FutureFoodS Webinar Series:
“Principles and practices of research-based advice to policy for food systems transformation: Towards agreement on conceptual guidelines for SPI across European countries”
Participate in the development of best practices for different types of science policy interfaces and science-policy-society interfaces via three highly interactive webinars that should be seen as a process towards a joint outcome:
Webinar 1, February 24: Principles and practices of SPI in different contexts
Webinar 2, March 19: Science–policy-society interface in food policy: Towards institutional and territorial coherence
Webinar 3, April 22: Development of widely shared typology and practice-oriented guidelines for SPI in FutureFoodS
Two-hour webinars from 10-12 am.
Aim
Surveys show that scientific advice is clearly valued in policy formulation for sustainable food systems transformation. Civil servants in many ministries and agencies across Europe have indicated that they often rely on external expertise and active engagement with scientific advisors and knowledge institutions. However, there seems to be limited consideration for the formal procedures in SPI and a scarcity of training in principles and practices.
Therefore, our aim is:
to develop a shared and operational understanding of best practices for Science–Policy Interfaces (SPI) in support of the partnership’s objective of “transforming Europe's food production and consumption towards more sustainable and resilient systems”.
formulating a typology of SPI for future joint training in and guidelines for provision of research-based advice to policy makers under FutureFoodS.
to understand the implications of integrating other stakeholders in so-called Science-Policy-Society Interfaces (SPSI).
Why should I participate?
Be part of a community of interested policy makers, civil servants and researchers developing mutual understanding of
how research-based advice may support policy for food systems transformation and
which principles and practices should be applied to science-policy-interfaces and science-policy-society interfaces (SPI/SPSI)
Thus, contribute with your knowledge and experience – and learn from others - on how SPI/SPSI may effectively contribute to the transformation of Food Systems.
Therefore, are you engaged in developing policies - for example - for green public food procurement, alternative protein supply, sustainable food based dietary guidelines, reducing food waste or similar initiatives for Food systems transformation? Whether you are the researcher providing science-based advice or a civil servant procuring and using such advice, you may be interested in European dialogues on how these SPI/SPSI processes work most efficiently at EU, national and regional levels. We encourage you to join the series of FutureFoodS spring webinars and learn more!
Registration is mandatory
We encourage participants to sign up for all three webinars and will prioritize final invitations accordingly while seeing a balance between participation from different roles (Civil servants/policy makers vs researchers, SPI managers and experts, stakeholders).
Introduction : Aim and rationale for the initiative
Keynote presentation(s) based on a FutureFoodS survey among civil servants and other recent findings as seen from research side: Different types of science advice tasks and governance of SPI, Principles and practices applied in current SPIs and challenges seen from practice
Group work in breakout sessions working in Miro to capture ideas:
Sharing concrete case examples from civil servants/researchers (e.g. from our survey respondents).
Open discussions w facilitator followed by specific questions aiming at creating mutual understanding of the variation in practices and a first version of typology of SPI and classification of principles etc.
First ideas of advantages and challenges of different types of SPI as seen by participants
What are the practical implications of SPI and SPSI in a Policy context as demonstrated in three national cases?
The webinar presents 3 different national case studies – from Italy, Denmark and Belgium- with the aim of understanding how to bridge the gap in SPI with regards to food policies. The 3 case studies focus on multi-actor approaches and networking activities.
Definition of SPIS vs SPI: Are there main differences in the role of science and scientific integrity?
Italy: Bridging the gap in food policies by a transdisciplinary and multi-actor policy approach
Denmark: Science to policy interface in support of the Food Agency’s policy for transition to plant-based diets
Flanders (Belgium): Networking for the food system transition via policy-science-society interface
Guided brainstorming sessions in break-out rooms
Which factors enable or hinder effective dialogue between scientists and policymakers at different institutional levels?
What are the main elements that enable good practices for SPSI on these different institutional levels?
Can (elements of) good practices in SPSI be generalized and turned into “universal principles”, or are they fully case- and context-specific?
Intro: Recap of outcome of group work/webinar 1 and 2.
Keynote on the rationale and idea for a joint conceptual framework for SPI/SPSI as support for coherent policy formulation in Food Systems approach.
Presenting a draft proposal for common principles and practice guidelines (building on the two first webinars and input on Miro board) for the discussion.
Group work aiming at discussing and developing draft common guidelines for SPIs and ideas for the development of training courses
Creating a typology of SPI/SPSI situations relevant vis-à-vis FutureFoodS
Agreeing on main principles to consider and an overall set of practice guidelines to be developed for different types of SPI.
First Ideas for training needs and course content
Plenary: bringing together the proposals from breakout groups
Why are we doing this?
There is a void of training courses in SPI/SPSI based on clearly formulated procedures and practice guidelines, which ensures basic principles of research-based advice to policy makers aiming at Food systems transformation. FutureFoodS intend to set up a web-based training course aiming at ensuring high quality and consistent research-based policy advice based on mutually agreed principles and practice guidelines. Therefore, we need to exchange experiences, ideas and expectations for such guidelines.
Surveys show that scientific advice is clearly valued in policy formulation, especially in developing specific policy proposals and formulating regulation. Civil servants in many ministries and agencies across Europe have indicated that they often rely on external expertise and active engagement with scientific advisors and knowledge institutions. They strongly support continuous interaction between civil servants, researchers, and – sometimes – other stakeholders. Ministries/agencies welcome new knowledge even without formal requests. However, despite widespread use of research-based advice to policy making, there seems to be a void of clearly formulated principles and processes regulating the SPI/SPSI practices. There is a tradition for requesting advice based on personal relationships and a lack of formal procedures that would ensure “arms-length” between civil servants and researchers. Thus, scientific integrity, transparency and consistency, which should be important principles ensuring effective SPI/SPSIs seems not well governed. This is a problem if a Trans-European organisation such as FutureFoodS intend to provide policy advice to member states and EU based on the insights gained from funded research projects and other activities.
By exchanging experiences from practice between civil servants and researchers engaged in SPI/SPSI we intend to establish a better overview of procedures used and discuss which are important principles to guide future SPI/SPSI based on trans-European collaboration.