Science-Informed Policymaking for State Governments

By Sheeva Azma

I was lucky enough to remotely attend the 2024 AAAS annual meeting, which was held in mid-February in Colorado. Thanks to my membership in the National Association for Science Writers, I got a press pass to attend as a journalist (for FREE!). I attended all the science policy sessions I could with the goal of helping my fellow scientists better understand science policy through my reporting. That’s the impetus for today’s post!

Many states have their own science advisory bodies, which were developed and enacted based on state legislation. These bodies mobilize experts, connect them to relevant policies, and even help facilitate research efforts to inform science-based policymaking. Not only do these organizations facilitate sound science policy at the state level, but they can also inform federal science policy. 

I had never heard of such science advisory boards before, so I was excited to dig into this conference. Three heads of three different state science policy advisory organizations spoke at this AAAS panel:

• Sarah Brady, Interim CEO, California Council on Science and Technology
• Terri Clark, Executive Director at Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering
• Donna Gerardi Riordan, Executive Director at Washington State Academy of Sciences

To give you some idea of what these organizations do, here’s a quick recap of the discussion:

Sarah Brady, California Council on Science and Technology (CCST)

The California Council on Science and Technology or CCST was created by the California state legislature in 1980 to advise the state government on science and technology issues. They work between policymakers and scientists, working to amplify the work happening in academic and research institutions, and on a timescale relevant to policymakers (that’s the biggest challenge they face).

The policy world moves fast, so CCST needs to be nimble and deliver science immediately on a daily, or monthly basis, or longer-term basis, to policymakers.

On the daily basis, CCST also runs a science and technology fellowship program based on AAAS STPF model. Each year, CCST recruits 10 to 15 PhD-level scientists work in California executive branch offices, the state legislature, and the governor’s office. “There’s nothing better than having a scientist actually at the table in a policymaker table when decisions are being made, bills are being drafted, etc.” Learn more here.

They can’t have a scientist in every California office, so CCST connects scientific experts with policymakers for briefings, getting experts into the policymaking room and fostering long-term science-policymaker relationships. CCST can also do workshops to provide recommendations to policymakers. CCST also does peer-reviewed reports on various policy issues, which each take 1-2 years to develop.

One issue CCST has tackled recently in a comprehensive way is the California wildfires. Examples of ways CCST has contributed to wildfire policymaking are multifaceted. CCST built partnerships not only on the state level but also on the federal level. On the state level, they held expert briefings, connected scientists with policymakers to answer questions, and helped inform policymakers on the total cost of the wildfires, including key legislative budget officials. This helped policymakers understand why they needed to act rapidly. On the federal level, they helped inform federal policymaking by informing Congress of the health effects of wildfires more generally. Students, science fellows, and professors alike have helped drive these and other efforts forward, says Brady.

Terri Clark, Executive Director at Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering

Next, Terri Clark, who leads the Connecticut Academy of Science and Engineering, spoke. Clark started with a quote she heard Senator James Maroney relate: “States are the laboratory of democracy.” National laws often start out in individual states, which is why state-level science policy is so important. CASE serves state agencies in the executive branch and the public sector.

CASE is a private, non-profit public service organization created in 1976 by a special act of the General Assembly in Connecticut to provide high-quality guidance on science and technology issues for the people of Connecticut. CASE is patterned after the National Academies and has 435+ science, technology, engineering, medicine, and math professionals. Membership is honorific but CASE is service-oriented: members are expected to give back to support the people of the state through science-informed policies.

Clark stated that even though CASE was formed to provide advice and guidance to the government, the government doesn’t always take the advice. Members are expected to be respondent on a short timeframe, but CASE also conducts longer-term studies and publishes reports. 

CASE has worked on over 150 projects since it was founded, with 22 from 2012 to present. CASE is known for being independent, nonpartisan, unbiased, and evidence-based. Academy members are based locally but connected to experts all over the world. Since members serve pro-bono, costs are low and relate to administrative support, unique costs related to work effort, and publication fees, if reports are furnished. CASE is a cost-effective way to build science-informed capacity within Connecticut to drive effective policies.

An example of how CASE informs policymakers’ process is its work with state task forces, which can be a useful application of science to directly inform policy. Task forces are called within legislation when the legislators aren’t quite ready to move forward. CASE engages with task forces by supplying experts, as they did with AI.

Another study CASE did was in the realm of early childhood and pre-K education, conducting a 1.5-year long study on behalf of the Education Committee of Connecticut’s General Assembly, because people were constantly asking for money for early education in appropriations, but nobody had any evidence that early education worked. CASE hired a team from the UConn Neag School of Education and assembled a study committee to provide guidance. They tested 529 students to examine the effect of early childhood education and found that state-funded early education programs added value. The data also was later used to obtain additional federal grants for early education in Connecticut.

Like CCST, CASE also has a science and technology policy fellowship program.

Donna Gerardi Riordan, Executive Director at Washington State Academy of Sciences

Donna Gerardi Riordan, the session organizer, spoke last. She leads the Washington State Academy of Sciences, another leading state academy in the US that works at the interface of science and policy. The experts at WSAS, like those at similar institutions such as those outlined above, advocate for sound science but not specific policy outcomes. WSAS provides scientific and engineering assessments to inform public policymaking and increase the impact of research. WSAS was modeled after the National Academies when it was established in 2005 by the state’s then-governor, Christine Gregoire.

WSAS is state-funded and its expertise cuts across all disciplines. 400+ members come from “research powerhouses” across the state, not only in academia but in industry and government. Expert affiliations include companies such as Microsoft and Boeing, as well as universities and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. Members also pay dues – “they pay for the privilege of being volunteers for us.”

WSAS mobilizes these experts to leverage their insight and networks to help Washington state. Convening study committees, independent third-party reviews, consensus reports, convening scientific meetings, and other tasks are the purview of WSAS. Activity within WSAS occurs based on what is needed by policymakers. Experts can also identify important questions for policymakers about different policy options to help policymakers see the science-informed “big picture,” discussing both certainties and uncertainties inherent in the given subject.

One example of a long-term project WSAS continues to work on with the government is their work on water supply in the Skagit River. This project, ongoing since 2019, is a collaboration between WSAS and Washington State University Water Research Center. They were not hired until after a series of consulting reports, which laid out evidence to help decide who gets to use the water and when and where. After those reports were furnished, WSAS was recruited to help figure out whether the evidence being used to decide water rights was, in fact, accurate. 

Like CASE and CCST, WSAS will, as of this writing, soon have a science and technology fellowship program.

A quick note about state-level science policy research organizations

It’s great to have a science advisory body to support state government. The federal government once, did, too, in the form of the Office of Technology Assessment. However, the OTA disbanded in 1995. So, now it’s up to the states to figure out the science policy for themselves, and not every state has these organizations. You might want to do some research to find out if your state (or, if you are based outside of the US, your local government) has a similar science advisory body.

Learn more about science policy!

Fancy Comma, LLC is a science communications company with a dual mission. As much as we work to serve our clients, we also hope to educate scientists on the multifaceted role science plays in society, and of course, that includes science in government.

Read all of the AAAS 2024 Annual Meeting recap blogs here! You can also improve your science communication and science policy skills by checking out Fancy Comma’s FREE resources. We also have lots of other blogs for you to peruse on the subject of science policy. Check out our science policy videos on YouTube, too!