Table 4 Capacity building for policy deliberation: overview of the potential advantages of integrated scientific assessments, in particular the PEM-inspired ones, measured up against other science-policy interfaces

Provision of policy-relevant knowledge on direct and indirect effects of different policy options (see introduction)

Engagement with stakeholders and exploration of policy scenarios helps ensure policy-relevance

Extensive engagement with stakeholders ensures policy-relevance, together with the highly relevant exploration of policy alternatives and their implications

If any, the engagement with stakeholders helps ensure policy-relevance; impact assessments are policy-relevant, but only few options and effects considered; conventional scientific research often does not address policy-relevant issues

Incorporating exploding bodies of literature in some fields (for example, Grieneseisen and Zhang, 2011; McKinnon et al., 2015)

Facilitated by involving a high number of researchers, and by employing meta-analysis methodology

Facilitated by involving a high number of researchers, and by employing meta-analysis methodology

Only effective when involving a high number of researchers and when employing meta-analysis methodology

Rigorous synthesis across different disciplines, approaches, policy fields, scales (making research gaps transparent) (see introduction; Norgaard, 2008a)

Credibility through disciplinary diversity in author teams (and diversity of viewpoints and approaches), and through elaborate synthesis and integration methodologies

Focus on pathway exploration facilitates such synthesis; credibility through diversity of disciplines & viewpoints involved and elaborate synthesis and integration methodologies

Due to the complexity and magnitude, conventional research papers cannot deliver such synthesis; also small-group policy advice typically does not deliver such synthesis

Evaluation of uncertainty, disagreement and inconclusive (non-aggregated) results, particularly in social science research (see introduction)

Credibility through disciplinary diversity in author teams (and diversity of viewpoints and approaches), and through elaborate synthesis and integration methodologies

Credibility through disciplinary diversity in author teams (and diversity of viewpoints and approaches), and through elaborate synthesis and integration methodologies; focus on pathway exploration fosters such synthesis;

High variation; requires appropriate methodologies and the involvement of researchers with diverse viewpoints

Capacity building in terms of methods and skills for knowledge integration and synthesis

High potential given that these assessments are essentially synthesis processes

Particularly high potential given the focus on collaborative exploration of alternative policy pathways

High variation; success inter alia depending on the degree to which synthesis is done