| Guest blog | Challenges to engage in global policy and practice as a young scientist in water management

Written by Dr Abishek S Narayan, Researcher at Eawag: Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, following the workshop on Science-Policy Interface for Scientists: An (Inter)national Perspective, organised by Swiss Young Academy in cooperation with the Geneva Science​-​​ ​Policy Interface and Reatch in May 2024.This is the first of a two-part Blog series exploring the challenges and strategies for engaging in global policy and practice as a young scientist.

Based on an exercise in a workshop organised by the Swiss Young Academy, the Geneva Science-Policy Interface, and Reatch, I reflected on my journey within the science-policy interface, serving as a 'boundary spanner' in various forms over the years in the field of water for development. I have been an academic collaborator, a consultant, an advisory board member, and a member of expert commissions in global policy and practice.

Therefore, this reflection piece leverages some of the frameworks presented at the workshop by the GSPI to identify challenges for early-career scientists to engage in this interface.

Usually, young people wish to pursue a career in science for a combination of two reasons: (i) fascination with their scientific domain and (ii) the desire to leverage science as a tool for real-world impact. Young scientists who feel a strong pull toward the second reason should get to know and explore ways to engage with the Science-Policy Interface (SPI).

This interface can occur at various levels: local, regional, national, or global. In some countries, engagement strategies may be clearer at the national and sub-national levels compared to the global level. Government structures at the legislative and bureaucratic levels are often well established, and the pathways to engage with them as a citizen or resident already exist. However, at the global level, there are several multilateral institutions, such as the United Nations and its agencies, programmes, and funds, as well as multilateral development banks like the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank, among others. At this global level, figuring out strategies for engagement can be both daunting and confusing, especially for young scientists.

There are significant challenges in engaging with the Global Science-Policy Interface—what the GSPI describes as a non-exhaustive list of 'misfits' between science and policy. Building on these models, the following misfits emerged from our discussions and my reflections.

1. Misalignment

There is a misalignment between the objectives of science and policy. Science aims to be precise, while policy aims to be practical. In the case of my doctoral research on planning water and sanitation in low- and middle-income countries, I encountered this challenge and felt pulled in two directions. On one hand, I needed to create innovative, cutting-edge solutions and conduct in-depth analysis that aligned with complex theoretical frameworks; on the other, I had to provide practical recommendations using proven solutions for policymakers and practitioners to benefit from.

2. Miscommunication

Scientists and policymakers often speak different languages, so the needs of policy and the results of science are often not effectively communicated to each other. As a researcher, I am expected to publish in scientific journals that use a style filled with terminology, complex formulations, citations, and numerous caveats, making the language inaccessible to most non-experts. Similarly, within the policy realm, a different form of communication is used, often lengthy, with multiple subordinate clauses and coordinating conjunctions, and lacking visual aids. This style is primarily intended to meet the needs of governance, which relies more on execution rather than justification.

Here’s a hypothetical example of the same sentence:

Scientific writing: "Ensuring the sustainability of water supply and sanitation services requires a multifaceted approach that integrates technological innovations, community engagement, and policy frameworks (Kumar et al., 2018; Miltin et al., 2018) to address the complex interplay between social, economic, and environmental factors influencing access to these essential services."

Policy writing: "To achieve progress on SDG indicator 6.2.1a of Agenda 2030, the Directorate of Service Provision in the Department of Water and Sanitation, under the Ministry of Water, recognises the need for a comprehensive strategy that combines cutting-edge technology as identified by the special scheme, community participation as per Law 1A, and effective policy implementation led by the aforementioned authority to address the interconnected challenges of access, affordability, and equity, as defined by the Human Right to Water and Sanitation (UNGA 64/292 - 2010)."

3. Mis-incentivised

The incentive for scientists within their academic domain is often centered around the impact factor of their research, a (questionable) measure of the quality and relevance of their work. This can lead to a focus on high-quality science within a specific discipline, resulting in research that is highly specialised and siloed. Policymakers, on the other hand, are driven by the mandate to create real-world change and impact. Their work often requires synthesising knowledge from multiple disciplines to address complex policy issues. As a result, siloed research may not adequately cover the breadth that corresponding policy demands.

For instance, in the water domain, scientists may conduct research on the effectiveness of a particular water treatment technology. While these studies are crucial for advancing our understanding, they may not fully address the broader policy context. Policymakers, however, need to consider the interplay between these technical issues and other factors, such as economic development, social equity, and environmental sustainability. Similarly, a policy aimed at improving water access may not sufficiently consider the technical limitations of the water treatment technology being used.

In summary, young scientists face several challenges such as competing priorities, communication barriers, and differing incentives when engaging with global policy. However, by navigating the Science-Policy Interface with a flexible, interdisciplinary approach, they can bridge these gaps and make meaningful contributions to global water policy.  

Dr. Abishek S. Narayan also published a follow-up blog, where he explores strategies to address the challenges mentioned above. Read the full blog on strategies to navigate the science-policy interface in water management here.