Stability versus flexibility in projectified science–policy context: what is the role of science advisors?

Abstract

Science–policy interaction is frequently organized through projects, lauded as flexible and focused administrative solutions for policy learning. However, there is a risk of stifling projects with overly rigid interfaces or, controversially, losing project results amidst the cracks of inter- and intra-organizational cleavages when interfaces are excessively flexible. This article examines how science advisors in Estonian ministries contributed to resolving this controversy through an in-depth case study of an agenda-setting bioeconomy project. The results suggest that the potential of science advisors to provide necessary flexibility is contingent on their position relative to bureaucratic hierarchies and boundary objects.