This paper draws on a wide range of findings from policy research and social studies of science to chart the current crisis of expertise and identify a research agenda for the study of post-factual policy analysis. From the beginning, the field of policy analysis has focused on the role of knowledge in politics. The recent rise of post-factual politics has left this field of research in a nearly schizophrenic state. While expert policy advice is on the rise in much of the world, conditions of polarization, populism and politicization have made it easier to invalidate and delegitimatize scientific expertise in ever more areas of policy. When available evidence is conflicting or inconclusive, representative institutions of governance have proven to be ill-prepared to resolve scientific controversy and often fumble in the face of complexity. While calls for the democratization of scientific expertise continue to resonate, knowledge production has never before been as diverse and pluralistic as today. Yet this bewildering array of available knowledge appears to have made it only easier to discard and discredit scientific expertise, rather than bolster the legitimate role of science in democratic politics. The paper takes stock of the conflicted state of policy analysis and charts the way forward.
