate change adaptation, which is characterised by policy relevance, deep uncertainty, and diverse stakeholders, contributing to a highly complex policy and planning landscape. This paper seeks to contribute to the science to policy interface literature by presenting results from case study analysis in Aotearoa New Zealand. In-depth, semi-structured interviews (<em>n</em> = 23) with policy practitioners and individuals in related roles and organisations, were used to elicit information about barriers and enablers to research uptake and implementation. Thematic analysis yielded four foundational propositions: Strong relationships enable research to inform policy and decision-making; Interpretations of uncertainty hamper policy-making for adaptation; Competing timeframes and priorities hinder research uptake; and Funding priorities affect research uptake and policy outcomes.</div><div>Collectively, these propositions highlight the need to strengthen collaboration between researchers and policymakers by building trust, fostering mutual understanding, and establishing feedback loops between individuals in their respective domains, supported by knowledge translators. The findings have international relevance and utility and can inform the design and evaluation of mission-led science that addresses the complex challenge of climate change adaptation, with an emphasis on enhancing transparency and trust between policymakers and researchers.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":313,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Science & Policy","volume":"173 ","pages":"Article 104239"},"PeriodicalIF":5.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Science & Policy","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1462901125002552","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The scale and complexity of global challenges and the growing pressure on researchers to demonstrate ‘impact’, has prompted considerable investigation into the relationship between science, policy and decision-making. This is especially evident in the field of climate change adaptation, which is characterised by policy relevance, deep uncertainty, and diverse stakeholders, contributing to a highly complex policy and planning landscape. This paper seeks to contribute to the science to policy interface literature by presenting results from case study analysis in Aotearoa New Zealand. In-depth, semi-structured interviews (n = 23) with policy practitioners and individuals in related roles and organisations, were used to elicit information about barriers and enablers to research uptake and implementation. Thematic analysis yielded four foundational propositions: Strong relationships enable research to inform policy and decision-making; Interpretations of uncertainty hamper policy-making for adaptation; Competing timeframes and priorities hinder research uptake; and Funding priorities affect research uptake and policy outcomes.
Collectively, these propositions highlight the need to strengthen collaboration between researchers and policymakers by building trust, fostering mutual understanding, and establishing feedback loops between individuals in their respective domains, supported by knowledge translators. The findings have international relevance and utility and can inform the design and evaluation of mission-led science that addresses the complex challenge of climate change adaptation, with an emphasis on enhancing transparency and trust between policymakers and researchers.
缩小气候变化适应科学与政策之间差距的四个主张:来自新西兰奥特罗阿的见解和证据
全球挑战的规模和复杂性以及科学家证明“影响”的压力越来越大,促使了对科学、政策和决策之间关系的大量调查。这在气候变化适应领域尤为明显,该领域的特点是政策相关性、高度不确定性和利益攸关方多样化,导致政策和规划环境高度复杂。本文旨在通过介绍新西兰奥特罗阿的案例研究分析结果,为政策界面文献的科学做出贡献。与相关角色和组织的政策实践者和个人进行深入的半结构化访谈(n = 23),以引出有关研究吸收和实施的障碍和推动因素的信息。专题分析产生了四个基本命题:牢固的关系使研究能够为政策和决策提供信息;对不确定性的解释阻碍了适应政策的制定;相互竞争的时间框架和优先事项阻碍了研究的吸收;资助优先级影响研究吸收和政策结果。总的来说,这些主张强调了在知识翻译的支持下,通过建立信任、促进相互理解和在各自领域的个人之间建立反馈循环来加强研究人员和决策者之间合作的必要性。这些发现具有国际相关性和实用性,可以为解决气候变化适应这一复杂挑战的以任务为主导的科学的设计和评估提供信息,重点是提高决策者和研究人员之间的透明度和信任。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Environmental Science & Policy
Environmental Science & Policy 环境科学-环境科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
8.30%
发文量
332
审稿时长
68 days
期刊介绍: Environmental Science & Policy promotes communication among government, business and industry, academia, and non-governmental organisations who are instrumental in the solution of environmental problems. It also seeks to advance interdisciplinary research of policy relevance on environmental issues such as climate change, biodiversity, environmental pollution and wastes, renewable and non-renewable natural resources, sustainability, and the interactions among these issues. The journal emphasises the linkages between these environmental issues and social and economic issues such as production, transport, consumption, growth, demographic changes, well-being, and health. However, the subject coverage will not be restricted to these issues and the introduction of new dimensions will be encouraged.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信