IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v51y2024i4p669-679..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stability versus flexibility in projectified science–policy context: what is the role of science advisors?

Author

Listed:
  • Peeter Vihma

Abstract

Science–policy interaction is frequently organized through projects, lauded as flexible and focused administrative solutions for policy learning. However, there is a risk of stifling projects with overly rigid interfaces or, controversially, losing project results amidst the cracks of inter- and intra-organizational cleavages when interfaces are excessively flexible. This article examines how science advisors in Estonian ministries contributed to resolving this controversy through an in-depth case study of an agenda-setting bioeconomy project. The results suggest that the potential of science advisors to provide necessary flexibility is contingent on their position relative to bureaucratic hierarchies and boundary objects.

Suggested Citation

  • Peeter Vihma, 2024. "Stability versus flexibility in projectified science–policy context: what is the role of science advisors?," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 51(4), pages 669-679.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:51:y:2024:i:4:p:669-679.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/scae009
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:51:y:2024:i:4:p:669-679.. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.