Despite an initial tendency to disregard Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) contributions, NGOs have now entered the fishery world, where debates should be carried out on the basis of different interpretations of sound scientific data. Such an approach is expected to be obvious, but this does not prove to be always true. NGOs and the research body that produced the scientific data are confused by other stakeholders and understanding scientific publications is regarded as not necessary. Further, there is a gap between the progress of scientific knowledge and the scientific approach adopted in policy resolutions. This opens new opportunities to carry out focused scientific communication.

The SCOOP project aimed to maximise the potential for the transfer of research findings into policy using European-funded socio-economic sciences and humanities research. The project incorporated a News Alert Service to communicate policy-relevant elements of research findings to interested stakeholders. It also sought to further develop the skills of researchers to effectively communicate research outcomes to policy makers through a programme of Masterclasses. A series of evaluation surveys were held to both tailor the project outputs to the target audiences, and to measure the impact of project actions on the interactions between SSH researchers and policy makers. Both SCOOP elements were well received, with evidence of improved communication, utilisation of SSH research by policy makers, and greater awareness and proactivity on the part of the researchers. More generally, interviews and questionnaire findings demonstrated that mediators play a crucial role: various intermediaries and interpreters work between policy makers and researchers to put in context the research outcomes and convey information through dedicated channels and formalised processes as well as informal, fluid processes.

Improving communications between scientists and policy makers have being received more and more attention in China. Based on negotiation-boundary work theory (Jasanoff, 1990), this paper presents an analysis of the interface between scientists and policy makers by drawing on the Strategic High-tech Research and Development Program of China (863 Program). The analysis indicates, first, that it is very important of science advice in China, the negotiation and the consensus between scientists and policy makers is vital for policy making; second, that it is dangerous to rely on Technocracy in China, the policy makers give up the discretion while influence experts’ decisions by controlling the consist of scientist advisory committee, which directly result in politicalizing academic research. For scientists and policy makers in China, they should redefine their respective authority boundary, and make the interaction process open and transparent.

Around the world there are widespread efforts to ensure that policy decisions are based upon a sound evidence base, and in particular to facilitate closer integration between the research and policy communities. This commentary provides an overview of the current situation in different parts of the world relating to the opportunities that exist for policy makers to assimilate scientific findings, as well as the existing barriers perceived by both the policy and research communities. Mutual trust and respect between the relevant parties emerge as crucial factors in successful collaboration. Skilled mediators are also considered essential to ensuring effective communication; this may be via third parties such as NGOs, or news services and online portals to convey, ‘translate’ and place in a policy context the scientific findings. Mechanisms for improving researchers’ communication skills as well as increasing their awareness of the need to communicate proactively with the policy community are also considered in order to inform future practice in this area.

The PCST (Public Communication of Science and Technology) conference, held every two years, offers an opportunity to chart the progress and direction of the international science communication community. The most recent conference, in Firenze, gave indications of a growing interest in science communication as cultural practice.

Danish agriculture and seed science have a history of successful collaboration spanning more than a hundred years. In this study, we interviewed 26 growers, consultants, and scientists from the Danish seed community focusing on their current knowledge status and on their views on improving scientific knowledge communication. Theoretically, we consider these actors participants in different communities of practice relating to the production of seeds (Seed-CoP), and we conclude that strong network collaboration is present among Danish seed-CoP effectuated by the valuable work undertaken by the consultants. We discovered a divergence in knowledge dissemination among the growers – an innovative group of growers with a high demand for new scientific knowledge versus a majority of growers content with the level of knowledge provided by the consultants. ‘Time’ was recognized as an important parameter, as only the innovative growers prioritized time allocation for additional knowledge search. To improve scientific knowledge dissemination and interdisciplinary collaboration among Danish seed-CoP we recommend a combination of face-to-face and online communication processes.

The paper examines the coverage of S&T related items published in selected English-language Indian newspapers in terms of their quantification and thematic representation. S&T is not the priority of the English-language newspapers in India. Even sports get several times more coverage than science. There is a case for amply visible representation of science in the press. Health, Environment, Space S&T, and Astronomy were the four dominant subjects covered. Most of the science covered in the newspapers was performed in the US, the UK and other advanced countries of Europe. Among all the newspapers, The Times of India devoted the maximum space to S&T coverage

Science communication processes are complex and uncertain. Designing and managing these processes using a step-by-step approach, allows those with science communication responsibility to manoeuvre between moral or normative issues, practical experiences, empirical data and theoretical foundations. The tool described in this study is an evidence-based questionnaire, tested in practice for feasibility. The key element of this decision aid is a challenge to the science communication practitioners to reflect on their attitudes, knowledge, reasoning and decision-making in a step-by-step manner to question the aim, function and impact of each issue and attendant communication process or strategy. This approach eventually leads to more professional science communication processes by systematic design. The Design-Based Research (DBR) derived from science education and applied in this study, may form a new methodology for further exploration of the gap between theory and practice in science communication and. Practitioners, scholars, and researchers all participate actively in DBR.

While several scientific communities have discussed the emergence of Open Access publishing in depth, in the science communication community this debate has never been central. Scholars in most scientific disciplines have at their disposal Open Access options such as journals, repositories, preprint archives and the like. Ironically enough, a community devoted to the study of science’s communication structures is witnessing this transformation without being directly involved. Both structural and cultural obstacles hamper the growth of an Open Access sector in science communication publishing. With this editorial I hope to start a debate on the need for a more open communication environment in our academic practice.

We analyse the science and technology news reports covered by the Jornal Nacional, the Brazilian newscast with the largest audience, which is broadcast at prime time on a free-to-air channel. The constructed week methodology was used to compose a sample of 72 newscasts, representative of an entire year (from April 2009 to March 2010): 77 science and technology news reports were thus identified, occupying an average of 7.3% of the newscast's daily broadcasting time, and therefore giving evidence that such matters belong on the JN's agenda. Content analysis has enabled us to observe the following: most reports were focused on announcing research results; the main fields dealt with were medical science and health; the coverage of national research projects ranked highest; researchers and scientific institutes represented the main sources of the news items; scientists were mostly shown in their offices, and as far as interviews are concerned female scientists were a minority. The approach to science was more positive than negative and controversial aspects were scarcely explored.