Science in Policy-Making: Neutral Experts or Strategic Policy-Makers?

Although many policy process and diffusion theories follow the premise that scientific and technological knowledge plays a crucial role in a wide variety of policy fields, very few empirically assess the impact that institutional and process-relevant factors may have on the position of science within a process. The present study addresses the question of what role science plays in policy processes. To answer this, we apply the Advocacy Coalition Framework (ACF) and investigate three complementary assumptions using a qualitative comparison of four cases: the ACF claims that scientific experts can take very different positions in the policy process, depending on how conflictive or consensus-oriented the relations among actors and coalitions are within a so-called policy subsystem. Put differently, the type of subsystem impacts on the position of science within the process. The results show that subsystem-specific factors impact upon whether scientific representatives act at the periphery of a process or as policy brokers seeking feasible policy solutions.