ISSP Panel on Evidence Based Decision Making University of Ottawa 7 March 2016 Robert S. Walker

EBDM by Politicians: Characteristics Today’s policy context is tough EBDM is influenced by stakeholder values Government decision space: – The economy – Public health, safety, security and the environment – Government finances Government decision types: policy and …. regulation, legislation, programs, services, operations, treaties, prosecution, war … Hind-cast versus forecast evidence

Science-Informed Evidence for Decision Making by Politicians: So what does good look like? Credible research Consensus of scientific experts Acknowledgement of alternative viewpoints Integrative Sensitive to value drivers Timely Anticipatory

Science-Informed Evidence for Decision Making by Politicians: Barriers Government is a funder of research and a customer for research Government science – Inside Government DM machinery – Lacks scientific capacity and capabilities – Lacks incentives for research partnerships with academia and industry Academic science – Strong multidisciplinary capabilities – Sees Government as funder of research Industry science – Driver for the economy – Sees Government as funder of research (tax credits), regulator and/or market Weak alignment of financial, intellectual and corporate incentives for research partnerships to address Government research needs

Science-Informed Evidence for Decision Making by Politicians: Opportunities Value partnerships with Government science in Government funding of academic and industry research Strengthen the role of Parliament in non-partisan examination of emerging S&T trends and the so-what for society Bring the concept of Open Science to bear on the regulatory process