Science in the service of democracy. New international study maps the role of chief science advisors to governments

How can governments make better use of scientific knowledge in decision-making? A new international study confirms that having access to data is not enough – the key lies in translating it into clear, trustworthy, and politically relevant recommendations. In many countries, this role is performed by Chief Science Advisors (CSAs). One of the co-authors of the study, published in the academic journal Science and Public Policy, is Karolína Pštross, PhD student from the Institute of Communication Studies and Journalism at FSV UK.

The need to bridge science and politics is not new. As early as 1995, the European Commission emphasized scientific literacy in decision-making with societal impact as a key prerequisite for a democratic society. Yet even today, countries struggle with a shortage of individuals capable of effectively applying scientific knowledge in public administration.

“Science provides valuable insights about the world around us. However, these insights often remain isolated within the academic community and are not used for the benefit of society. Science advice is one way to address this problem,” explains Pštross, adding: “People who can connect expert knowledge with political decision-making are especially crucial in today’s era of so-called polycrisis. They serve as an independent body that explains complex issues, recommends appropriate experts for consultation, has no political agenda of its own, and, simply put, advocates for science at the highest levels.”

In addition to Karolína Pštross, the study was co-authored by Stuart Firestein and Natalia Pasternak from Columbia University in New York and Paul V. Almeida from the University of São Paulo. Pštross spent a research stay at Columbia University funded by the Fulbright Commission, during which she conducted a literature review and interviews with former Chief Science Advisors, civil servants, and policymaking experts. The publication draws extensively on their testimonies.

The study shows that successful science advice is built not only on expertise, but above all on trust, communication, and an understanding of the political environment. Its aim was to place the role of the CSA within a broader spectrum of advisory models and to examine how this model functions in different countries, what skills it requires, and what roles and responsibilities it entails.

There Is No Single Correct Model

The authors identified the CSA position in seven countries: the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, and Ireland. However, their organizational arrangements differ significantly. For example, the United Kingdom has a Chief Scientific Adviser as well as a network of departmental advisers coordinated by the CSA, while other countries primarily rely on a single key CSA who advises the Prime Minister or President directly.

There are also other forms of science advice. The European Union, for instance, relies on a panel of seven Chief Scientific Advisors (the Science Advice Mechanism), which works with temporary working groups of independent experts. This approach is intended to strengthen independence, reflect the EU’s commitment to plurality, and protect against political pressure. However, it may be slower and does not allow for such a close and confidential relationship with political leadership as in the case of an individual adviser.

The authors emphasize that there is no universal solution. The choice of a particular model depends on political culture, public trust in science and institutions, and the organization of decision-making processes in a given country.

Across interviews and previous research, the role of the Chief Science Advisor consistently emerges as primarily one of “bridging” the worlds of science and politics. In addition to subject-matter expertise, key skills include:

• the ability to summarize complex findings into concise, understandable, and practically applicable recommendations,
• strong communication and negotiation skills,
• credibility, independence, and integrity,
• an understanding of how government, public administration, and the political process function.

Many advisors enter this role without any formal training. They learn “on the job”, often drawing on prior experience in industry, public administration, or management. Numerous studies therefore call for more systematic education for scientists who wish to work in public policy, as well as for politicians to better understand the scientific process and how to work with expert evidence.

“During my research, it was important for me to also examine the state of science advice in the Czech Republic,” says Karolína Pštross. “Unfortunately, the situation here is not very favorable. Although we have had a CSA position in the past, it largely focused on science policy in terms of funding and overlapped with the agenda of the Research, Development and Innovation Council. Currently, the role of a Chief Science Advisor does not exist. Ministries, of course, have their own experts whom they consult, but that is not the same,” she notes. She adds that the situation may change in the future and sees growing interest in the topic: “We can draw inspiration, for example, from the excellent Expert Opinions of the Czech Academy of Sciences, strongly supported by its former President Eva Zažímalová, or from the admirable work of the think tank České priority in the field of evidence-based policymaking.”

Young Scientists Want to Enter Politics

Another positive development is the growing interest of young scientists in careers outside academia and industry. Increasing numbers want to work in public administration and contribute to solving societal challenges through the application of scientific knowledge. Although there are fellowships and internships in public administration (for example, the popular Science & Technology Policy Fellowships program run by AAAS in the United States) and in international organizations, opportunities for systematic education in “science for policy” remain limited.

The study shows that Chief Science Advisors can play a key role in modern governance. “The CSA model is not in competition with academies of sciences, expert commissions, or international advisory bodies – on the contrary, it can effectively complement them. The better we understand how different models function, the more effectively governments can use science for the benefit of society as a whole,”concludes Karolína Pštross.

The study is available in Open Access.