Advisory adaptive capacity in pandemics: comparative insights from seven European countries
Abstract
Background: Pandemics require scientific advisory systems that can adapt to evolving knowledge, uncertainty, and expanding policy questions. While countries differed in relying on pre-existing or newly created advisory structures during COVID-19, less is known about what determines adaptive capacity. This study examines how interdisciplinarity and institutional design shaped the adaptive capacity of scientific advisory mechanisms.
Methods: We conducted a comparative multiple-case study of scientific advisory mechanisms in seven Western European countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom), drawing on 30 semi-structured interviews and document analysis. Thematic analysis focused on structural configuration, organisation of interdisciplinarity, and science–policy coupling.
Results: Adaptive capacity was not determined by whether advisory structures were pre-existing or newly created. Instead, it depended on how advisory systems organised interdisciplinarity and were connected to policy processes. We identify three organisational patterns: (1) embedded interdisciplinarity within single advisory structures with subgroups; (2) layered or parallel advisory streams with integration at policy level; and (3) hybrid configurations combining approaches over time. Across cases, advisory systems expanded beyond biomedical expertise as the pandemic evolved into a multi-dimensional crisis, often through subgroup formation or additional committees. These organisational choices shaped how rapidly systems incorporated new knowledge domains and responded to changing outbreak dynamics.
Conclusions: Advisory adaptive capacity during pandemics depends on how systems structure interdisciplinarity and policy embedding. Designing advisory systems as flexible platforms capable of incorporating diverse expertise is critical for maintaining coherent and responsive scientific advice.
Key messages: • Adaptive capacity of pandemic advisory systems depends less on institutional origin and more on how interdisciplinarity is organised and embedded in policy processes.
• Flexible advisory structures that can expand expertise and adapt over time are critical for maintaining coherent and responsive scientific advice during pandemics.
Related
- Party capacity, state capacity, and pandemic governance: a fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis of COVID-19 prevention and control outcomes in 52 African countries during the early stage
- Building farmers capacity for sustainable agricultural resilience through the diffusion of innovations in ICT advisory using partial least squares structural equation modeling
- Persistent Differences in Reported Inpatient Rehabilitation-Bed Capacity Across 27 European and OECD Countries
- Enhancing circular textile waste recycling: a comparative analysis of European countries and South Korea
- Intergenerational educational mobility and intrinsic capacity in later life: a harmonised analysis of individuals from five countries.
BibTeX
@article{cesuroglu2026advisory,
title = {{Advisory adaptive capacity in pandemics: comparative insights from seven European countries}},
author = {T Cesuroglu and C Waltz and I Abma and F Castaño Rosario and A Schreijer},
journal = {The European Journal of Public Health},
year = {2026},
month = oct,
doi = {10.1093/eurpub/ckag169.350},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckag169.350},
note = {CC BY-NC 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Advisory adaptive capacity in pandemics: comparative insights from seven European countries
AU - T Cesuroglu
AU - C Waltz
AU - I Abma
AU - F Castaño Rosario
AU - A Schreijer
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/10/01
JO - The European Journal of Public Health
DO - 10.1093/eurpub/ckag169.350
UR - https://doi.org/10.1093/eurpub/ckag169.350
AB - Background: Pandemics require scientific advisory systems that can adapt to evolving knowledge, uncertainty, and expanding policy questions. While countries differed in relying on pre-existing or newly created advisory structures during COVID-19, less is known about what determines adaptive capacity. This study examines how interdisciplinarity and institutional design shaped the adaptive capacity of scientific advisory mechanisms. Methods: We conducted a comparative multiple-case study of scientific advisory mechanisms in seven Western European countries (Belgium, France, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom), drawing on 30 semi-structured interviews and document analysis. Thematic analysis focused on structural configuration, organisation of interdisciplinarity, and science–policy coupling. Results: Adaptive capacity was not determined by whether advisory structures were pre-existing or newly created. Instead, it depended on how advisory systems organised interdisciplinarity and were connected to policy processes. We identify three organisational patterns: (1) embedded interdisciplinarity within single advisory structures with subgroups; (2) layered or parallel advisory streams with integration at policy level; and (3) hybrid configurations combining approaches over time. Across cases, advisory systems expanded beyond biomedical expertise as the pandemic evolved into a multi-dimensional crisis, often through subgroup formation or additional committees. These organisational choices shaped how rapidly systems incorporated new knowledge domains and responded to changing outbreak dynamics. Conclusions: Advisory adaptive capacity during pandemics depends on how systems structure interdisciplinarity and policy embedding. Designing advisory systems as flexible platforms capable of incorporating diverse expertise is critical for maintaining coherent and responsive scientific advice. Key messages: • Adaptive capacity of pandemic advisory systems depends less on institutional origin and more on how interdisciplinarity is organised and embedded in policy processes. • Flexible advisory structures that can expand expertise and adapt over time are critical for maintaining coherent and responsive scientific advice during pandemics.
SN - 1101-1262
SN - 1464-360X
ER -