Expertise under uncertainty: Comparing policy expert platforms at the global climate–health nexus

Abstract

Abstract This paper centres on expert platforms at the nexus between global climate policies and public health. Policy nexus problems have been associated with fragmentation and unclear authority. At the core, however, seem to be uncertainties about the nature of these problems and even about the nature of the nexus itself. The paper focuses on an especially rich ecosystem of policy expert platforms that have emerged at the climate–health nexus over the past decade. It outlines a typology and presents a comparison of selected policy expert platforms in terms of how they deal with these nexus uncertainties. It is argued that these platforms have developed various ways of interlinking science and policy. Insights on contradictions and controversies resulting from these ‘politico‐epistemic logics’ are discussed. Mapping the nexus may inspire current research on political and epistemic uncertainty. It may also be a source of practical inspiration for developing forms of expertise beyond the standards of evidence‐based policy. Points for practitioners The landscape of advisory arrangements at the nexus may be a source of practical inspiration for developing forms of expertise beyond the standards of evidence‐based policy. A commonality across various platforms is the acceptance of uncertainty as a resource that can be used to make knowledge more robust and to keep open multiple pathways. Types of policy expert platforms are associated with specific conflicts and tensions. Being aware of them might be helpful to deal with contradictory expectations and to avoid disappointment.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 6 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.