Abstract

The author researched the historical divide between scientific evidence and political decision‑making, analysing why policymakers favour politically palatable truths and how academics’ insular communication limits impact. Drawing on theory, case studies and communication scholarship, the paper argues criminologists should become public communicators – engaging legislators, using credible messengers, tailoring messages, and building networks – to accelerate evidence uptake. It outlines five practical strategies and a cross‑national, interdisciplinary roadmap to bridge the science‑to‑policy gap and increase the immediate public impact of criminological research.