Consultation on the code of practice for scientific advisory committees and councils
Updated 14 December 2021
漏 Crown copyright 2021
This publication is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected].
Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned.
This publication is available at /government/consultations/review-of-the-code-of-practice-for-scientific-advisory-committees-and-councils/consultation-on-the-code-of-practice-for-scientific-advisory-committees-and-councils
1. Overview
Committees and councils advise on a wide range of topics and provide insights from many disciplines including the natural sciences, technology, medicine, engineering, the social sciences, and the arts and humanities.
Committees and councils are typically made up of at least 1 Chair and several members. The Chairs and members are appointed because they hold expertise, skills and/or experience relevant to the topic on which they provide advice.
A committee or council鈥檚 operations are guided by a number of documents, including the 鈥楥ode of practice for scientific committees and councils鈥� (CoPSAC). 罢丑别鈥�CoPSAC鈥痯rovides guidance on the establishment, management and conduct of committees and councils and their relationship with the organisations they advise.
罢丑别鈥�CoPSAC鈥痺as last updated in 2011 and several sections are now out of date. We have revised the content and structure of the鈥�CoPSAC鈥痓ased on feedback from committee and council stakeholders. We are now inviting broader feedback from the public on the document.
Please note that the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) is not a scientific advisory committee or council in a formal sense.鈥�SAGE鈥痟as no membership. Its participants are called upon depending on the nature of the emergency and the issues under consideration change from meeting to meeting. While alignment with the鈥�CoPSAC鈥痠s sought as far as is practical,鈥�SAGE鈥痠s not within scope for this consultation, and several sections of the鈥�CoPSAC鈥痙o not directly apply (although for some emergencies,鈥�SAGE鈥痬ay work with existing鈥�SACs鈥痺hich are covered by鈥�CoPSAC). See further information on SAGE.
2. Who this consultation is aimed at:
- members of the scientific advisory community within government who missed the opportunity to provide feedback during the initial revision process
- members of the wider scientific community
- stakeholders with an interest in Open Science principles
- members of the academic community with expertise on the development, translation and use of science advice
- members of the science communication community (for example press officers from universities, scientific institutions)
3. Questions
Is the revised CoPSAC sufficient in guiding councils and committees on ensuring:
- independence (chapter 6, section 6.1 and references throughout)
- transparency, including publications (chapter 6, sections 6.2,6.3, 6.6 and references throughout)
- diversity and inclusion (chapter 2, sections 2.2, 2.4 and references throughout)
This call for evidence is being conducted in line with the Cabinet Office 鈥楥onsultation Principles鈥�.
See the consultation privacy notice.
If you have any comments or complaints about this public consultation, please email: [email protected]