Raising the voice of science in complex socio-political contexts: an assessment of contested water decisions

Figures & data

Figure 1. Pillars that influence the use of science in policy decisions.

Figure 2. Simplified schematic of the New Zealand policy and regulatory framework for freshwater management.

Figure 3. Simplified schematic of the Californian framework for management of freshwater quality, with a focus on the agricultural landscape in the Central Valley Regional Water Board region.

Figure 4. Simplified schematic of the Californian framework for management of groundwater quantity.

Table 1. Interview sample across policy contexts.^a

	All	California	New Zealand
Total	16	8	8
By sector
Government	9	2 (0,0,2,0)	7 (0,3,4,0)
Industry	4	3 (2,0,0,1)	1 (0,0,0,1)
Non-government organisations	1	1 (0,0,0,1)	0
Research^b	2	2 (2,0,0,0)	0

^a In parenthesis are the numbers of interviewees who provide science, manage science for decisions, make policy decisions and advocate for science findings.

^b The authors are involved in science used in decision-making processes in New Zealand and California (not included in tally).

Figure 5. Pillars and elements that describe the influence of science in policy decisions.

Table 2. Pillars, elements and analysis themes to describe the influence of science in policy.

Pillar	Element/theme	Description
Science	Credibility	Perception that the information is scientifically adequate, and the sources are authoritative and trustworthy
	Legitimate	Information development process is unbiased and respectful of divergent stakeholder beliefs and values
	Relevance and applicability	Relevance (salience) of the information to decision-makers, particularly in terms of geographic and scalar context and timeliness
	Comprehensiveness	Evidence (science) is comprehensive and accounts for a broad range of variables
	Timing	Extent to which science delivery aligns with policy development process
Scientist	Accessibility	Accessibility, readability, and how intelligible the science is to the audience the scientist wants to influence
	Capability of scientist	Ability of the scientist to understand the needs of the decision maker
	Mind-set of scientist	Degree to which a scientist is open-minded and willing to consider other science/solutions as credible
	Scientist personality	Degree to which the scientist’s personality influences decision-makers acceptance and use of science
Decision maker	Capability of decision maker	Decision makers ability to understand and interpret science
	Mind-set of decision maker	Degree to which the decision maker is open-minded and willing to consider science that questions prior beliefs
	Political influence	Extent to which political processes or agendas influence the decision maker and the use of science for policy
Scientist – decision maker relationship	Trust	Trust in scientist
	Financial resources	Whether financial resources hindered the delivery of robust science for policy or scientist involvement in policy process; often influenced by decision makers

Figure 6. Percent of statements (n = 168) for each barrier to the influence of science in policy theme.

Figure 7. Number of interviewees (n = 16) who noted each barrier to the influence of science in policy theme.