ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

ECPR

Install the app

Install this application on your home screen for quick and easy access when you’re on the go.

Just tap Share then “Add to Home Screen”

The Role of Scientific Advisory Systems in Six OECD countries

Institutions
Public Administration
International
Climate Change
Nicole Schmidt
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg
Nicole Schmidt
Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg

Abstract

National bureaucracies need to prepare for the challenges raised by climate change. The Paris Agreement seeking Nationally Determined Contributions every five years will further demand clearer responsibilities from civil servants at various levels of government who are involved in policy formulation processes. Governments often adopt the viewpoint that climate policies must be scientifically sound and informed by science (Gibbons et al. 1994; Holmes and Clark 2008) in order to reduce uncertainty originating from climate change. Over the past years, there has been an increase in policy advisory systems that exist across various policy contexts and levels (Arimoto and Sato 2012; Gallopin et al. 2006; Jasanoff 1990, Reinecke 2016). For example, in 2009, New Zealand appointed Chief Scientific Advisors to the administration in order to achieve synergies in the science policy community. How do national bureaucracies prepare for the new challenges raised by climate change? Do we observe an increase in the creation of Chief Scientific Advisors? In an empirical illustration of Israel, I show how national bureaucracies and the Office of the Chief Scientist matter with regards to the formulation of the national adaptation plan and contrast this to development to five other OECD countries, i.e. the UK, Ireland, New Zealand, Australia and the United States. This paper is of explorative nature and relies on document analysis and interview material with governmental key-advocates of climate change policy. Chief Scientist Offices undertake coordination tasks between the political and scientific systems. However and while we see an increase in the rise of climate-related policies (Nachmany et al. 2015), policies in the field of adaptation remain poorly developed in many countries (Wellstead et al. 2016). The aim of this paper is to shed light on how scientific data was processed by bureaucrats in these countries, and how administrative arrangements and particularly advisory systems embedded in the government, impacted the formulation of climate change policy in these country.