CSaP Annual Conference closing plenary: Resilience in a changing world

As Salma Shah noted, politics requires persuasion. It is paramount for government and academics to keep this in mind as they navigate different policy challenges. However, persuasion is becoming increasingly challenging in an information ecosystem which is becoming more fragmented, decentralised and filled with disinformation. As Dr. Jon Roozenbeek highlighted, social media impressions can be bought for very low sums.

Better understanding of the disinformation economy, as Roozenbeek describes it, is pivotal for considering how to combat disinformation and how to allow government to best navigate today’s complicated media ecosystem and reach voters. This could include exploring interventions which raise the input prices into disinformation, such as raising the costs of sim cards. Such measures would be aimed at ensuring disinformation becomes as costly as possible, reducing the supply of disinformation.

However, as Shah stressed, government faces different and distinct policies priorities which it must juggle. These disparate goals are complicated by the many different policy institutions which exist within and adjacent to government and can lead to policy silos. Ensuring effective communication between these different policy silos can help government navigate different priorities in a world characterised by polycrises. Tabitha Goldstaub argued that one important benefit in breaking down policy silos and disparate policy institutions is that this can lead to increased serendipity in the policy process.

Engineering serendipity can lead to more novel ideas within government. This ethos is central to the work which the Centre for Science and Policy pursues through connecting policymakers with researchers, and Goldstaub stressed that people are central to the government’s growth mission and broader policy agenda. White highlighted the similar ethos which drives the Institute for Government’s mission to make government more effective. This includes helping to translate opposition priorities into actionable government policy, helping to address the challenges in delivering policy and services which stem from those policies, and helping government understand what skills and knowledge people in government require.

For the current UK government, White described how the Institute for Government supported them with understanding how the machinery of policymaking has changed since the Labour Party last served in government. Alongside such exercises, the Institute for Government spends significant time helping government think about what changes the lived experience of the voter and how to make people feel that conditions are improving. These dual questions are front-and-centre for governments across Europe and reflect the challenging information ecosystem which Roozenbeek highlighted. White also described the important role which organisations such as the Institute for Government can play in helping think through the questions government is not asking.

Concluding the session, the panellists reflected on some of the major trends which are shaping the current government's approach to policymaking. White argued that although much has been made about missions as a novel method of doing government, these missions have not had much practical impact on the day-to-day running of government. Rather, missions can be a useful mobilising tool, especially for communicating with different policy audiences. Panellists also reflected on the government's drive to become more efficient, with Shah noting that the civil service must do a better job at marketing itself to the public. White argued that the emphasis should be placed on making budgets more efficient rather than aiming at reducing staff, as this can lead to key roles in the civil service going unfilled.

As the session effectively brought forth, in a challenging policy landscape government has many different policy priorities which it must navigate. The 2025 CSaP Annual Conference helped highlight the important role which bridging research impact and policy need can have in improving policymaking while posing many more questions to be explored moving forward.