Designing a rapid response process for urgent policy-relevant knowledge needs: A case study on deadwood and forest fires

The dynamic nature of policy processes creates urgent knowledge needs that may not align with typical timelines of scientific research and knowledge synthesis. Faced with these time constraints, policy-makers resort to ad-hoc strategies to make decisions or resolve disputes, compromising the quality of evidence-based policy. As part of a project, we addressed this challenge by developing and testing a structured process for responding to urgent knowledge needs while maintaining scientific rigor. This process was tested in April 2023 through a knowledge-synthesis on the relationship between deadwood and fire risk in European forests, delivering evidence for ongoing EU Nature Restoration Law policy discussions. A targeted group of experts delivered a report within six weeks of initial request, following a scoping and engagement process. In this paper, we evaluate the context and outcomes of this rapid response process, prompting reflection on conditions necessary to respond in a timely manner. Our analysis reveals key challenges: knowledge production constraints, barriers to diverse expertise mobilization, limited transformative potential, science-policy interface tensions, specific ethical risks. To address these challenges, we identify four key requirements for rapid response processes: (1) sustained science-policy dialogue to clarify urgent needs and their context, (2) structured systems for accessing existing research, (3) incentivized expert engagement with clear participation pathways, (4) robust ethical oversight that maintains scientific integrity while acknowledging limitations. These requirements provide a foundation for developing ethically grounded, sustainable science-policy interactions that balance rigor with responsiveness, incorporate diverse knowledge systems, and enhance transformative potential across different contexts and scales. • A structured rapid response process was developed and tested for urgent biodiversity policy requests. • Urgent requests face trade-offs between timeliness, scientific rigor, and transformative potential. • Knowledge production in rapid response processes risks oversimplification and limited contextual consideration. • An integration of sustained science-policy dialogue and ethical oversight mitigates these risks. • Embedding rapid responses within broader research contexts enhances both policy relevance and scientific integrity.