Focus and Application Options

LIAISE Policy Brief No. 5 on "Scientific tools in Europe: focus and application options" has just been published. Policy Impact Assessment (IA) has been an obligatory procedure in the legislative process within the EU since 2002. It has to identify the likely impacts on sustainable development (specifically the social, environmental and economic impacts) of all major policy strategies and instruments prior to actual implementation. The link between IA and sustainable development is rooted in the 2006 renewed Sustainable Development Strategy. IA also provides the legal basis to feed scientific evidence into the policy process and to base policy-making on scientifically robust tools and results. In line with the recognition of the importance of IA for sound sustainable policies, the EC (DG Research and Innovation) has funded through the Framework Programmes (FP) 6 and 7 research supporting knowledge creation in this field. This policy brief presents an analysis of tools developed in the context of FP6 and FP7 undertaken by the LIAISE project. This assessment focused on the following interests of IA practitioners as tool users: Which policy area(s) do the tools address? Which impact area(s) are covered by the tools? Which jurisdictional level(s) can the tools be applied at? How can the tools be categorized? There exists a wide variety of tools that comprises: Quantitative and qualitative tools, such as models, scenarios, multi-criteria analysis and participatory tools, Tool components, such as indicators, databases and comprehensive analytic methods, Evaluation frameworks, toolboxes and platforms etc. serving as a higher level system for tool selection or tool linkage. These results are based on an analysis of 203 research projects designing tools for IA funded in FP6 and 7. The results shall contribute to addressing the science-policy interface of IA by identifying possible challenges for tool users and tool suppliers with respect to tool development and selection

Emergence of super-Poissonian light from indistinguishable single-photon emitters

The optical interference constitutes a paramount resource in modern physics. At the scale of individual atoms and photons, it is a diverse concept that causes different coherent phenomena. We present the experimental characterization of both coherent and statistical properties of light emitted from ensembles of trapped ions increasing with a number of contributing phase-incoherent independent atomic particles ranging from a single to up to several hundreds. It conclusively demonstrates how super-Poissonian quantum statistics non-trivially arises purely from the finite number of indistinguishable single-photon emitters in the limit of a single detection mode. The achieved new optical emission regime in which these independent atoms contribute coherently to the super-Poissonian statistics provides a new perspective on the emergence of optical coherence at the atomic scale and constitutes a unique toolbox for its generation and control at the most microscopic level

Selecting appropriate methods of knowledge synthesis to inform biodiversity policy

Responding to different questions generated by biodiversity and ecosystem services policy or management requires different forms of knowledge (e.g. scientific, experiential) and knowledge synthesis. Additionally, synthesis methods need to be appropriate to policy context (e.g. question types, budget, timeframe, output type, required scientific rigour). In this paper we present a range of different methods that could potentially be used to conduct a knowledge synthesis in response to questions arising from knowledge needs of decision makers on biodiversity and ecosystem services policy and management. Through a series of workshops attended by natural and social scientists and decision makers we compiled a range of question types, different policy contexts and potential methodological approaches to knowledge synthesis. Methods are derived from both natural and social sciences fields and reflect the range of question and study types that may be relevant for syntheses. Knowledge can be available either in qualitative or quantitative form and in some cases also mixed. All methods have their strengths and weaknesses and we discuss a sample of these to illustrate the need for diversity and importance of appropriate selection. To summarize this collection, we present a table that identifies potential methods matched to different combinations of question types and policy contexts, aimed at assisting teams undertaking knowledge syntheses to select appropriate methods