24.10.2025 NewsScience and policy

Policy red teaming with scientists already across two governmental terms

Science Sparring is policy red teaming developed by knowledge brokers at the Finnish Academy of Science and Letters. At its core are carefully planned interactive sessions between researchers and policymakers. It aims to ensure that the latest research knowledge is integrated into policy preparation processes.

Science Sparrings have been organised since 2020, and the development of the method is part of a five-year project funded by Jane and Aatos Erkko Foundation. Over the past year, the method has undergone a development sprint, with efforts to identify new possibilities through experimentation. Read more about Science Sparring here.

In practice, sparrings have been co-organised primarily with different ministries. Gradually, awareness of the method has grown within the Finnish government, and civil servants increasingly know to contact the Finnish Academy of Science and Letters and its knowledge brokers. In the recent Government Consultation Guide for Legislative Drafting (2025), Science Sparring was recommended as a low-threshold model to strengthen evidence-informed policymaking.

Science Sparring’s core methodology centres on policy red teaming. Essentially, this means that researchers review and comment on early policy draft documents with a goal of detecting blind spots and assumptions that might otherwise go unexamined. Hence, it identifies risks related to policymaking systematically and proactively.

Eight out of twelve ministries have utilised Science Sparring, for example in legislative drafting work.

In total, Science Sparrings have been organised on 15 different topics:

Requirements set by the sustainability crisis for journalism and science communication (Helsinki Institute of Sustainability Science HELSUS), 2025
High impact climate actions in regional administration (ELY Centres), 2025
Knowledge base of physical activity, sports and elite sports (Ministry of Education and Culture), 2025
Monitoring and Evaluation Plan for Government R&D funding (Prime Minister’s Office), 2024
Systems mapping on demographic change (Prime Minister’s Office, DEMOGRAPHY program), 2024
Implementation of the Restoration Regulation (Ministry of the Environment, Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry, Science Panels), 2024
Ecological connectivity (Ministry of the Environment), 2023
Anticipation of the Biodiversity Act (Ministry of the Environment), 2023
National Climate Adaptation Plan (Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry), 2022
Architectural Policy Program (Ministry of Education and Culture, Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment, and Ministry of the Environment), 2021
Roadmap to Fossil-free Transportation (Ministry of Transport and Communications), 2021
Public Sector Strategy (Ministry of Finance and Association of Finnish Municipalities), 2020
Nature Conservation Act reform (Ministry of the Environment), 2020-2021
National Transportation Plan (Ministry of Transport and Communications), 2020
Climate Regulatory Impact Assessment (Ministry of the Environment, Ministry of Justice), 2020

Developing Science Sparring through feedback

During autumn 2024 and spring 2025, six Science Sparrings were organised, involving a total of four different ministries, six research communities, and the climate expert network of regional administration. In total the participants of these Science Sparring sessions included 55 researchers, 40 civil servants, and six journalists.*

Science Sparrings have been utilised to strengthen the evidence use of ministries’ planning and programme work.

After each sparring, participants – both those involved in planning and in the workshops – have been offered an opportunity to respond to a feedback survey. Slightly under half of the participants responded to the survey. The received feedback has been constructive and positive. It has enabled to identify policy areas where the Science Sparring is particularly well-suited.

The feedback indicates that a compact group of participants (around 8–12 people) is the most effective and meaningful. Most respondents felt that Science Sparring enabled each participant to voice their expertise.

Successful Science Sparrings were able to clearly identify the knowledge need, articulate questions and outline objectives of the discussion, and those were clearly communicated to participants in advance.

Participants described Science Sparring, for example, as follows:

Good introductions, lively discussion, easy to join a prepared setting.
The framing of questions was pragmatic and solution oriented.
Participants clearly engaged in the discussion and topics were explored quite deeply in a relatively short time. Facilitation worked well.

Multidisciplinary dialogue and bringing together different expertise were considered meaningful. Additionally, unhurried discussion, in-depth discussions about the phenomenon being addressed, and mindful presence were experienced as a good counterbalance to other daily work. In the feedback, Science Sparring received praise for the open and respectful atmosphere of the workshops, which in part enabled in-depth treatment of the topics:

The working approach was very good. It got people to focus on what we were doing, to mindful presence. The group size was appropriate so that everyone could speak.
Good, respectful team spirit.

The method still grapples with previously identified challenges. For example, identifying the knowledge need is a critical phase and it should consider both researchers’ and civil servants’ expertise. Simultaneously, the atmosphere of the workshops appears to be particularly sensitive to suffering from a sense of rush, especially if the topic is a complex phenomenon such as demographic change:

It felt perhaps a bit like time ran out in the group discussions and it went quite quickly. Perhaps a full-day workshop could have been even more rewarding.
There could have been more time for small group work. It felt a bit rushed.

In the future Science Sparrings will leverage the use of artificial intelligence

Over five years, Science Sparring sessions have been facilitated by a group of knowledge brokers who have expertise in different scientific fields. Their expertise focuses particularly on strengthening dialogue between researchers and civil servants. This has enabled development work in which the method has been designed to be used in various decision-making contexts.

Some Science Sparring participants experienced the facilitators’ limited knowledge of the subjects in varying topics as challenging. We want to develop this aspect going forward: we are currently developing AI-assisted facilitation capabilities at the Finnish Academy of Science and Letters, where AI compiles research knowledge in real time and acts as an “opponent” in facilitation settings.