Abstract The linear model of science-policy interaction presents scientific knowledge as a necessary and straightforward requirement for rational decision-making. While the practices related to the linear model have been criticized by science policy actors and research funders, who promote more participatory arrangements, the linear model persists in both research policy and practice. This study investigates why and in which form the linear model continues to exist. I focus on the “professor group on energy policy”, a voluntary and bottom-up science-policy initiative active in Finnish energy policy debates during 2013−2017. The analysis is based on interviews, reports, news articles and observations. I assess both the engagement practices of the group and how they are justified and evaluated. The study demonstrates the prevalence of the linear model as a repertoire that different actors employ to order science and policy. The results point to the need to critically assess the context, politics and expectations related to science-policy interaction.

中文翻译：

---

执行线性模型：能源政策教授组

摘要 科学政策互动的线性模型将科学知识作为理性决策的必要和直接要求。虽然与线性模型相关的实践受到科学政策参与者和研究资助者的批评，他们促进了更多的参与性安排，但线性模型在研究政策和实践中都存在。这项研究调查了线性模型继续存在的原因和形式。我关注“能源政策教授小组”，这是一个自愿的、自下而上的科学政策倡议，活跃于 2013-2017 年芬兰能源政策辩论中。分析基于采访、报告、新闻文章和观察。我评估了团队的参与实践以及它们的合理性和评估方式。该研究表明，线性模型作为不同参与者用来安排科学和政策的曲目的普遍性。结果表明需要批判性地评估与科学政策互动相关的背景、政治和期望。