How Scientific Research Impacts Policy Cycle

Scientific research is increasingly referenced in policy documents issued by international, national, and regional organizations, reflecting its role in governance and decision-making across diverse social responsibilities. However, the extent to which scientific publications contribute to different stages of policy making remain an under-researched area. This study investigates how policy sources cite scientific research across disciplines, with a particular focus on the placement and function of the citations within governmental and intergovernmental organization (IGO) policy documents. Our core dataset is drawn from UK REF2021 journal articles, while policy citation counts and a sample of policy documents were retrieved from Overton.io. A random sample of 1,000 policy documents citing scientific articles in five fields from governmental and IGO sources were analyzed to determine type of policy documents, their purposes, and the placement of the citations in them. Policy documents, based on their focus and their purpose, were assessed according to the five-stage policy chain model: agenda-setting, formulation, adoption, implementation, and evaluation. The findings indicate that governmental and IGOs are the predominant sources of policy citations. Many policy documents lack distinct sections typical of scientific articles and appear in numbered chapters (41%), while in the remaining documents citations were primarily located in the Introduction (13%), Background (9%), Methods (10%), or References without clear in-text citation (7%). With some disciplinary differences, nearly half of policy citations appear in the “policy formulation” stage of the policy making chain, while about one-fifth occur in the “policy evaluation” stage, demonstrating how policymakers rely on academic research both when shaping policy frameworks and assessing their effectiveness. Field of public health stands out as an exception, with a significantly higher proportion of scientific citations in the “policy implementation” stage (34%) compared to other fields (8%), reflecting the evidencebased nature of practical guidance and guidelines informed by research. Additionally, most policy document sources had more administrative (63%) than scientific (37%) focus and held operational (39%), advisory (26%), or executive (16.5%) roles, highlighting their action-oriented nature. The results challenge the view that policy documents merely synthesize academic research; instead, they often engage in knowledge production through commissioned studies, empirical analysis (56%), and evidence-based recommendations (34%). Policy-to-research citations should not be seen solely as indicators of research uptake but as part of a reciprocal process where policy documents both utilize and generate scientific knowledge. Policy citations can thus serve as a critical measure of the impact of science on policy research and recommendations, demonstrating how academic research informs and shapes evidence-based governance.