In this insightful interview, COMPASS’s Heather Mannix speaks with Emily Patrolia, founder and CEO of ESP Advisors and a COMPASS board member, about the crucial role of science and scientists in informing policy decisions.
They explore the current challenges and opportunities scientists face in engaging with policy, how scientists can prepare to communicate effectively, and ways to remain involved without risking burnout. Whether you’re new to policy engagement or a seasoned participant, this conversation offers valuable perspectives on how to create a meaningful support evidence-based decision-making in today’s world.
Quick Links
Resources and topics mentioned in the video.
- Learn more about ESP Advisors
- Subscribe to ESP Advisor’s Substack
- Attend a COMPASS workshop or event
- Knauss Fellowship
- mid-Atlantic Integrated Ocean Observing System Americas (MARACOOS)
- Capitol Hill Ocean Week
- The Supreme Court Chevron Decision
- the Inflation Reduction Act
Transcript
This transcript has been edited slightly for clarity.
Heather Mannix: I’m Heather Mannix. I’m the Director of Strategic Engagement for COMPASS. I’m also the current interim co-Executive Director and part of the management team. And this is a real treat for me to get to talk to Emily Patrolia, who is the founder and CEO of ESP Advisors and also a COMPASS board member.
I have admired Emily for a long time. We met many years ago at this point, while I was pretty new at COMPASS and Emily was a Knauss Fellow with the Senate Commerce Committee. And I think we came in to talk about fisheries and aquaculture and have stayed in touch ever since. I’m just thrilled to have Emily as a member of our board now, because you’ve always been such a champion for the role of science and scientists in policy. And so today we’re going to talk about that.
We’re going to talk about what this current moment is in policy, and how scientists can really have impact even though things might seem uncertain — there’s a lot going on. The policy world is churning, as always — but I think there’s a lot to be said and a lot that science and scientists can do even amongst that uncertainty.
But before we go down that path, I’d like to just start with Emily and give you a chance to talk a little bit about yourself. Emily, can you share, how did you come to work in policy? What was your pathway to where you are now?
Emily Patrolia: Sure. Thanks, Heather. And yeah, I’m so happy to be here and definitely a big champion of COMPASS’s work and in general bringing folks with science backgrounds — or really any knowledge — into the policy space to make everything better and have a more fruitful conversation.
So I got into policy work when… I started learning about it when I was an intern, actually, in undergrad. I was at the University of Delaware, and I had an internship with the mid-Atlantic Integrated Ocean Observing System Americas or MARACOOS. And I learned that ocean policy was a thing. I didn’t even know that was a career you could have. I was like, ‘Well, that’s cool.’ Because, you know, I like science. I also like interacting with people. And the ocean had always been, you know, a really special part of my life personally and a passion of mine. So as an intern, I helped organize congressional briefings and so got to engage in D.C.
I was very lucky MARACOOS took me to my first Capitol Hill Ocean Week or CHOW. And so I just kind of caught the bug. I was with all these people who do really cool stuff in ocean and U.S. federal policy, and I realized it was something I wanted to pursue. And then I also learned about the Knauss Fellowship (or the Sea Grant Knauss Fellowship at that time) because my boss had been one in 2000 or 2001.
And so I went to get my master’s from University of Rhode Island, the Marine Affairs degree. So it’s interdisciplinary, focused on law and policy, but also different natural sciences and social sciences. And I was lucky enough to get the Knauss fellowship that sent me to D.C. to work on the Commerce Committee where I met you, Heather.
Heather Mannix: Yeah, perfect. Well, great. I’m going to ask a question that I didn’t have written down, because I’m just curious. What’s your favorite part of your job? What’s the favorite, like — What do you like the best about what you do?
Emily Patrolia: That’s such a great question. Well, there’s a lot of things I love about my job. I think it really does come down to the people. You get to meet so many wonderful individuals who are working to make a difference and everyone has different backgrounds and perspectives that they’re coming at it. And so when it comes to, especially, you know, U.S. federal policy and D.C. itself, there’s so many different people with different backgrounds working together on different issues.
And I really love compromise. I love bringing people together who have different opinions, who are trying to achieve different things. And when we breakthrough and find something that everyone, you know, is happy with and we can move forward with, there’s just … there’s not a better feeling.
Heather Mannix: Yeah, I totally agree. Finding that compromise. And I think in some ways our jobs are similar because we’re bridges, right? We’re bridges between different worlds: the science world, the ocean science world, and this policy world. I think we kind of go about it in different ways, but, you know, the focus is on the people and the relationship building.
And so I guess kind of transitioning, why do you think it’s important for people — for the scientists — to be part of these policy dialogues? Why is that an important role to have or what do you think is best about that?
Emily Patrolia: Oh, it’s super important. So if you think about — well, everyone has, you know, their lane of expertise. Policymakers tend to not be scientists. And by the way, that’s a good thing because the way policy makers and lawyers think is different than the way scientists think. And we all have a role to play. And so, you know, but a lot of policies do involve science: How do we understand a certain, you know, industry? How do we regulate things? How do we measure them? You know, what’s what’s coming up in the world that we need to start paying attention to and how should we pay attention to it? Is there a new technology like marine carbon dioxide removal that is very promising, but we don’t, you know, we don’t quite know all the technology so we need to put in place either funding for research and development, but also thinking about how do we regulate that industry in the future. And so scientists need to be involved in all of those processes.
And it’s one of those things like, you know, policymakers are, you know… if you think about congressional staff — they’re young, they’re super smart, they really know their stuff when it comes to policy. And they’re very willing and able and looking for advice from experts. And so whenever they know what they don’t know, they’re going to reach out to experts. And so in that instance, you want to make sure that you’ve met them so that they know that you’re around and you’re an expert in whatever your expertise area is and that they can reach out to you. So it’s just good to make that connection.
And then also, they might I mean — there’s a lot we all don’t know that we don’t know, right? So we wouldn’t even know to ask or, you know, bring it up and ask questions. And so in those conversations, as you open dialogues with people who are making these decisions, you might say, ‘hey, you know, I know you’re thinking about it this way, but have you thought about this?’ And so you open up their eyes to something that might be an unintended consequence that they hadn’t even considered.
Heather Mannix: Yeah, exactly. And there’s all these different ways that you can kind of have these conversations and be part of them, too, right? There’s not just one advocacy pathway or, you know, advising pathway. There are different approaches depending on what the conversation’s about, kind of the stage of the policy: is that at the beginning of the policy? Are we kind of in this formulation/information gathering stage? Or are we at the point where we’re going to be actually putting some words down on paper for the legislation? And I think knowing where you are in that cycle is super helpful and important. And knowing that there’s different roles that you can play can be helpful, too, in how you approach those relationships.
Emily Patrolia: Yeah. And if I could add on that point — that’s a really, really good point. And I think, of course, you know, federal government and congressional advocacy can feel really scary. It can feel like a black box, you know, that’s like really hard to understand: Who do you even talk to? Who is making decisions?
And also, you know, I think there’s some fear because, you know, lobbying is the big L word. People aren’t sure if they’re allowed to do it or, you know, the question is about ethics with how they’re funded — if they’re, you know, scientists, how they’re funded. But I think that’s a good point that you raise. There’s ways to engage that aren’t advocacy. So, you know, there’s advocacy and lobbying where you’re coming and you have an opinion and you want to ask for something. You want to ask for funding or changes to a regulation or changes to a law that supports something you care about. But also, there’s so many ways to engage where you’re just being an expert and educating, and that’s not lobbying. And that typically doesn’t cross any kind of ethical guidelines — depends on, you know, your organization — but I would just say, you know, there’s room for everyone to engage in a meaningful way and help make the process better.
Heather Mannix: You know, you talked about… it can feel scary or just, you know, a lot of … There’s a lot of uncertainty in policy, right? There’s: When will decisions be made? What’s going to catch a policy maker’s attention? What current event might happen that will change the total trajectory of these discussions that’s going on? And it feels like we’re in kind of especially like a cycle of uncertainty right now. The Supreme Court Chevron Decision this summer has injected a lot of unknowns about how science is going to be part of policy decisions. And of course, we have the election in November. So I guess given all of that, what advice would you give to a scientist who’s interested in engaging in federal policy but might say, ‘I don’t know, where do I even start? Or there’s so much going on, Is it even worth it right now?’ So I’d love to hear your thoughts on that.
Emily Patrolia: There is always a lot of uncertainty in policy and there are a lot of things going on that impact, you know, everything down the chain. So, you know, when it comes to some non-controversial science and stuff, those things can even still be impacted, of course, by like the big politics of the day; Congress may be planning on bringing up a bill that addresses something, but then something happens in Ukraine and now they have to scrap that. So there’s just a lot going on.
And so it is helpful to have an expert, you know, with you helping to let you know what’s kind of going on in the day-to-day if you’re really trying to make progress. And it’s also helpful to be trained. So COMPASS does these trainings for policy and communications and workshops. And I really recommend at least educating yourself before engaging, just so you understand a little bit more how the process works and what’s the best way to get your message across to the people who you want to help, or educate, or influence.
And then, yeah, I think especially right now, of course, we’re going into an election, so there’s always uncertainty: who’s going to be the new president? What’s going to be the balance of power in Congress? What are the priorities going to be? You know, we have that presidential election every four years and then Congress changes every two years. So pretty used to that.
But to your point, the Chevron decision really kind of rocked D.C. and federal policy in a really major way that we still, I think, don’t quite know how that’s going to play out. But for those who don’t know, basically the Chevron Doctrine was in place for decades, and basically it stipulated that whenever Congress passes a law and gives an agency the authority to do something — oftentimes regulating something — and Congress is not clear about exactly how that thing should be regulated, the agency has discretion to decide. And so that’s kind of in place because it’s expected that the agency would have the experts to understand what the science is, you know, what’s going on, and regulate it appropriately. So that was rolled back in the recent Supreme Court decision over the summer. So that now means, on the one hand, industries who are regulated and others are going to be taking the federal government to court a whole lot more. And in that instance, scientists are going to be really needed to give testimony or provide their expertise sometimes in courtrooms to explain maybe what the best science is to regulate or manage something.
And then on my side, on kind of like the congressional engagement side, where were the laws start, Congress is going to have to be a lot more specific now to give agencies those authority. So not just, ‘hey, you should regulate, you know, this pollutant or manage this fishery.’ They have to say more specifically how the agency should be managing it. And so we’re going to need a lot more scientific input than we already have in that discussion so that the laws can be accurate and helpful and not kind of damaging things down the road.
Heather Mannix: So I think, you know, because this policy work can be tough — It’s a lot of work to engage and it can feel like it’s really easy to get, I don’t know, swept up in negativity or like the changes that need to be made are so much bigger than kind of one person.
So I’d love to hear, Emily, from you: What do you do to kind of like foster resilience in this work? What gives you hope? How do you move forward?
Emily Patrolia: Yeah, that’s a great question. It’s important to take care of yourself, and it totally can get really overwhelming, you know, especially in the policy world. Things can feel really slow. You know, we are making progress, but it can sometimes feel like two steps forward, three steps back. And then of course, if you’re doing… if you’re engaging in policy a lot, you necessarily have to pay attention to politics — not because you’re engaging in politics (some people do, some people don’t), but because it’s the water you’re swimming in. So you just kind of need to know what’s going on.
And my first recommendation is limit your consumption of news media — and media in general — I think as much as possible. I would say… I can pretty confidently say that 95% of us consume more news media than we have to for our personal lives or our jobs. And so, for example, for my job, I have to be very read into what’s going on, but I still limit it to one time a day that I’ll consume the news. And so if you don’t have to be as engaged in policy, I would just figure out what’s your minimum. You know, maybe it’s once a week, maybe once a month, maybe it’s twice a year that you just need to check in on the things you care about. And what are your levers of influence. So just manage that.
But what gives me hope? Well, first of all, you know, I do try to focus on the success, on the wins, on the progress. I try to have a bigger, longer term view. Look backwards, look forwards, look around, look at other groups doing really cool stuff. Get psyched about that and see you’re not alone. All these different people again — different priorities, goals, all that stuff — but we’re all kind of working together and we all care and we all share, you know, core values. You know, we want the best for people on the planet. So that always gives me hope.
And then one last thing I’ll say is — this gives me hope — And also it’s like whenever I’m on a plane, people ask what I do and I’m like, ‘I’m in the policy world.’ And they say, ‘Isn’t that awful?’ And I said, ‘Well, it’s actually not, you know, because in the news they never talk about all the compromises and all the little bills that pass that are super bipartisan.’ And it never gets reported because, you know, it’s boring to talk about compromise and where we all agree. So there’s a lot happening that you just may not hear about. And it’s a lot of good stuff that people work very hard on. So that always gives me hope to.
Heather Mannix: Yeah, I love that. And I think it’s true. Sometimes in the news media, we really just hear this like upper-level of drama and conflict. But there is so much happening underneath that, especially when you get into specializations and science and kind of, you know, these niche worlds. And kind of along the same lines, it gives me hope, too, just how hard people are working and how much they care. I think that’s something that when you… both on the scientist side, you know, just seeing this amazing work and the change that can come from it and the ideas and the innovation and then the ability to take those to policy folks who can use it and put it into action. The synergy of that when that happens, like you said earlier, it’s just such a beautiful, beautiful thing to see and have that work out.
So, I guess along those lines, do you have any examples that you’ve seen in your work where policy engagement, science policy engagement has been really effective?
Emily Patrolia: Yeah, absolutely. Right at the beginning of COVID, you know, we wanted to document the damages and the impacts that COVID was having: not being able to go out on ships, not being able to repair technology, not being able to conduct the science. So we compiled all of that and we had it ready and we were engaging with our friends in Congress and just sharing that information. And two years later, this bill started moving — the Inflation Reduction Act. And then, you know, the staffers that we were talking to — who we were talking to for years — were able to get some support for that program through that bill that was moving.
And so I guess the the kind of moral of that story is even if when you’re engaging at the time, it doesn’t feel like there’s a path forward or any real way to move something, that doesn’t mean that it’s not worth it because you never know what vehicle might show up down the road. I think Congress in particular really is, you know… collecting information can be slow. And then there are these moments of opportunity where, if you weren’t already in the pipeline and talking to them in the last year or two, you’re not going to be able to catch the boat that’s suddenly moving. So don’t give up, but keep engaging.
Heather Mannix: Our colleague Meg [Nakahara] talks about it sometimes as the policy cycles are just waves coming to the shore, right? And they’re on kind of these constant cycles, but they’re unpredictable and you don’t really know which wave is going to come and when and how that’s going to work. And so being ready, kind of like ready to go, ready to jump on that wave is kind of what you have to do to be ready.
And it goes back to hope — what we were talking about too, right? So even if you feel things feel stuck and like they’re not really moving, you never really know when something is going to gather steam or there’s going to be that current event that pushes something forward and then suddenly you’re there, you’re in the middle of it and ready to go.
Emily Patrolia: Totally. Yeah, I love that analogy. And perfect for ocean stuff too which is what I do primarily.
Heather Mannix: Exactly! So, okay, continuing with that analogy, how can people learn more about this? How can they kind of be in the water ready, you know, ready to go and to be more involved?
Emily Patrolia: Well, not to plug COMPASS, but yes, to plug COMPASS. I think everyone, you know, anyone who’s interested in engaging in the policy realm and also just learning how to better communicate, you know, your work so that it can be used by folks who make different decisions all throughout that kind of… the people process. Engage with COMPASS. There’s materials online, there’s workshops, there’s webinars — all sorts of opportunities to learn how to take your science to the next level in terms of creating impact and supporting the policymaking process.
And then on ESP Advisors, we provide a lot of educational materials as well. It’s kind of… some of it’s about, you know, just the general process: How does federal funding work? What are the cycles? When do you engage? And also we do a weekly report about what’s going on in ocean policy in particular. So if you’re interested, I recommend just starting to pay attention and getting newsletters and learning about what types of things are happening, what are people focused on, ‘who’s who’ kind of in the space. So we have a Substack, it’s oceanpolicy.substack.com/ that you can check out. And then we also, like I said, we do a lot of our educational materials just on our blog, on our website. So that could be good places to start.
And I think just in general, following and signing up for newsletters from groups that do science policy and communication is a good place to start.
Heather Mannix: Yeah, folks who can be a little bit of that bridge for you, right? So that you don’t have to go and look at the policies or necessarily watch C-SPAN, unless you want to.
Emily Patrolia: Yeah, don’t watch C-SPAN!
Heather Mannix: But there’s a lot of folks doing this work. I’ll put a plug in, Emily, for the ESP newsletter and some quick updates that you often do on social media. A lot of us here at COMPASS follow those and they’re just, in the ocean science world, just wonderful ways to get your feet wet and really start to understand in plain language what’s going on and where the opportunities might be coming down the line.
Emily Patrolia: That’s great to hear.
Heather Mannix: Yeah, well, great. Anything else, Emily, that you’d like to share or anything we didn’t get to talk about?
Emily Patrolia: I think just the last thing I’d like to say is that it’s all about people and we’re all just people. So, you know, I think sometimes, again, we talked about how it could be intimidating or it can be discouraging, But just remember the whole policy machine, Congress, the agencies, it’s all people doing their best at at their jobs and, again, trying to make the world and the country a better place. So just remember to lean in with empathy and that understanding, and that makes it all a lot nicer.
Heather Mannix: Well, thank you so much, Emily. It’s been great to talk with you and I hope to hear more.
Emily Patrolia: Right back at you. Thank you so much, Heather.
