Policy advisory systems in parliaments: comparative insights for reforming Indonesia’s parliament expertise agency

This article examines how policy advisory systems (PAS) are institutionalised within parliaments and what lessons can strengthen Indonesia’s Parliament Expertise Agency (Badan Keahlian DPR RI). Drawing on PAS theory and legislative studies, it applies a structured-focused comparison across nineteen parliamentary systems in Europe, the Asia–Pacific, and Latin America. The analysis identifies three recurring configurations—in-house research units, committee-integrated structures, and hybrid multi-node systems—each balancing expertise and political control. Effective systems tend to share three conditions: autonomy backed by legal mandate, procedural embedding in committee deliberations, and sustained interaction between analysts and legislators. For Indonesia, the article argues for consolidating BK DPR RI’s analytical centres, codifying evidence use in the DPR’s Rules of Procedure, and building structured partnerships with universities and think tanks. More broadly, it highlights parliamentary advisory capacity as democratic epistemic infrastructure amid populism, polarisation, and epistemic fragmentation.