Public Health Researchers’ Roles in Tension during Public Health Emergencies. A Qualitative, Actor-Centered Approach [thesis].

Degree of PhD in Health Sciences (Public Health Sciences); Thesis advisor: Annika Frahsa; Co-thesis adivsor: Per von Groote, Co-referee: Caroline Schlaufer

This thesis explores how Public Health researchers navigate their roles and responsibilities at the science-policy interface, particularly during Public Health Emergencies. Drawing on a systematic scoping review of literature, qualitative data from interviews, and Twitter data, the study examines the tensions that emerge when researchers are expected to act as both neutral experts and value-driven advocates. It highlights the contested nature of scientific evidence, the role of formal and informal practices in advisory work, and the influence of researcher positionality on visibility and participation during Public Health Emergencies. The findings point to a blurred distinction between Public Health and Public Health research complicates role expectations and contributes to identity tensions. Furthermore, the research underscores the lack of interdisciplinarity in scientific advisory processes and calls for stronger integration of Social Science and Political Science theory into Public Health. Overall, the study emphasizes the need for critical reflection, gender equity, and institutional support for interdisciplinarity to enhance the legitimacy and effectiveness of Public Health researchers’ science-policy engagement.