By Sheeva Azma

Bipartisanship gets stuff done, especially in science policy. So, how can we get there, as scientists?

That’s the question I had in mind as I virtually attended the “Engaging Policymakers Across Political Difference” talk at the 2024 AAAS Conference. Because I’m a member of the National Association for Science Writers, I got a press pass to attend as a journalist (for FREE!). I excitedly attended as many virtual science policy sessions as possible…and I learned a lot! Check out the full list of 2024 AAAS annual meeting recap blogs here, or all of my writing about various AAAS seminars and meetings I’ve attended here.

One quick note: because I was a virtual attendee, I was able to catch an audio recording of the session after it happened. However, on this particular recording, it was difficult to discern who was who, so I have chosen to quote the panelists as a group, collectively, rather than try to figure out who said what.

The session was coordinated by Kate Stoll of AAAS and Melanie Roberts of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory in Seattle, Washington. Presenters included Rajul Pandya of Arizona State University, Amanda Shores of the American Geophysical Union, and Kristan Uhlenbrock of the Institute for Science & Policy at the Denver Museum of Nature & Science in Denver, Colorado.

“There’s a million lessons involved,” stated one of the panelists. What I learned about science policymaking in this session shocked me, as none of it involved science at all, but rather, relating to and engaging to people. The panelists seemed unified in their discussions of engaging people, elevating differences, and leveraging established techniques to co-create science policies with consensus.

Finding Common Ground in Policymaking

According to the panelists, it’s important to understand common values, for one thing, as we have more in common than we have differences. What’s more, we all have the same values, but we value and contextualize them differently. “You can really recognize and celebrate differences in a way that doesn’t create divisiveness…if you are intentional and aware of what the division is. It’s important to elevate our differences.”

How to co-create science policies with people with differing views than you

Co-production is a form of knowledge work that involves different parties. Practically speaking, it is important to have discussions with policymakers of all political views so that people can connect and discuss and advance science in many contexts, especially since science itself is not inherently partisan. It’s also about helping communities “reach out to science in a way that makes it accessible for them.”

Some ways to do that, according to the panelists, are to:

• Avoid letting your emotions get in the way of political agreement. Take the emotion out of political engagement to bridge the political divides. Find consensus and good will where it exists naturally.
• Build on existing consensus. There is already quite some agreement around issues such as “resilience, emergency preparedness, [and] clean energy.”
• Pick your battles and see where you can contribute to the conversation.
• Keep an open mind. Don’t come in with a preconceived notion of what the solution should be before you engage with community stakeholders.
• Include everyone in the discussion. Make sure you engage with people who have historically been excluded from or do not have access to science.

So, what are the lessons learned from engaging across political divides? Here’s a rundown of what the panelists said:

• Building trust, while crucial, takes a long time. Remain neutral, but be friendly and non-judgmental, and do not insult people.
• Elevate differences but focus on shared values and interests, as there’s more in common than you’d think.
• Use active listening and build off of community priorities.
• Re-evaluate your communication style so that it works across a “different viewpoint spectrum.” This might require changes in the way you talk and use language.
• Storytelling can be really powerful, as it’s easy to refute facts, but more difficult to refute experiences.
• Make the process as participatory as possible; for example, ask people about their differences.
• Don’t ignore the grassroots aspect of political participation. Building a huge network can help you leverage the “power of the people.”
• Remember that capacity-building itself is “a huge win.“

Resources for engaging across political divides

The panelists also shared their favorite resources for engaging across the political spectrum:

• Deliberation and dialogue are processes essential to community-focused policymaking. The Association of Science and Technology Centers have resources on this subject, including a dialogue and deliberation toolkit, as well as other resources on co-creation of community-focused science policy. 
• Participatory dialogue
• “Participatory mapping” is a technique that allows one to use multidisciplinary thinking and collaboration to synthesize information in maps. Esri has free tools that can use maps to help describe problems and weave a geospatial narrative to help when reaching out to lawmakers and communities alike.
• The Consortium for Science Policy Outcomes at Arizona State University does a lot on the subject of participatory dialogue and is worth checking out.
• There’s also lots of good “pop culture” resources such as the Ezra Klein Show podcast, management and consulting books that talk about how to listen, and people like the Dalai Lama who discuss being attentive and are focused on creating unity to better the world.

Science policy role-playing exercises

After the presenters spoke, participants then engaged in a couple of science policy communication and role-playing exercises. 

The first exercise was to “find something cool” about another person at the seminar. One attendee described the activity as “affirming.” Participants left the activity feeling “happy,” moreso than one might in an adversarial communication.

Next, participants engaged in role-playing, either pretending to be a senator or a scientist, engaging in dialogue about co-creating solutions including science. Learning, listening, practicing humility, understanding a different viewpoint, and engaging in a dialogue were the skills being tested here.

A participant who role-played as a scientist stated that “finding common ground” was crucial to find “issues that might not have been seen.” Another who role-played as a scientist stated that “having an open mind helped for getting to a solution.”

Looking for commonality in policy proposals is sometimes the easy part – reconciling the differences can be the hard part, according to one of the panelists.

Learn everything you need for science policy with Fancy Comma, LLC’s free resources

Read all of my 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.