Schlierkamp Juliane, Berchtold Claudia, Linde-Frech Isabelle
Fraunhofer INT, Appelsgarten 2, 53879, Euskirchen, Germany.
Environ Manage. 2025 Jun;75(6):1368-1387. doi: 10.1007/s00267-025-02161-x. Epub 2025 Apr 23.
The impact of research is gaining increasing importance, as science is increasingly seen as a means to address humanity's grand challenges. Consequently, interaction between science and policymakers is essential - a process formalized through Science-Policy Interfaces (SPIs). But who actually participates in these processes? This question is crucial, as scientific findings are not always consistent: they may be subject to interpretation, contradict each other, or be shaped by underlying normative frameworks. This paper explores the potential of bibliometric analysis to trace science-policy interactions, using the Wildfire Risk Management (WFRM) domain as a case study. Drawing on data from the Dimensions database, we examine publication and policy trends, disciplinary coverage, and the influence of Altmetrics on policy citations. Our key findings indicate that: There is a significant time lag (6-9 years) between scientific publication and policy adoption. The number of publications in a research field correlates with policy citations, but not all disciplines are equally represented in policy documents. Altmetrics, particularly social media attention, influence policy uptake, suggesting that visibility beyond academia plays a role in knowledge transfer. Data quality issues in linking scientific research to policy documents persist, limiting full traceability. Despite these limitations, the study highlights the potential of bibliometric approaches to support the development of more transparent and accountable SPIs. With improved data infrastructure, such methods could help policymakers better identify and integrate relevant scientific insights.
随着科学越来越被视为应对人类重大挑战的一种手段,研究的影响力正变得越来越重要。因此,科学与政策制定者之间的互动至关重要——这一过程通过科学-政策接口(SPI)得以正式确立。但究竟是谁实际参与了这些过程呢?这个问题至关重要,因为科学发现并不总是一致的:它们可能会受到解读、相互矛盾,或者受到潜在规范框架的影响。本文以野火风险管理(WFRM)领域为例,探讨文献计量分析在追踪科学-政策互动方面的潜力。利用Dimensions数据库的数据,我们研究了出版物和政策趋势、学科覆盖范围以及替代计量学对政策引用的影响。我们的主要发现表明:科学出版物与政策采纳之间存在显著的时间滞后(6至9年)。研究领域的出版物数量与政策引用相关,但并非所有学科在政策文件中的体现都相同。替代计量学,尤其是社交媒体关注度,会影响政策的采纳,这表明学术界之外的可见性在知识转移中发挥着作用。将科学研究与政策文件相联系的数据质量问题依然存在,限制了完全可追溯性。尽管存在这些局限性,但该研究凸显了文献计量方法在支持发展更透明、更具问责性的SPI方面的潜力。随着数据基础设施的改善,此类方法可以帮助政策制定者更好地识别和整合相关的科学见解。