Table 1 Examples of environmental factors highlighted by the authors and workshop participants

• An intrinsic interest in the societal impact of scientific evidence

• A desire to build skills in science-policy

• A desire to form networks with decision-makers, senior scientists and other ECR’s

• Exposure to a studying or working environment where the contribution of evidence to decision-making is talked about and promoted

• Access to graduate programs or internships with a focus on working at the science-policy interface

• Exposure to networking opportunities related to science-policy. Such as engagement with groups of peers (e.g. ECR networks) as a stepping stone for involvement in working at the science-policy interface

• Entry: Equity of opportunity. Socio-cultural and demograhic factors such as gender could act as barriers and / or influence perceptions of credibility and experience

Contribution:

• Engagement in activities related to evidence generation and knowledge production. A lack of transdisciplinarity in the academic approach to science-policy

• Impact and effectiveness: Networking and visibility, interfacing with knowledge users. Perceived lack of credibility of ECRs due to limited experience and / or track record. Being early-career and / or having little experience in the field could hinder engagement with decision-makers