Scientific policy advice during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic – a comparison of 25 democratic countries

Abstract Background The SARS-CoV-2 pandemic required rapid and effective policy responses from governments worldwide, especially in the realm of public health. Due to the global impact of the pandemic, it is important to compare country-specific approaches. A systematic analysis of the role and institutionalization of different bodies of scientific policy advice during the pandemic was conducted to gain insights into scientific policy advice structures and to inform future solutions. Methods We contacted the governments of 35 democratic countries about the role and institutionalization of bodies of scientific advisory advice during the pandemic. Data collection took place between September 2023 and March 2024. We analyzed primary data provided by the governments by qualitative systematic document analysis. Results We received feedback from 25 countries within the research period (including 19 European countries). The results were divided into three main categories: (1) temporality, (2) structure, function, & composition, and (3) transparency. Further sub-categories emerged that helped to compare and classify the countries’ approaches, such as initiation, financing, selection, expertise, and diversity of members, systematics of documentation. For example, some used existing structures from ministries, research institutions or the private sector while others were entirely newly established. National bodies of scientific policy advice mostly developed ad hoc, were temporary, and showed several differences between countries. Conclusions Different types of bodies of scientific policy advice were identified in terms of e.g. initiation, function, expertise, and institutionalization. The results demonstrate a significant variation regarding the role and impact of scientific policy advice during the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Our study can help to identify essential aspects of scientific policy advice and to formulate recommendations for future health crises. Key messages • The innovative methodological approach and the data which was collected from 25 countries give new insights into an important field of research. • National bodies of scientific policy advice mostly developed ad hoc, were temporary, and showed several structural differences between countries.