Dataset Information

Realigning science, society and policy in uncertain times.

ABSTRACT: Against a backdrop of rapidly changing social, economic and geopolitical settings and ideologies, the world is facing a wide range of challenges, including in biodiversity, climate, energy, the environment, food, health and water. These can only be addressed by fully harnessing key capacities that science offers. However, there is a crisis of trust in science which affects some sections of society and some policy-makers, impairing the capacity of science to deliver its essential roles. This damaged relationship between science, society and policy has immense health, economic and social consequences and implications for sustainability of the entire planet. Scientists must strive collectively to re-establish trust by society and politicians where it is damaged, and reinforce conviction of science's central importance in underpinning policy. Science's roles must in turn be acknowledged by policies that sustain innovation and freedom to work without political interference or constraints. A well-functioning and trusting relationship between science, society and policy-makers offers a potent means to thwart and mitigate emergent global challenges.

SUBMITTER: Mehta G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7277255 | biostudies-literature | 2020 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Realigning science, society and policy in uncertain times.

Mehta Goverdhan G Hopf Henning H Krief Alain A Matlin Stephen A SA

Royal Society open science 20200520 5

Against a backdrop of rapidly changing social, economic and geopolitical settings and ideologies, the world is facing a wide range of challenges, including in biodiversity, climate, energy, the environment, food, health and water. These can only be addressed by fully harnessing key capacities that science offers. However, there is a crisis of trust in science which affects some sections of society and some policy-makers, impairing the capacity of science to deliver its essential roles. This dama ...[more]

PMID: 32537231

Similar Datasets

Project description:The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated the significant value of systems modelling in supporting proactive and effective public health decision making despite the complexities and uncertainties that characterise an evolving crisis. The same approach is possible in the field of mental health. However, a commonly levelled (but misguided) criticism prevents systems modelling from being more routinely adopted, namely, that the presence of uncertainty around key model input parameters renders a model useless. This study explored whether radically different simulated trajectories of suicide would result in different advice to decision makers regarding the optimal strategy to mitigate the impacts of the pandemic on mental health. Using an existing system dynamics model developed in August 2020 for a regional catchment of Western Australia, four scenarios were simulated to model the possible effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on levels of psychological distress. The scenarios produced a range of projected impacts on suicide deaths, ranging from a relatively small to a dramatic increase. Discordance in the sets of best-performing intervention scenarios across the divergent COVID-mental health trajectories was assessed by comparing differences in projected numbers of suicides between the baseline scenario and each of 286 possible intervention scenarios calculated for two time horizons; 2026 and 2041. The best performing intervention combinations over the period 2021-2041 (i.e., post-suicide attempt assertive aftercare, community support programs to increase community connectedness, and technology enabled care coordination) were highly consistent across all four COVID-19 mental health trajectories, reducing suicide deaths by between 23.9-24.6% against the baseline. However, the ranking of best performing intervention combinations does alter depending on the time horizon under consideration due to non-linear intervention impacts. These findings suggest that systems models can retain value in informing robust decision making despite uncertainty in the trajectories of population mental health outcomes. It is recommended that the time horizon under consideration be sufficiently long to capture the full effects of interventions, and efforts should be made to achieve more timely tracking and access to key population mental health indicators to inform model refinements over time and reduce uncertainty in mental health policy and planning decisions.

Project description:The Lisbon Strategy was adopted by the Heads of State and Government of the European Union (EU) in 2000. By moving science into a central position for the development of a European knowledge-based economy and society, its adoption at political level seems to have been a powerful catalyst for the increased involvement of scientists in science policy in the EU. Recognising the need for scientists to act collectively in order to contribute to shape the future of science policy in Europe, a pioneering group of European science organisations leaders and representatives, as well as other scientists, initiated a European, interdisciplinary, inclusive movement leading to the creation of the European Research Council (ERC) to support basic research of the highest quality. Having scientists' campaign for the funding of bottom-up research by the EU Framework Programmes exclusively on scientific grounds, and for an ERC, was a unique event in the recent history of European science policy. For the first time, the scientific community acted collectively and across disciplinary or national boundaries as a political actor for the sake of a better science policy for Europe. As is often the case when first-hand experience is gained through the creation of a new organization, novel forms of collaboration arise. The European biomedical community has recently proposed the creation of a strategic action plan for health research (the European Council of Health Research; EuCHR), provisionally translated at present into a Scientific Panel for Health (SPH) research in Horizon 2020, the EU's research-funding programme for the period 2014-2020. The creation of such Scientific Panel should be viewed as an important contribution by the biomedical community as a major political agreement has been reached on the need for a comprehensive and long-term scientific strategy to accelerate research and facilitate innovation at EU level. It is our belief that describing and analyzing the process leading to the creation of the ERC and SPH (2002-2014) should be widely shared with the research community in general, as this may contribute to the understanding of the evolving relations between scientists and science-policy making.

Dataset Information

Realigning science, society and policy in uncertain times.

Publications

Realigning science, society and policy in uncertain times.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets