Bridging the Gap: Transforming science advice for air pollution policy

Air pollution is the greatest environmental risk to human health¹, affecting almost every system in the body and at every stage of life². It also damages ecosystems and leads to biodiversity loss. Science has played a central role in demonstrating the need for action and in developing air quality standards and policies to deliver progress. In the UK there are well-established mechanisms for providing science advice for policy, including Chief Scientific Advisers (CSA) in each government department, and a network of science advisory councils and expert groups. The Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) is the government department responsible for national air quality policy and coordination in the UK, and they have a CSA, a science advisory council and the Air Quality Expert Group (AQEG). Despite these structures, academics have struggled to see how their research can reach policy makers or have an impact on policy development.

For the past 13 years I have worked with Defra, embedded in their air pollution team, as a knowledge broker funded through fellowships, seconded to the Chief Scientific Adviser’s Office, and on their Air Quality Expert Group. I initially observed that interactions between academics and policy officials were primarily transactional, often failing to deliver the anticipated value. Through the insights provided by my roles bridging the two communities I have enabled a transformation in how Defra approaches interactions with both the air pollution research community and research funders, resulting in better access to and uptake of science evidence and expertise. I also worked with the AQEG to transition its mode of operation from providing large authoritative reviews of science to providing more accessible, responsive and agile policy advice.

In this presentation I will provide insights from my experience, including what enabled my work to have the impact that it has, how transformations came about, and some examples of the opportunities for policy impact that arose. There is a danger that, with reduced funding availability and increasing time pressures, ways of working begin to regress. I suggest that this would be counterproductive and in fact a strengthening of knowledge exchange mechanisms and relationships at this time would be beneficial to both researchers and policy makers.  

• United Nations Environment Programme, UNEP, https://www.unep.org/topics/air
• Royal College of Physicians, A breath of fresh air: responding to the health challenges of modern air pollution. RCP, 2025.