Scholarlink

<p>Recent literature on science–policy–society interfaces (SPSI) suggests that transformative change in environmental governance requires solution-focused, inclusive, and co-produced mechanisms in the creation of policy-relevant knowledge. Nonetheless, due to accepted epistemic norms and modes of organisation, most SPSIs fail to address prevailing power disparities and contribute to real economic and political restructuring for sustainability. This paper addresses a rarely considered but critical aspect of transformative knowledge co-production, namely the governance structures and processes that underpin SPSI interactions. Based on a design thinking process and expert interviews, we outline a novel model of SPSI governance that is based on the principles of sociocracy, centring equity, inclusivity, and consent-based decision-making. Finally, using the example of the Science Service for Biodiversity, a newly developed SPSI under the EU-funded BioAgora project: we sketch the strengths and limitations of this model, inviting readers to reimagine and further the discussion on SPSI governance.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

A novel governance framework for transformative science–policy–society interfaces: What can sociocracy offer?

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年3月11日

查看全文
  • Eszter Kelemen,
  • Zsófia Kollányi,
  • Kata Fodor,
  • Juliette Young,
  • Karla Locher-Krause,
  • Kármen Czett,
  • Robin Dianoux,
  • Jiska van Dijk,
  • Kaisa Korhonen-Kurki,
  • Marie Vandewalle

摘要

Recent literature on science–policy–society interfaces (SPSI) suggests that transformative change in environmental governance requires solution-focused, inclusive, and co-produced mechanisms in the creation of policy-relevant knowledge. Nonetheless, due to accepted epistemic norms and modes of organisation, most SPSIs fail to address prevailing power disparities and contribute to real economic and political restructuring for sustainability. This paper addresses a rarely considered but critical aspect of transformative knowledge co-production, namely the governance structures and processes that underpin SPSI interactions. Based on a design thinking process and expert interviews, we outline a novel model of SPSI governance that is based on the principles of sociocracy, centring equity, inclusivity, and consent-based decision-making. Finally, using the example of the Science Service for Biodiversity, a newly developed SPSI under the EU-funded BioAgora project: we sketch the strengths and limitations of this model, inviting readers to reimagine and further the discussion on SPSI governance.