What is science-policy engagement?
Science-policy engagement is about making sure scientific knowledge is understood and used by the people who make decisions. It’s not about telling policymakers what to do, but about sharing evidence in clear, relevant ways so it can inform policies, laws, or public services. For scientists, it usually means finding ways to communicate your research so it’s useful outside academia, whether through reports, briefings, conversations, or collaborations.
Why science–policy engagement matters
Why engage?
Environmental challenges (unprecedented climate records, extreme weather, and threats to the air we breathe) are urgent and complex. Policy decisions often require the best available science.
As a researcher, your insights can improve evidence-based policymaking and ensure long-term societal benefits.
Benefits for researchers
Real-world impact of your work.
Access to new funding opportunities (many funders now expect pathways to policy impact).
Broader networks with policymakers, non-governmental organisations, think tanks, and industry.
Career development and visibility beyond academia.
Benefits for policymakers
Clear, timely, and relevant evidence.
Access to trusted experts for advice, not just academic papers.
Ability to test and refine policy ideas with scientific input.
Routes to engagement
Key principles
Clarity: Avoid complex terms, lead with key messages.
Relevance: Link your evidence to current policy priorities (e.g. Net Zero Strategy, Environmental Improvement Plan, COP processes).
Timeliness: Provide evidence when decisions are being shaped, not after.
Balance: Present uncertainties and limitations honestly.
Formats
Short pitch: A clear summary that can be delivered in 1–2 minutes, written in 2–3 bullet points for an email, briefing summary, or meeting.
Briefings: 2 page (1500 words) summary with key findings, policy implications, and clear recommendations.
Oral evidence: Concise, respectful, and solutions-oriented.
Infographics/data visualisations: Communicate complex findings quickly.
Tailoring your communication
Key principles
Clarity: Avoid complex terms, lead with key messages.
Relevance: Link your evidence to current policy priorities (e.g. Net Zero Strategy, Environmental Improvement Plan, COP processes).
Timeliness: Provide evidence when decisions are being shaped, not after.
Balance: Present uncertainties and limitations honestly.
Formats
Short pitch: A clear summary that can be delivered in 1–2 minutes, written in 2–3 bullet points for an email, briefing summary, or meeting.
Briefings: 2 page (1500 words) summary with key findings, policy implications, and clear recommendations.
Oral evidence: Concise, respectful, and solutions-oriented.
Infographics/data visualisations: Communicate complex findings quickly.
Know your audience
Civil servants want actionable detail and feasibility.
Politicians value clear narratives, local relevance, and human impact.
Public/NGOs can amplify messages, so clarity and accessibility are essential.
Justifications and good practice
Justifications for engagement
Publicly funded research should serve society.
Policymakers need evidence to justify interventions.
Helps bridge the “evidence–policy gap.”
Good practice considerations
Respect the boundaries between science and advocacy: inform, don’t lobby.
Build relationships over time rather than waiting for a crisis.
Recognise diversity of policy contexts across UK nations.
Collaborate with colleagues and networks – collective voices often carry more weight.
Challenges to anticipate
Evidence may not always be used, even if high quality.
Policy operates on faster timescales than academia.
Political priorities can shift suddenly, but persistence and clarity can still shape outcomes.
10 tips for science-policy engagement
- Be proactive – don’t wait to be asked.
- Identify the policy landscape relevant to your research.
- Tailor your communication to the context – use active and neutral language.
- Keep it concise, focused, and solution-oriented.
- Explain acronyms, terms, statistics and graphs – don’t assume knowledge.
- Highlight uncertainties but don’t hide policy relevance.
- Be timely – align outputs with decision-making cycles.
- Build trust through ongoing relationships, not one-offs.
- Use multiple routes: committees, fellowships, NGOs, local gov.
- Work collaboratively with peers for stronger impact.
Remember: your evidence can make a difference!