This blog post is part of a series of blog posts about the multi-country project under the Technical Support Instrument (TSI) “Building capacity for evidence-informed policymaking in public administrations and governance in a post-pandemic Europe”. We are asking people involved in the project, whether as part of the project implementation team, beneficiary organisation, expert group, trainer and trainee, or stakeholder, to share their insights and experiences gained during this 24-month project. This one is about the experience of Marie Sophie Mayer, Blue Book Trainee at the Joint Research Center and Master Student, who has worked on this project and particularly on Estonia sharing her insights and learnings.
My choice to work at the Joint Research Centre (JRC) within the Blue Book Traineeship, a 5-months traineeship programme at the European Commission, was driven by my passion for scientific research and my desire to connect it with the policy field. Working for the “Science for Democracy and Evidence Informed Policymaking” Unit was the perfect opportunity for me because its remit is to better understand how to use scientific knowledge to inform policymaking.
One important part of the Unit’s work on evidence-informed policymaking (EIPM) is the multi-country reform project on “Building capacity for evidence-informed policymaking in public administrations and governance in a post-pandemic Europe”, funded by the Technical Support Instrument (TSI) managed by the Commission’s DG for Structural Reform Support (REFORM). The project aims at promoting reforms in the public administration and research and innovation systems for better evidence-informed policymaking of seven EU Member States, Greece, Belgium, Czech Republic, Netherlands, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania. In its current second phase, it focusses on analysing the countries' needs and gaps in their ability to make policies based on evidence.
At this stage, I became part of my unit’s TSI team and was given the opportunity to work in-depth on the case of Estonia. Hence, I supported the organisation of five focus groups addressing key aspects of evidence-informed policymaking and its implementation in Estonia which were identified during the first phase. The focus groups were conducted in all participating Member States and aimed at collecting data for the needs and gaps assessment by bringing the key stakeholders together for discussion.
The focus groups I accompanied were held in Tallinn, Estonia between 29 November and 1 December 2023. Besides highlighting strengths and good practices in the current system, we identified areas for improvement, such as more powerful political mandates to advisory networks, the formalisation of existing structures, and increasing collaboration between both academic and policymaking worlds. The focus groups facilitated the exchange between the key stakeholders in the Estonian ecosystem and the process to think together outside of the box towards their desired science-for-policy ecosystem.
On a personal note, being immersed into the TSI project with a strong focus on the Estonian case has not only enriched my experience at the JRC but also made me delve into a more thorough understanding of the Estonian science-for-policy ecosystem from which I can draw certain learning about the Estonian case and beyond:
Hard structures and formalisation are not enough to successfully implement an ecosystem of evidence-informed policymaking. It also requires a culture of science for policy and an institutional memory of it. This involves a mindset among both policymakers and scientists that values firstly each other's work and secondly the importance of linking the two. Consequently, there must also be a willingness on the part of the actors to share these values and to build together such an ecosystem. A challenge that Estonia faces in this regard, despite strong agreement on the importance of science for policy and the benefits of including science in the policymaking process, is the high turnover of personnel. This makes it difficult to maintain the same cultural values in the system and nurture the necessary mindset.
The importance of context-specific needs in creating and improving a science-for-policy ecosystem was often stressed in Estonia, emphasizing the unique environment created by the small size and limited working force of the country. It became clear to me that a one-size-fits-all approach is often not effective, and that policies need to be tailored to the specific context in order to be successful. This experience has taught me the importance of understanding the local context and considering the unique needs of a system when fostering EIPM.
The experience of conducting focus groups in Estonia has highlighted the immense value of bringing people together for discussion. Simply facilitating interactions and exchanges of ideas among stakeholders has proven to be a significant value addition. The opportunity for individuals to become aware of one another, learn about each other's work, and engage in meaningful exchanges has not only fostered new ideas and interactions, but empowered them to possibly enact on necessary changes within their respective spheres.
Lastly, it has become evident to me that the importance of gender and age balance in all processes cannot be underscored. The most fruitful discussions of the focus groups involved also women and young individuals. Their engaging presence in the room and interesting perspectives helped nurture a more inclusive and comprehensive exchange of ideas which serves a successful development towards a science for policy ecosystem.
Engaging in the TSI project has been an incredibly valuable experience that has greatly enriched my professional development. My focus on Estonia has provided me with key insights and practical experience. It has allowed me to gain an advanced understanding of practices in support of providing evidence for better policymaking and subsequently using science to build stronger democracies. Given my academic focus on environmental policy and climate change, the insights I have gained will significantly influence my future work, particularly as I view climate change as a critical case for evidence-informed policymaking. I am grateful to everyone I had the opportunity to work with on this project for the valuable time and the vast amount of knowledge I gained from this experience. Besides, I can highly recommend the Blue Book Traineeship for anyone looking to gain valuable hands-on experience and expand their knowledge in this field.
Login (or register) to follow this conversation, and get a Public Profile to add a comment (see Help).
25 Jan 2024 | 29 Jan 2024