ABSTRACT Relying on a neo-institutionalist framework of epistemic governance, this article examines the rhetorical function the term ‘science’ plays in the parliamentary discourse of seven countries. Our analysis confirms that ‘science’ is often referred to by members of parliaments throughout the world and across all policy sectors. We find ample references not just to particular sciences, but also to science in the abstract, and find hardly any contests around the mentions of science beyond technical contests around the credibility of a particular result. Our analysis reveals crucial forms of epistemic work conducted by evoking ‘science’ in the abstract. Drawing on and elaborating Durkheim’s view of morality and the framework of epistemic governance, we argue that much of the work done by references to ‘science’ can be characterised as building a moral authority of science.

ABSTRACT International organisations are key actors in global governance. Among them is a growing group of international meta-organisations (IMOs) – organisations whose members are themselves organisations. Understanding how IMOs become worth joining demands an explanation of how they try to gain value in the eyes of prospective members. The article analyses the case of the International Association of National Public Health Institutes, which rapidly amassed a membership in excess of 100 organisations from more than 90 countries. The analysis identifies different aspects of epistemic work through which an IMO may accumulate and assert its authority while it aims to become an attractive body to belong to for potential members. Drawing on the theoretical framework of epistemic governance, the article suggests that IMOs are accumulations of authority that can be utilised in national policy-making.

Cultural approaches to national policymaking have yielded much empirical evidence that national decision-making is greatly impacted by policy choices made in other countries. Considering that the common explanation of policy diffusion cannot explain all instances of isomorphism, this paper proposes an alternative way of operationalising interdependent decision-making. Drawing on emerging work in neoinstitutionalist world society theory, we suggest that the rise of global policy models can be explained by thinking of the world polity as a synchronised system in which national states keep an eye out on each others’ moves and, often, match them. As a consequence, global models are formed in parallel with their spread. We illustrate this argument by analysing the worldwide institutionalisation of national bioethics committees (NBCs). Using qualitative analysis of official documentation on NBCs, we trace how the institution has evolved into a widely recognised and codified format in four shifts – the appearance of an institutional category, construction of the paradigmatic model, networking and consultation by international organisations. We show how this analysis corrects for the assumption of rigid policy models in most diffusion research and offers new designs for empirical research.