Salient and contested scientific evidence in debates over sustainable transformation: pesticide policymaking in Switzerland
Abstract Research indicates that the increased use of scientific evidence is an important lever for transforming policy toward sustainability goals. We explore how actors use scientific evidence in contests over policy transformation in the agri-food sector. Theoretically, we build on prior research...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Springer Nature
2025-07-01
|
| Series: | Humanities & Social Sciences Communications |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05159-2 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849238836989657088 |
|---|---|
| author | Oliver Truffer Benjamin Hofmann Eva Lieberherr |
| author_facet | Oliver Truffer Benjamin Hofmann Eva Lieberherr |
| author_sort | Oliver Truffer |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Research indicates that the increased use of scientific evidence is an important lever for transforming policy toward sustainability goals. We explore how actors use scientific evidence in contests over policy transformation in the agri-food sector. Theoretically, we build on prior research on evidence use in policymaking and the 3i´s —ideas, interests, and institutions—that constitute policy regimes. We argue that some pieces of scientific evidence become salient in policy debates but are contested by competing actor coalitions. Salient and contested means that different actors refer to the same scientific evidence to support arguments for and against options of policy transformation. We posit that, in these arguments, evidence use is closely linked to the ideas, interests, and institutions that actor coalitions want to protect or challenge. We assess our arguments through a close examination of a landmark Swiss policy reform between 2019 and 2022 aimed at pesticide risk reduction. Drawing on policy post-exceptionalism literature to operationalize our analytical categories, we analyzed a comprehensive set of content-coded parliamentary and consultation documents derived from the policy process. Our analysis shows that (1) only a few pieces of scientific evidence became salient, (2) actor coalitions linked scientific evidence to different ideas, interests and institutions in line with their policy preferences, and (3) salient scientific evidence in support of transformation becomes contested when it is “too big to ignore”. We conclude that while salient scientific evidence promotes evidence-informed debate, it does not necessarily provide clear and unambiguous direction for policy. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-3af9d9177dae4fc78a7a8c8e3645bcb9 |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2662-9992 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-07-01 |
| publisher | Springer Nature |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Humanities & Social Sciences Communications |
| spelling | doaj-art-3af9d9177dae4fc78a7a8c8e3645bcb92025-08-20T04:01:23ZengSpringer NatureHumanities & Social Sciences Communications2662-99922025-07-0112111610.1057/s41599-025-05159-2Salient and contested scientific evidence in debates over sustainable transformation: pesticide policymaking in SwitzerlandOliver Truffer0Benjamin Hofmann1Eva Lieberherr2Department of Evolutionary Biology and Environmental Studies, University of ZurichDepartment of Environmental Social Sciences, Eawag: Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and TechnologyDepartment of Environmental System Sciences, ETH ZurichAbstract Research indicates that the increased use of scientific evidence is an important lever for transforming policy toward sustainability goals. We explore how actors use scientific evidence in contests over policy transformation in the agri-food sector. Theoretically, we build on prior research on evidence use in policymaking and the 3i´s —ideas, interests, and institutions—that constitute policy regimes. We argue that some pieces of scientific evidence become salient in policy debates but are contested by competing actor coalitions. Salient and contested means that different actors refer to the same scientific evidence to support arguments for and against options of policy transformation. We posit that, in these arguments, evidence use is closely linked to the ideas, interests, and institutions that actor coalitions want to protect or challenge. We assess our arguments through a close examination of a landmark Swiss policy reform between 2019 and 2022 aimed at pesticide risk reduction. Drawing on policy post-exceptionalism literature to operationalize our analytical categories, we analyzed a comprehensive set of content-coded parliamentary and consultation documents derived from the policy process. Our analysis shows that (1) only a few pieces of scientific evidence became salient, (2) actor coalitions linked scientific evidence to different ideas, interests and institutions in line with their policy preferences, and (3) salient scientific evidence in support of transformation becomes contested when it is “too big to ignore”. We conclude that while salient scientific evidence promotes evidence-informed debate, it does not necessarily provide clear and unambiguous direction for policy.https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05159-2 |
| spellingShingle | Oliver Truffer Benjamin Hofmann Eva Lieberherr Salient and contested scientific evidence in debates over sustainable transformation: pesticide policymaking in Switzerland Humanities & Social Sciences Communications |
| title | Salient and contested scientific evidence in debates over sustainable transformation: pesticide policymaking in Switzerland |
| title_full | Salient and contested scientific evidence in debates over sustainable transformation: pesticide policymaking in Switzerland |
| title_fullStr | Salient and contested scientific evidence in debates over sustainable transformation: pesticide policymaking in Switzerland |
| title_full_unstemmed | Salient and contested scientific evidence in debates over sustainable transformation: pesticide policymaking in Switzerland |
| title_short | Salient and contested scientific evidence in debates over sustainable transformation: pesticide policymaking in Switzerland |
| title_sort | salient and contested scientific evidence in debates over sustainable transformation pesticide policymaking in switzerland |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-025-05159-2 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT olivertruffer salientandcontestedscientificevidenceindebatesoversustainabletransformationpesticidepolicymakinginswitzerland AT benjaminhofmann salientandcontestedscientificevidenceindebatesoversustainabletransformationpesticidepolicymakinginswitzerland AT evalieberherr salientandcontestedscientificevidenceindebatesoversustainabletransformationpesticidepolicymakinginswitzerland |