Raising SPIRES to unite science, policy, and the public

Solutions to environmental challenges are irrelevant until they are legitimised by public opinion. There are inherent subjectivities in the way society responds to the crises facing humanity, so people must have a say in which pathways are pursued.

To that end, science must be available to the public to provide information, identify solutions, and demystify the complexities of natural systems so that the public is empowered to make meaningful choices.

Participatory approaches like citizen science, forums of empowerment like climate assemblies, and broad networks that bring together other trusted groups can all support engagement. In each of these instances, case study examples of best practice are already producing strong results. To secure the best possible future for the environment, those solutions should be scaled up to bring in groups who are currently still estranged from science.

Much like its relationship with society, science must have a good relationship with policy, governments, and decision makers to effect meaningful change in the world. As the legitimacy of modern environmental science comes from the extent to which it helps society overcome challenges, a priority for the future of environmental science will be to ensure that meaningful relationships are established with decision-makers.

Historically, the relationship between science and policy has been two-way: policy sets strategic priorities for science, provides research funding, and employs or appoints experts within governments; meanwhile, science provides evidence for policy, shapes our knowledge of the world which influences priorities, and educates the public who direct policy makers.

Science and policy interact across multiple organisations and processes, often subconsciously or without deliberate design. These inherent and diffuse relationships are key leverage points with the capacity to transform policy processes and governance systems. They also give regulation the scientific credibility needed to outlast political cycles and the certainty to create ‘level playing fields’ for businesses and consumers.

Within the scientific community, there are many constituent elements which must be properly aligned to maximise the potential of science to aid policy and serve society. Insights from environmental professionals often do not make their way to researchers, and the findings of research rarely influence practice on the front lines. While best practice is driving links between research, industry, and practice, more can be done to make these approaches consistent and widespread.

Testing research against the experiences of professionals can confirm that theoretical understandings of the interactions between nature and society hold up in practice, while feeding research into guidance is crucial for ensuring continuing development of best practice. Likewise, if research is untargeted or not informed by practical insights, it may lead to less effective use of money, science capital, and time, all of which are limited in the context of pressing environmental challenges.

Industry also has a fundamental role to play, particularly given the rising number of green jobs and the vast knowledge and expertise contained within the private sector. Capitalising on networks of professional practice will be vital to informing research and policy, as well as rolling out best practice, so the private sector needs a strong incentive to engage.

The broadest churches have the tallest spires. As environmental science improves its relationships, it should bring more communities into contact with the broad church of interdisciplinary expertise that science can contain. 

Managing those diffuse and complex interactions to ensure that the implications of science are useful and relevant to humanity could be facilitated through a “SPIRES” (Society, Policy, Industry, Research, the Environment, and Science) model:

• Society must be engaged to legitimise science. The relationship between science and society determines if evidence is meaningfully used and if science is fulfilling its duties to the public. For the relationship to succeed, more than just the most vocal or science-positive voices should be engaged, including those who have been historically excluded, such as indigenous communities. 
• Policy must be engaged to implement science. The relationship between science and policy determines if society is empowered to make choices based on evidence. For the relationship to succeed, science should be part of the consideration of policy design and implementation. 
• Industry must be engaged to leverage science. The relationship between science and industry determines whether the majority of environmental scientists are working towards the goals and interests of society. For the relationship to succeed, interdisciplinary and challenge-led science should be relevant to consumers and businesses, so that best practice is encouraged as widely as possible. 
• Research must be engaged to drive science. The relationship between science and research determines if there is sufficient evidence to empower the public and inform policy. For the relationship to succeed, research should be guided to address pressing issues emerging from practice, as well as the needs of policymakers and the public. 
• The environment must be engaged to ethicise science. The relationship between science and the environment determines how scientific evidence can provide benefits for society. For the relationship to succeed, the connection between society and nature should be reimagined, alongside how people value the natural world. 

In practice, these relationships are inherent, subconscious, and decentralised, so the focus of environmental science should be on altering the interactions which already exist to improve relationships between parties.