Interview with UCL Researcher

Written by Yena Lee

Edited by Firdavs Mirzoev

Interviewee Information

Dr. Jegak Seo is a science and research professional based in London, specialising in antimicrobial resistance (AMR), global health, One Health, and environmental sustainability. He has held research and management roles at UCL, the Royal College of Pharmacy, and Swansea University, as well as working with the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). His career also reflects strong cross-cultural experience: he has worked across the UK and South Korea, and previously served as an advisor and events leader for Korean Researchers in the UK, where he connected Korean researchers with universities.

1. Projects like OHRIGAME involve international collaborations, such as link-ups between UK institutions and partners in Vietnam. What lessons have you learned about managing cross-cultural research initiatives, and what advice do you have for international student teams working globally? 

A key lesson I have learned is that successful international collaboration depends just as much on teamwork as on the scientific question itself. Different institutions and countries often differ in expectations around communication, hierarchy, decision-making, timelines, and even what constitutes a successful research outcome. If those differences are not recognised early, relatively small misunderstandings can become major barriers later. 

For me, the starting point is therefore to establish clarity early: what are we trying to achieve, who is responsible for what, how are decisions made, and how will we communicate when something changes? At the same time, that structure has to be combined with cultural humility. A partnership should not be one institution simply exporting its way of working to another. Local collaborators often understand the practical, regulatory, and societal context far better than an external research team does, so they need to be involved in shaping the research rather than simply implementing it. 

For student teams working internationally, my advice would be to understand your collaborators before focusing solely on the deliverable. Be curious, communicate more explicitly than you think you need to, and never assume that your own academic culture is the default. The strongest international projects I have seen are those where different perspectives genuinely improve research.

2. Having completed your PhD research at UCL and transitioned into research management, policy support, and consulting, what advice would you give to young researchers aiming to build careers that bridge academic science with high-level policy? 

I encourage young researchers to think beyond the idea that research ends when a paper is published. Academic training teaches us how to ask rigorous questions and generate evidence, but policy environments ask an additional question: what should someone do differently because of this evidence? That shift in mindset has probably been the most important part of my own career. During my PhD, my work was technically focused on antimicrobial resistance and exposure to low concentrations of antibiotics. But over time, I became increasingly interested in how evidence moves beyond the laboratory and becomes guidance, policy, regulation, or a strategic decision. That led me into work involving international organisations, professional bodies, and multidisciplinary policy projects. 

My advice would be to deliberately build skills on both sides. Develop strong scientific credibility, because policymakers need people who understand evidence properly. But also learn to communicate uncertainty, write concisely, understand stakeholder priorities, and work within real-world constraints. Policymakers rarely have time to read a thirty-page literature review; they may need to know, in a page or even a paragraph, what the evidence says, how certain we are, and what the realistic options are. 

I also advise students not to worry if their career path isn't linear. Some of the most useful opportunities come from working across disciplines and organisations. The ability to translate between scientific, policy, and professional communities can itself become a very valuable expertise. 

3. You have worked across academia at UCL, international policy during your time with the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), and professional leadership at the Royal College of Pharmacy. What is the biggest communication gap you see between academic research labs and global policymakers, and how can student journalists help bridge that divide? 

I think the biggest gap is that researchers and policymakers address different questions. 

Researchers are trained to ask, “What does the evidence show, and what remains uncertain?” Policymakers often need to ask, “Given the current evidence and uncertainty, what decision should we make?” Neither approach is wrong, but the difference in timescale and purpose can create frustration on both sides. 

Academic communication can also become extremely specialised. Researchers may spend years developing terminology and methodological detail that is essential within their discipline but difficult for someone outside that field to interpret. At the same time, policymakers may need a clear answer before the science is mature enough to provide certainty. The challenge is therefore not to oversimplify science, but to make complexity usable. 

I think student journalists can play a particularly valuable role here because they can act as translators between communities. Good science journalism does not simply make technical language easier; it explains why the research matters, what the limitations are, whose decisions it affects, and what questions remain unresolved. 

For issues such as antimicrobial resistance, this is especially important because the scientific story is only one part of the picture. Antibiotic use is connected to healthcare systems, agriculture, economics, regulation, human behaviour, and global inequality. Journalists who can connect these dimensions can help both the public and decision-makers understand the significance of research far beyond an individual laboratory finding. 

4. CCF focuses heavily on bridging traditional STEM with ethics, economics, and social sciences. Given that combating AMR requires changing human behavior, farming practices, and healthcare legislation, how essential is an interdisciplinary mindset when designing stewardship strategies? 

I would say it is absolutely essential. Antimicrobial resistance is a good example of a problem that cannot be solved by microbiology alone. 

We can develop better diagnostics, discover new antibiotics, and understand resistance mechanisms in extraordinary scientific detail, but those advances will have limited impact if we do not also understand why antimicrobials are used, how healthcare systems incentivise prescribing, how farming practices operate, how patients perceive antibiotics, and how regulation affects access and behaviour. 

This is why the One Health perspective is so important. Human health, animal health, and the environment are interconnected, but even One Health needs to go beyond the natural sciences. Economics matters because individuals and organisations respond to incentives. Behavioural science matters because knowledge alone does not necessarily change behaviour. Ethics matters because restricting antimicrobial access can have very different consequences in a well-resourced health system compared with a country where access to essential antibiotics is already limited. Law and policy matter because stewardship ultimately operates through healthcare systems and institutions. 

For me, the best stewardship strategies do not just ask, “What intervention should work scientifically?” but also, “Who needs to change their behaviour, what prevents them from doing so, what incentives exist, and what unintended consequences could the intervention create?” 

That is why I think interdisciplinary education is particularly valuable for younger researchers. Some of the most difficult global challenges will not be solved by becoming narrower specialists; they will be solved by specialists who can understand and collaborate across disciplinary boundaries.