A new typology for comparing scientific advisory committees. Evidence from the Italian response to the COVID-19 pandemic

The study of scientific advisory committees (SACs) is a recurrent topic of research in public policy and public administration. Scholars are increasingly interested in analyzing the scientization of policy advice as well as the role played by knowledge- based policymaking processes. Despite recent developments in the field, SACs studies continue to face an analytical and empirical gap due to the lack of parsimonious conceptualizations of the char-acteristics that enable them to be both theoretically rel-evant and effective in driving comparative analysis. To fill this research gap, this article proposes a novel typology of SACs based on a specific conceptualization of the moti-vations of policymakers that allows the selection of two classificatory criteria: the origin of the members and the degree to which their expertise is homogeneous. The theo-retical relevance of this typology is illustrated by applying it to the SACs established in the Italian regions to address the COVID- 19 pandemic. The article highlights the rele-vance of the typology to the theory underlying the empiri-cal analysis. In doing so, it provides relevant insights into the composition and nature of SACs that is useful not only for the academic debate on evidence- based policymaking but also for both practitioners and decision- makers.