Science, Technology, and Society. Emerging Relationships. Papers from "Science," 1949-1988

Home , Joel Primack, John William Dawson, Philip Abelson, Ralph Lapp, Scientific controversy, Sputnik (news agency)

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 304 329 SE 050 392

AUTHOR Chalk, Rosemary, Ed. TITLE Science, Technology, and Society. Emerging Relationships. Papers from "Science," 1949-1988. INSTITUTION American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, D.C. REPORT NO AAAS-88-12; ISBN-0-87168-332-6 PUB DATE 88 NOTE 265p.; Graphs and small print may not reproduce well. AVAILABLE FROMAmerican Association for the Advancement of Science Books, P.O. Box 753, Waldorf, MD 20604 ($19.95; $15.95 to AAAS members). PUB TYPE Collected Works - General (020)

EDRS PRICE MF01 Plus Postage. PC Not Available from EDRS. DESCRIPTORS Altruism; *Ethics; Health Occupations; *Humanism; *Moral Values; National Security; *Philosophy; Risk; *Science and Society; Sciences; Social Influences; Social Values; Technology

ABSTRACT The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) has necessarily played a major role in the debates over choices and responsibilities arising from the advances of scienfa and its applications in a rapidly changing world. The editor of this volume has selected articles, editorials, and letters from the AAAS journal "Science," from 1949-1988, that deal with: (1) scientific freedom and responsibility; (2) the difficult ethical questions that have arisen in the practice of science and its applications; (3) the risks and benefits of new technologies and the making of decisions concerning them; (4) the conflict between the traditional openness of science and the pressures for secrecy arising from concerns over national security by government officials; and (5) other related matters. (MVL)

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made * from the original document. Science, Technology, and Society Emerging Relationships

Edited by Rosemary Chalk

Papers from SCIENCE, 1949-1988

The American Association for the Advancement of Science 0 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Science. technology. and society.

Bibliography: p. Includes index.

1. ScienceSocial aspects. 2. TechnologySociai aspects 3. Science and ethics. I. Chalk. Rosemary A.II. American Association for the Advancement of Science

Q175.55 .S295 1988 303.483 88-26204

This material originally appeared in Science, the official journal of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

ISBN 0-87168-332-6 AAAS Publication No. 88-12

Printed in the United States of America

4 Foreword vii Acknowledgments ix

Introduction 1

1. Science and Responsibility Moral Imperatives in the Nuclear Age

The Social Responsibilities of Scientists . 4 Social Responsibilities of Scientists 11 Bertrand Russell Philip H. Abelson Between Two Extremes 5 Two Aspects of Scientific Responsibility 12 Joseph Turner John T. Edsall The Moral Un-Neutrality of Science 6 Reflections on Current Issues in Science and C.P. Snow Technology 15 Anna J. Harrison The Jinni in the Bottle 10 Dael Wolfle Common Elements and Interconnections 18 Anna J. Harrison The Moral Sense of the Scientists 10 J.V. Reistrup

2. Science and Freedom Sputnik and Segregation

Government and the Freedom of Science 24 Address at the Einstein Session of the Pontifical John T. Edsall Academy of Sciences 29 Pope John Paul II Science and Freedom 27 Bentley Glass Freedom of Inquiry: An Endangered Species . 31 Charles E. Hess How Helpful Is Freedom? 28 Joseph Turner Is Taking Sides a Good Idea for Universities? 32 Harold T. Shapiro Freedom of Inquiry 28 DeWitt Stetten, Jr.

3. Sciencc and Ethics An Ethical Code for Scientists?

An Ethical Code for Scientists 34 Code of Ethics 44 Ward Pigman and Emmett B. Carmichael F.R. Fosberg The Ethical Basis of Science 37 Code of Ethics 44 Bentley Glass Henry Lanz Ethical Code for Scientists'? 44 Ethical Code for Scientists? 44 Lawrence Cranberg W.E. Graham

5 iii 4. The Human Side of Science Beyond the Laboratory Walls

Modern Science and the Intellectual Tradition 48 A Very Human Business 65 Gerald Holton William D. Carey Science and Social Attitudes 53 Address at the Einstein Session of the Pontifical Robert S. Morison Academy of Sciences 66 Carlos Chagas Humanity in Science: A Perspective and a Plea 60 June Goodfield Human Issues in Human Rights 68 Robert W. Kates 5. Scientists and Citizens Entering the Political Arena

The Scientist as a Citizen 74 Scientists, Engineers, and Citizens 94 J.R. Schenken Edward Wenk, Jr. Participatory Technology 76 Public Doubts About Science 95 James D. Carroll Philip Handler Public Interest Science 82 Scientists' Responsibility for Public Information96 Frank von Hippel and Joel Primack C.B. Raleigh Technology Observed: Attitudes of a Wary Public 88 Todd R. La Porte and Daniel Met lay

6. Science and the Modern World Autonomy and Accountability

A Time to Take Stock 98 Protectionism and the Universities 114 J.R. Pierce Robert L. Sproul! Abortion and the Limitations of Science 98 Science and Technology in a World Brian G. Zack Transformed 114 David A. Hamburg Intellectual Property: The Control of Scientific 99 Information Guidelines for Industry-Sponsored Research at Dorothy Nelkin Universities 117 Robert D. Varrin and Diane S. Kukich Differing Values in Academia and Industry 104 Philip Abelson The Social Process of Science 121 Gerard Piel Creationism in 20th-Century America 104 Ronald L. Numbers New Risks of Prejudice, Ethnocentrism, and The University. Industry, and Cooperative Violence 122 David A. Hamburg Research III A. Bartlett Giamatti

IV 6 7. Fraud and Misconduct in Science Putting Our House in Order

Fraud and the Structure of Science 126 Reported Laboratory Frauds in Biomedical William J. Broad Sciences 130 DeWitt' Stetten, Jr. Fraud, Science, and Safeguards 129 Edith D. Neimark Fraud in Science 131 Daniel E. Koshland, Jr. Research Practices 129 Harold Hillman Accuracy and Truth 131 Raymond R. White Fraud Investigation 129 George A. Silver NIH Fraud Guidelines 132 Michael R. Rosen and Brian F. Hoffman Fraud Investigation 129 George Silver

8. Professional Rights and Duties in the Health Sciences New Developments, New Debates

The New Biology: What Price Relieving Man's Impact of Genetic Manipulation on Society and Estate? 134 Medicine 152 Leon R. Kass Arno G. Motulsk %' Privacy, Confidentiality, and the Use of Medical Genetic Screening: Marvel or Menace? 158 Records in Research 143 Peter T. Rowley Leon Gordis and Ellen Gold American Medicine's Golden Age: What Happened to It? 147 billl C. Burnham

9. Science and Risk How Safe Is Safe Enough?

Social Benefit versus Technclogical Risk 166 Risk and Benefit in Environmental Law 191 Chauncey Starr Paolo F. Ricci and Lawrence S. Mo lton Risk and Responsibility 173 Science. Technology, and the Limits of David L. Bazelon Judicial Competence 196 Sheila Jasanoff and Dorothy Nelkin Comment on Societal Risk 176 David Okrent The Nature of Technological Hazard 201 C. Holzetzeinser, R.W. Kates and P. Slovic Risks of Risk Decisions 180 Chauncey Starr and Chris Whipple Science, Risk, and Public Policy 207 Willianz D. Ruckelshaus Regulation of Technological Activities: A New Approach 186 Simon Ranzo

7 v 10. Science and National Security Silos of Secrecy

United StatesSoviet Scientific Exchanges Academic Freedom and the Classified Victor F. Weisskopf and Robert R. Wilson Information System 219 Drift and Danger in U.S.Soviet Relations 212 Robert A. Rosenbaum et al. William D. Carey Scientifi" Freedom, National Security, and the First Amendment Science and the National Security 213 221 William D. Carey James R. Ferguson Scientific Exchanges and U.S. A Run Worth Making 225 William D. Carey National Security 214 Wiliam D. Carey and Frank Carlucci Federal R&D Budget: Guns versus Butter 126 The Government, Secrecy, and University F.A. Long Research 216 Scientific Communication and National Security Donald Kennedy in 1984 227 Handcuffing Science 217 Mitchel B. Wallerstein William D. Carey Scientific Communicziions and National Security Declaration on Prevention of Nuclear War 217 233 Conference on Nuclear Warfare Richard D. De Lauer

Epilogue 235

Appendix: AAAS Committee Reports

Civil Liberties of Scientists 238 Science and Human Welfare 244 AAAS Special Committee on Civil Liberties for AAAS Committee on Science in the Promotion of Scientists Human Welfare Social Aspects of Science 239 Scientific Freedom and Responsibility 249 AAAS Committee on the Social Aspects AAAS Committee on Scientific Freedom and of Science Responsibility

Index of Science References 257 Index 259

8 The great scientific advances of the twentieth century have and choices arising from the advances of science and its applications enabled us to sec far more deeply than ever before into the in a rapidly changing world. One manifestation of this concern was nature of matter and of life. They have also endowed mankind the establishment in 1976 of a Committee on Scientific Freedom and with power to alter the environment, and the living organisms in it, in Responstility, which had a specific mandate to consider these ways almost unimaginable to our ancestors. With increased power issues. Rosemary Chalk served w ith great ability and devotion the comes increased responsibility for the wise use of that power. The staff officer of this Committee, as 1 can testify from having worked release of nuclear energy, one of the great turning points in human with her as a member and (for two years) chairman of the Committee. history, has thrust upon us the necessity of preventing the destruction As the editor of this volume, she has selected articles, editorials, and of civilization by nuclear weapons. The emerging understanding of letters from the AAAS journal Science that deal with. scientific :if:: processes, and their application in modern biotechnology, will freedom and responsibility, the difficult ethical questions that have permit us to modify living organisms in ways that may result in great arisen in the practice of science and us applications, the risks and benefit or great harm. benefits of new technologies and the making of decisions concerning The wise use of these great and rapidly increasing powers in a them, the conflict between the traditional openness of science and the democratic society is everybody's business. A special responsibility, pressures for secrecy arising from concerns over national security by however, falls upon the scientific community. Scientists have placed goverment officials; and other related mailers. these new powers in the hands of mankind. Some scientists, at least, The reader who is concerned with any or all of the important and must assume the responsibility of pointing out, to the world at large, difficult problems discussed here can gain valuable illumination and new opportunities and dangers that may not at first be obvious to the new perspectives that will well repay a careful reading. 1 warmly public. The use of this new power to change the world raises new recommend this book to those concerned with these vital problems. ethical problems and dilemmas. The solutions are not simple, and scientists are not always wise when they attempt to deal with new John T. Edsall social problems arising from their discoveries. Passionate disagree- Department of Biochemistry ments can arise among conscientious and thoughtful people when and Molecular Biology they debate these issues. Harvard University The American Association for the Advancement of Science has necessarily played a major role in the debates over responsibilities As noted in the introduction, this book builds upon an earlier the development of the book and assisted in suggesting and locati..g collection of Si Lent e reprints prepared while I was the stall selected items The staff of the AAAS Publications Office, especially officer for the AAAS Committee on SuentifiL Freedom and Arthur Herschman, Kathryn Wolff, and Lonna Kobliek offered Responsibility. Amy Siberian, Grayce A Finger, and Corrine special ads ice and assistance at critical points in the development of Harris each contributed to the development of the reprint sales, and the book. My husband. Michael A Stoto, contributed many hours their efforts provided a valuable Lore of material now incorporated sots ing the technical glitches of our home computer system Finally, 1 into this text. express sincere gratitude to David Savold, who provided extensive 1 am indebted to Mark S. Frankel, program head for the AAAS time, talent, and patience throughout the editing and production Committee on Scientific Freedom and Responsibility, who sponsored process. The relationship between science and technology and society Scienc e. the weekly journal of the American Association for the a field of inqinry termed STS studies has fascinated many Advancement of Science. The material covers the period from 1949 students and scholars throughout recent decades Part of the until early 1987. providing a broad historical oven lc% of the emerg- fascination lies in the dynamic quality cf the relationship between ing relationship of science. technology and society in the postwar science and society. Science transforms society through its dis- period by authors well known in the scientific literature. Many of Lie coveries, but science is itself altered by social forces beyond the articles were prepared menially as AAAS presidential addresses. Phi laboratory walls. Beta Kappa talks, or keynote lectures at international conferences. In the aftermath of World War IL as scientists entered the corridors The collection is organized in reverse chronological order within of political, military, and economic power, they began to integrate chapter themes. Each chapter provides a focal point for particular their former ivory tower world of science with new social. com- issues that have characterized different stages of the evolving STS mercial, and governmental concerns. With a vision of science as an relationship. For example. the chapter on science and responsibility "endless frontier." in the words of Vannevar Bush. the scientific examines questions about the obligations that scientists bear for the leaders of the post-Hiroshima world sought to open up new v istas of social consequences of their work How should scientists respond to intellectual power. They designed a complex set of public and private social concerns about the uses of their discoveries? How can they arrangements to channel public resources toward the development of foster accuracy and integrity in research') To whom arc scientists creative scientific talent and the organization of new institutions for accountable? scientific research. Building on these reforms, they hoped to generate In addition to articles. the collection includes editorials reflecting new knowledge and technology to benefit society as a whole. different perspectives on science, technology. and society concerns Calls for more independence or freedom in science. in order to over the past four decades. These provocative essays capture the protect the self-guided direction of scientific inquiry and develop the thoughts and reflections of leaders of the scientific community who most promising areas of research, were met over time by c.jually sought to articulate and clarify the pressing problems ()leach period in strong calls for social responsibility and accountability in science, the the pages of Science. result of uneasy public concern about the directions in which laissez- In the late 1950s. for example, biologist Bentley Glass suggested faire science might be headed. The pioneering spirit that guided the that the freedom of science might he threatened more by forces of early relationship between science and technology and society gra- racism and apartheid. as illustrated by the segregationist battles of dually gave way t3 a new sense of accommodation and acceptance of Little Rock. Arkansas. and Pretoria. than by the technical achieve- regulation, as scientists and society as a whole sought new ways to ments of the Soy lc: Union as sy mbolized by the successful launching integrate into the ,:merging research agenda the public's concerns of the Sputnik satellite. with individual rights, public safely, and economic costs Letters to the editor and other published correspondence highlight Another pan of the fascination with the study of science. technolo- other concerns of the scientific community The exchange of letters in gy. and society is found in the contrast between objective and sub- 1982 between 'smer AAAS Executive 01 ficer William D Carey and jective knowledge. While the formulas. mathematics. and laboratory then Deputy Secretary of Defense Frank Carlucci initiated a new tests that characterize advanced scientific and technical infonnation wave of discussions within government and science policy circles are often beyond the understanding of most citizens. the social issues about the extent to which the openness of American scientific com- and problems associated with the development and use of science and munication threatens the national secunty interests of the U S gov- technology arc more easily comprehended. and they are experienced ernment. More recently the claim by St lent e editor Darnel E Kosh- more directly. Conflicts over the siting of nuclear power plants, for land, Jr., that "99.9999 percent of Isc,entific I reports are accurate and example, or decisions governing the applications of genetic engineer- truthful" generated a flurry of letters debating the extent to which ing, raise fundamental questions about the ethical and social pnnci- fraud causes serious damage in the scientific literature ples that should guide such activities. It is my hope that this volume will be a valuable resource document Is technological determinism what can be done should be done for those with professional interest in the field of science, technology, the best principle to invoke in shaping these technologies? How and society studies. This book is also designed as a supplemental text should siich issues as informed consent. individual rights, or utilita for university courses examining the social context of scienc" and nan pnnciples emphasizing the common good. affect these de- technology, both replacing and extending the earlier Si tent e Reprint cisions? If wt wish to develop science in a social and human context, Series on Scientific Freedom and Responsibility that was published by what means can different sectors of society express their prefer- by AAAS in the early 1980s. I believe the book may be of interest also ences and concerns? to lay readers who want to know more about what we may call the Science, Technology. and Sin :et). Erni rging Rc lution3hip.% pro- conscience of science For all readers, the book provides an in-depth vides a thorough introduction to these issues This anthology offers examination of the purposes and values that shape the directions of 85 articles. editonals. and letters published during the last 40 years in science today. RC In thc first half of the twentieth century, socntists on both sides of framework that would providc guidance for thc gcncralscientific the Atlantic confidently believed scientific progress would inevit- commuraty on the appropriate balancc between thc nada, : pro- ably !cad to positive social change. From their work on the fessional duties of the -...ientists and their emerging social obligations. frontiers of intellectual discovery, thcy felt, society would eventually Echoing themes introduced by C P Snow's address to the reap a harvest of progressive reform. 1960 AAAS Annual Meeting discards the doctrine of ethical neutral- But the aftermath of World War 11 tempered this optimistic confi- ity in scicncc, in which scientists disown responsibility for the ap- dence with the sober realization that the political and economic form plications of then research. He sets forth a rationale to replace this governing social change would inevitably shape the manner and doctrine. building upon the mtnnsic beauty and truth of basic scicncc methods by which scicncc would be applied to important social and the excitement of fundamental research. Sug6...-:ing that scien- problems. Thc realization that the mtnnsic beauty of atomic physics tists must extend their duty to question and sect It,e truth into ques- could lead to the death and destruction witnessed in Hiroshima tions of use and applications of their work. Snow concludes that prompted Robert Oppenheimer's famous comment that physicists scientists who have particular kruwledge about utc effects of their had now "known sin." Now that sacntists had successfully negoti- work in public affairs have amoral ..-..perativc t, say what they know. ated a new social contract that committed large amounts of public The issues raised by Russell anti Sri, w continued to echo in the funds to the support of research. they found a cy had to develop a new al tonals in Science for more than malty years as (Alias sought to framework of social accountability for the uscs and consequences of clarify ethical pnnciples for professional k onduct in put. affairs. this research. Thc editorials in this chapter suegcst altemativc ways to dcumnine Thc gradual understanding that social progress depended as much thc appropnatc balance bctwcei. re.-s of scient;st as a disen political and economic reform as on scientific achievement interested sccItcr of knowiedgc and a., .1 c.,ncerned cit. ze!it contem prompted many trading figures in science. enginecrmg, and the porary society. health sciences to explore ways in which scientists could help im- John T. Edsall in 1931 intcgratthe thict.ig of the:revious prove social conditions. (Nilo.% outside the world of science also decades into a new statanent on the profession... aid sot r-sponsi- sought to define this role for scientists. bilitics of scicntists. Al.c .vugh Me two areas have much it zommon, Writing in the 1950s amid Cold War tensions and public concern he writes, the problans of socialr ponsibility inience -lust be about nuclear tests, Bertrand Russell establishes a powerful theme by considerest in light of the general .ode of scientific behal :or that appealing to the role of socntists as citinns in clarify ing the nature of evolved ovcr the past few ..entunes Thus an mph_ .% on the ;ntcgrity their responsibility to society. "Facts which ought to guide the de- and truthfulness of scientific claims 1,1 the political arena r,, 1st iccv.- cisions of statesmen," he proclaims. "do not acquire their due im- sarily be an important measure of the public rolef the .cient.. portance if they remain burial in scientific journals." He denounces Anna JHarrison continues this thane in two of he! scientists who in tandem with the various industries connected with suggcsting that scicntists. indiv iduaily and collecti.ely air obligatc.; armaments, had become "merchants of death." and he seeks to rally to providc their technical expertise L.; those who need informat :o the mainstream members of the scientific community to participate in make decisions about the uscs and directions of science and technolo public debates about the consequences of nuclear war. If dis- gy. But thcy are responsible for the integnty of that information and interested scientists do not speak out." Russell warns, "thc others w ill should identify (Arad) their uncertaintics, or biascs, in attempting to succeed in conveying a distorted impression. not only to the public fit preliminary re..earch findings to important putlic policy problem~ but also to the politicians." This chapter presents that recur throughout the field of Calls for greater social responsibility in science increased sharply science, technology, and society studies Cancans about the im- in response to the growing stockpile of nuclear weapons. ',he recogni- portance of protecting the objectivity of scientific knowledge. the tion of environmental damage from pesticidcs, and tile American uscs and social applications of research, and the nerd to reconcile public's desire to end the Vietnam war. These themcs found their way profess4onal values with political and social interests continue to into the pages of Science as various authors ..ought to develop a dominate discussion% about the meaning of responsil ,.ity in science -- RC 4

personsto seethattheinformation reaches the minds and hearts of vast numbers of people.I do not think this work can be successfully accomplished except by the help of men of science. They. alone, can speak with the authority that is necessary to combat the misleading statements of those scientists who have permitted themselves to become merchants of death.Ifdisin- terested scientists do not speak out, the otherswillsucceedinconveyinga distorted impression, not only to the public but also to the politicians. Science, ever sinceitfirstexisted,entirelyfeasible, but thatit was in- has had important effectsin mattershuman and he would have nothing to thatlie outside the purview of puredo with it. Obstacles to Individual Action science. Men of science have differed astotheirresponsibilityforsuch It must be admitted that there are effects. Some hay.. said that the func-Affecting Public Opinion obstacles toindividual actionin our tion of the scientist in societyisto age which did not exist at earlier times. supply knowledge, and that he need not ModerndemocracyandmodernGalileo could make his own telescope. concern himself with the use to whichmethods of publicity have made theBut once when I was talking with a this knowledge is put.I do not thinkproblem ofaffectingpublic opinionvery famous astronomer he explained that this view is tenable, especially inquite different from what it used to be.that the telescope upon which his work our age. The scientist is also a citizen;The knowledge that the public pos-depended owed its existence to the bene- and citizens who have any special skillsesses on any important issue is derivedfactions of enormously rich- men, and. have a public duty to see, as far as theyfrom vast and powerful organizations:if he had not stood well with them, his can, that their skill is utilized in accord-the press, radio, and, above all,tele-astronomicaldiscoverieswould have ance with the public interest.Histori-vision.The knowledge that govern-been impossible.More frequently, a cally, the functions of the scientist inments possess is more limited. They arescientist only acquires access to enor- public life have generally been recog-too busy to search out the facts formouslyexpensiveequipmentifhe nized. The Royal Society was foundedthemselves, and consequently they knowstands well with the government of his by Charles H as an antidote to "fanati-only what their underlings think goodcountry. He knows that if he adopts cism" which had plunged England intofor them unless there is such a power-a rebellious attitude he and his family a long period of civil strife. The scien-ful movement in a different sense thatare likely to perish along with the rest tists of that time did not hesitate topoliticianscannotignoreit. Factsof civilized mankind.Itisatragic speak out on public issues, such aswhich ought to guide the decisions ofdilemma, and I do not think that one religioustoleration and thefollyofstatesmen--for instance, as to the pos-should censurea man whatever his prosecutionsfor witchcraft.Butal-sible lethal qualities of falloutdo notdecision; but I do thinkand I think though science has, in various ways atacquire their due importance if theymen ofsciers.,should realizethat various times, favored what may beremainburiedinscientificjournals.unless something rather drastic is done called a humanitarian outlook,ithasThey acquire their due importance onlyunder the leadership or through the from the first had an intimate and sinis-when they become known to so manyinspiration of some part of the scientific ter connection with war.Archimedesvoters that they affect the course of theworld, the human race, like the Gada- sold his skill to the Tyrant of Syracuse elections.In general, there is an oppo-rene swine,willrush down a steep for use against the Romans; Leonardosition to widespread publicity for suchplace to destruction in blind ignorance secured a salary from the Duke of facts.Thisoppositionspringsfromof the fate that scientific skill has pre- Milan for his skill in the art of fortifi-various sources, some sinister, somepared for it. cation; and Galileo got employmentcomparatively respectable. At the bot- It is impossible in the modern world under the Grand Duk, of Tuscany be-tom of the moral scale thereis thefor a man of science to say with any cause he could calculate the trajectoriesfinancial interest of the various indus- honesty. "My businessisto provide of projectiles.In the French Revolu-tries connected with armaments. Thenknowledge, and what use is made of tion the scientists who were not guil-there are various effects of a somewhat the knowledge is not my responsibility." litined were set to making new explo-thoughtless patriotism which believes in The knowledge that a man of science sives,but Lavoisier was not spared, secrecy and in what is called "tough-provides may fallinto the hands of because he was only discovering hydro- ness."Butperhaps more important gen which, in those days. was not a men or institutions devoted to utterly than either of these is the unpleasant-unworthy objects.I do not suggest that weapon of war. There have been some ness of thefacts,which makes thea man of science, or even a large body honorable exceptions to the subservi-general public turn aside to pleasanter ence of scientists to warmongers. Dur-topics such as divorces and murders. ingtheCrimean WartheBritish The consequence is that what ought to The authorisafellowof TrinityCollege. Cambridge, and of the Royal Society. This article Government consulted Faraday as tobe known widely throughout the gen- is the text of an address delivered 24 September the feasibility of attack by poisonouseral public will not be known unless 1959 in London at a meeting of British scientists convenedby theCampaignforNuclearDis- gases.Faraday repliedthatitwas great efforts are made by disinterested armament. 13 5 of men of science, can altogether pre-more than half the population of thewhich control most of human activity ventthis, but they can diminish theglobe. could be ended. But at presentis apt to find himself no longer in the magnitude of the evil. almost allthe go% ernments of greativory tower, with a wide outlook over There is another direction in whichstates consider that it is better to spenda sunny landscape, but in the dark and men of science can attempt to providemoney on killing foreigners than onsubterranean dungeon upon which the leadership. They can suggest and urgekeeping their own subjects alive.Pos-ivory tower was erected. To risk such in many waysthevalue ofthosesibilities of a hopeful sort in whatevera habitation demands courage.It will branches of science of which the im-field can best be worked out and statednot be necessary to inhabit the dungeon portant practicalusesarebeneficialauthoritatively by men of science; .rid,if there are many who are willing to and not harmful. Consider what mightsince they can do this work better thanriskit, for everybody knows that the be done if the money at present spentothers, itis part of their duty to do it.modern world depends upon scientists, on armaments were spent on increasing As the world becomes more tech-and, if they are insistent, they must be and distributing the food supply of thenically unified, life in an ivory towerlistened to. We have it in our power to world and diminishing the populationbecomes increasingly impossible.Notmake a good world; and, therefore, pressure.In a few decades, povertyonlyso;the man who standsoutwith whatever labor and risk, we must andmalnutrition,which nowafflictagainstthepowerfulorganizationsmake it.

Between the two opposing positions lies a third position which holds that at least some scientists, although they fear the dangers posed by a further increase in military power, have the duty to work on projects that the government deems necessary, but that scientists also have the duty to state their opinions on matters lying outside science. If this is the age of specialization, so this argument runs, itis also the age of specialists working together on teams. Public officials should have the final word, but any attempt to With science supporting an ever expand- an airport entitles one to select destinations understand the full range of consequences ing military technology, many people in this for travelers. The area of special competence military, political, economic, and moralof country are wondering to what extent Amer- of scientists lies in the discovery of technical new advances in research, requires the views ican scientists should assume responsibility facts; decisions of public policy rest with of the men who understand those advances for the uses to which the government puts elected or appointed public officials. best. their discoveries and talents. It has always An oppositeopinion concerningthe It is this third position that expresses our been possible, of course, to speak of pure obligations of scientists holds that scientists own convictions, and that seems to express research, just as it has always been possible, should consider the possible consequences of the convictions of most of the persons in this we suppose, to speak of the pure act of sit- any piece of research before it is begun, and country who are presently concerned with ting down to a meal and consuming it with if the research is judged more a threat to the these problemsalthough, admittedly, impeccable table manners. But any piece of country, or humanity at large, than a benefit, agreement on general principles does not behavior can acquire moral properties, given they should refuse their services. A man can- necessarily imply agreement on particular the appropriate circumstanceseven sitting not delegate to a superior the responsibility cases. The first position errs because, pushed down to eat a hamburger, as recent de- for the moral consequences of his acts, the to its conclusion, it turns the citizen's obliga- velopments in the South have shown. second view claims. To be sure, to predict tions to the state into despotism; while the One view of the scientist's responsibility future applications of new discoveries calls second position errs because, if pushed, it far the social consequences of scientific more for the talents of a prophet than forturns the moral integrity of the individual truths is that this responsibility ends with the those of a scientist. No one now knows to into anarchy. The third position seeks the scientist's willingness to do work directly or what uses, or abuses, the fall of parity in mean between the scientist's assuming too Indirectly for the government, including physics may some day prove amenable. But little responsibility for the consequences of work on weapons. According to this view, somewhere along the line, basic research be- his research and his assuming too much re- being a good scientist no more gives one comes applied research, and forecasts about sponsibility. special privileges in determining national the uses of discoveries become something policy than being a good information clerk at more than anybody's guess. 6 It consists of the invention of cate- goriesor, if you like, of the division of moral labor. That is, the scientists who want to contract out say, we produce the tools. We stop there. It is for youthe rest of the world, the politi- ciansto say how the tools are used. The tools may be used for purposes which most of us would regard as bad. If so, we are sorry. But as scientists, that is no concern of ours. Scientists are the most important oc-among other groups of similar educa- This is the doctrine of the ethical cupational group in the world today. Attion and income. I do not apologize forneutrality of science. I can't accept it this moment, what they do is of passion-considering that a good thing. for an instant. I don't believe any sci- ate concern to the whole of human A close friend of mine is a very dis-entist of serious feeling can accept it. society. At this moment, the scientiststinguished scientist. He is also one ofIt is hard, some think, to find the precise have little influence on the world effectthe few scientists I know who has livedstatements which will prove it wrong. of what they do. Yet, potentially, theywhat we used to call a Bohemian life Yet we nearly all feel intuitively that can have great influence. The rest of theWhen we were both younger, he thoughtthe invention of comfortable categories world is frightened both of what theyhe would undertake historical researchis a moral trap. It is one of the easier dothat is,of theintellectualdis-to see how many great scientists hadmethods of letting the conscience rust. coveries of scienceand of its effect.been as fond of women as he was. IIt is exactly what the early 19th century The rest of the world, transferring itsthink he would have felt mildly sup-,economists, such as Ricardo, did in the fears,isfrightenedof the scientistsported if he could have found a prele-face of the facts of the first industrial themselves and tends to think of themdent. I remember his reporting to merevolution. We wonder now how men, as radically different from other men. that his researches hadn't had any luck.intelligentmen, can have beenso As an ex-scientist, if I may call myselfThe really great scientists seemed tomorally blind. We realize how the ex- so, I know that is nonsense. I have evenvary from a few neutral characters toposure of that moral blindness gave tried to express in fiction some kindsa large number who were depressinglyMarxism its apocalyptic force. We are of scientific temperament and scientific"normal." The only gleam of comfortnow, in the middle of the scientific or experience. I know well enough thatwas to be found in the life of Jeromesecond industrial revolution, in some- scientists are very much like other men.Cardan; and Cardan wasn't anythingthing like the same position as Ricardo. After all, we are all human, even iflike enough to outweigh all the others.Are we going to let our consciences some of us don't give that appearance. So scientists are not much differentrust? Can we ignore that intimation we I think I would be prepared to risk afrom other men. They are certainly nonearly all have, that scientists have a generalization.ThescientistsI haveworse than other men. But they do differunique responsibility? Can we believe known (and because of my official lifefrom other men in one thing. That isit, that science is morally neutral? I have known as many as anyone inthe point I started with. Whether they To meit would be dishonestto the world) have been in certain respectslike it or not, what they do is of criticalpretend otherwisethere is only one just perceptibly more morally admirableimportance for the human race. Intel-answer to those questions. Yet I have than most other groups of intelligentlectually, it has transformed the climatebeen brought up in the presence of men. of our time.Socially.itwill decidethe same intellectual categories as most That is a sweeping statement, and Iwhether we live or die, and how wewestern scientists. It would also be dis- mean it only in a statistical sense. Butlive or die. It holds decisive powers forhonest to pretend that I find it easy to I think there is just a little in it. Thegood and evil. That is the situation inconstruct a rationale which expresses moral qualities I admire in scientistswhich the scientists findthemselves.what I now believe. The best I can are quite simple ones, but I am veryThey may not have asked for it, or mayhope for is to fire a few sighting shots. suspicious of attempts to oversubtilizeonly have asked for it in part, but theyPerhaps someone who sees more clearly moral qualities.Itis nearly always acannot escape it. They think, many ofthan I can will come along and make sign, not of true sophistication, but ofthe more sensitive of them, that theya real job of it. a specific kind of triviality. So I admiredon't deserve to have this weight of in scientists very simple virtueslikerespo, sibility heaved upon them. All The Beauty of Science courage,truth-telling, kindnessinthey want to do is to get on with their Let me begin with a remark which which, judged by the low standardswork. I sympathize. But the scientistsseems some way off the point. Anyone which the rest of us manage to achieve.can'tescapetheresponsibilityanywho has ever worked in any science the scientists are not deficient. I thinkmore than they, or the rest of us, canknows how much esthetic joy he has on the whole the scientists make slightlyescape the gravity of the moment inobtained. That is, in the actual activity better husbands and fathers than mostwhich we stand. of science, in the process of making a of us, and I admire them for it. I don't discovery, however humble itis,one know the figures, andIshould be Doctrine of Ethical Neutrality can'thelpfeeling an awareness of curious to have them sorted out, but There is of course one way to con- I am prepared to bet that the propor-tract out. It has been a favorite way Sir C.P. Snow. Bntish author. is visiting prole cor of tion of divorces among scientistsisfor intellectual persons caught in the English at the University of California, Berkeley This article is based on ..n address given 27 December at the slightly but significantly less than thatmidst of water too rough for them. AAAS Annual Meeting 15 7 beauty. The subjective experience, thereal to engineers. When they fe;get haa dozen open and notorious ones, esthetic satisfaction, seems exactly thewhen they begin io design heavy-powerwhich are on the recorl for anyone to same as the satisfaction one gets froirequipment a,out wice as heavy asitreadr:::.ging from the "discovery" of writing a perm or a novel, or compos-needs to be, engineers are the first tothe L radiation to the singular episode ing a piece of music. I don't think any-knew that they are lacking virtue. of the Piltdown man. one has succeeded in destinguishing be- There is no doubt, then, about the We have all,if we have lived any tweci them. The lierature of scientificesthetic content of science, both in thetime in the scientihc world, heard pri- discovery is full of this esthe#:.; jcy. Theactivity and the result. But esthetics hasvatetalk of something likeanother very best communication ofit that Ino connection with morals,say thedozen cases which for various reasons know comes in G. H. Hardy's book,categorizers. I eln't want to waste timeare not yet public property. In some A Mathematician's Apology. Grahamon peripheral issuesbut are you qu;tecases, we know the motives for the Greene once said he thoi.ght that, alongsure of that? Or is it possible that thesecheating sometimes, but not always, with Henry James's prefaces. this wascategories are inventions to make ussheer personal advantage, such as get- the best account of the artistic experi-evade the human and social conditionsting money or a job. But not al .ays. ence ever written. But one meets thein which we now exist? But let us moveA special kind of vanity has led more same thing throughout the history ofstraight on to something else, which isthan one man into scientific faking. At science, Brlyars great yell of triumphright in the grain of the activity ofa lower level of research, there are pre- when he saw he could construct a self-science and which is at the same timesumably some more cases. There must consistent,non-Euclideangeometry;quintessentially moral. I mean, the de-have been occasional Ph.D. students Rutherford's revelation to his colleaguessire to find the truth. who scraped by with the help of a bit that he knew what the atom was like; of fraud. Darwin's slow, patient, timorous cer- But thetotal number of allthese tainty that at last he had got there The Search for Truth men is vanishingly small by the side of all these are voices, different voices, of By truth, J don't intend anything com-the total number of scientists. Incident- esthetic ecstasy. plicated, once again. I am using theally, the effect on science of such frauds That is not the end of it. The resultwo a scientist uses it. We all knowis also vanishingly small. Science is a of the activity of science, the actualthatitephilosophical examination ofself-correcting system. That is, no fraud finished piece of scientific work, has anthe concept of empirical truth gets us(or honest mistake) is going to stay un- esthetic value in itself. The indgmentsinto some curious complexities, but mostdetected for long. There is no need for passed on it by other scientists will morescientists really don't care. They knowan extrinsic scientific criticism, because often than not be expressed in estheticthat the truth, as they use the word andcriticism is inherent in the process it- terms:"That'sbeautiful!"or "Thatas the rest of us use it in the languageself. So that all that a fraud ..an do is really is very pretty!" (as the under-of common speech, is what makes sci-waste the time of the scientists who stating English tend to say). The es-ence work. That is good enough forhave to clear it up. thetics of scientific constructs, like thethem. On it rests the whole great edifice The remarkable thing is not the hand- esthetics of works of art, are variegated.of modern science. They have a sneak-ful of scientists who deviate from the We think some of the great syntheses,ing sympathyforRutherford, who,search for truth but the overwhelming like Newton's, beautiful because of theirwhen asked to examine the philosoph-numbers who keep toit.Thatis a classical simplicity, but we see a differentical bases of science, was inclined todemonstration, absolutely clear for any- kind of beauty in the rela'ivisticex-reply, as he did to the metaphysicianone to see, of moral behavior on a very tension of the wave equation or theSamuel Alexander: "Well, what havelarge scale. interpretation of the structure of de-you been talking all your life. Alexan- We take it for granted. Yet it is very oxyribonucleic acid, perhaps because ofder? Just hot air! Nothing but hot air!"important. It differentiates science in its the touch of unexpectedness. Scientists Anyway, truth in their own straight-widest sense (which includes scholar- know their kinds of beauty when theyforward sense is what the scientists areship) from all other intellectual activi- see them. They are suspicious, and sci-trying to find. They want to find whatties. Thereisa built-in moral com- entific history shows they have alwaysis there. Without that desire, there isponent right in the core of the scientific been right to have been so, when ano science. It is the driving force of theactivity itself. The desire to find the subject is in an "ugly" state. For ex-whole activity. It compels the scientisttruth is itself a moral impulse, or at ample, mostphysicistsfeelintheirto have an overriding respect for truth,least contains a moral impulse. The bones that the present bizarre assemblyevery stretch of the way. That is,ifway in which a scientist tries to find of nuclear particles, as grotesque as ayou're going to find what is there. youthe truth imposes on him a constant stamp collection, can't possibly be, inmustn't deceive yourself or anyone else.moral discipline. We say a scientific the long run, the last word. Ylu mustn'tlieto yourself. At theconclusionsuch as the contradiction We should not restrict the estheticcrudest level, you mustn't fake your ex-of parity by Lee and Yangis "true" values to what we call "pLre" science.periments. in the limited sense of scientific truth, Applied science has its beauties, which Curiously enough, scientists do try tojust as we say that it is "beautiful" ac- are, in my view, identicalin nature.behave like that. A short time ago. Icordingtothecriteriaofscientific The magnetron has been a marvelouslywrote a novel in which the story hingedesthetics. We also know that to reach useful device, butit was a beautifulon a case of scientific fraud. But I madethis conclusion took a set of actions device, not exactly apart from its utilityone of my characters, who was himselfwhich would have been useless without but because it did, with such supremea very good scientist, say that, consider-the moral nature. That is,all through economy, precisely what it was designeding the opportunities and temptations,the marvelous experiments of Wu and to do. Right down in the field of de-itis astonishing how few such casesher colleagues, there was the constant velopment, the esthetic experience is asthere are. We have all heard of perhapsmoral exercise of seeking and telling

.16 8 the truth. To scientists, who are brought The personal links within this inter- Itis very difficult to see what else up in this climate, this seems as naturalnational world were very close. Itisthey could have done. All this began as breathing. Yet it is a wonderful thing.worth remembering that Peter Kapitza,intheHitlerwar.Mostscientists Even if the scientific activity containedwho was a loyal Soviet citizen, honoredthought then that Nazism was as near only this one moral component, thatmy country by working in Rutherford'sabsolute evil as a human society can alone would be enough to let us saylaboratory for m*ny years. He becamemanage. Imyself thought so.Istill that it was morally un-neutral. a fellow of the Royal .3..-";..ty, a fellowthink so, without qualification. That But is this the only moral component?of Trinity College, Cambridge, and thebeing so, Nazism had to be fought, and All scientists would agree about thefounder and kingpin of the best physicssincethe Nazis might make fission beauty and the truth. In the westernclub Cambridge has known. He neverbombswhich wethoughtpossible world, they wouldn't agree on muchgave up his Soviet citizenship and isuntil 1944, and which was a continual more. Some will feel with me in whatnow direc'or of the Institute of Physicalnightmare if one was remotely in the I am going to say. Some will rint. ThatProblems in Moscow. Through him aknowwell, then, we had to make them doesn't affect me much, except that Igeneration of English scientists came totoo.Unless one was anunlimited am worried by the growth of an attitudehave personal knowledge of their Rus-pacifist, there was nothing else to do. I think very dangerous, a kind of tech-sian colleagues. These exchanges wereAnd unlimited pacificism is a position nological conformitydisguised asthen, and have remained, more valuablewhich most of us cannot sustain. cynicism. I shall say a little more aboutthan all the diplomatic exchanges PV. Therefore I respect, and to a large that later. As for disagreement, G. H.invented. extent share, the moral attitudes of Hardy used to comment that a serious The Kapitza phenomenon n'tthose scientists who devoted themselves man ought not to waste his time statingtake place now. I hope to li seeto making the bomb. But the trouble is, a majority opinionthere are plenty ofthe day when a young Kapitza t..in oncewhen you get onto any kind of moral others to do that. That was the voice ofmore work for 16 years in Berkeley orescalator, to know whether you're ever classicalscientificnonconformity.ICambridge and then go back to angoing to be able to get off. When scien- wish that we heard it more often. eminent place in his own country. Whentists became soldiers they gave up somethat can happen, we are all right. Butthing, so imperceptibly that they didn't Science in the Twenties after the idyllic years of world science,realize it, of the full scientific life. Not Let me cite some grounds for hope.we passed into a tempest of history,intellectually. I see no evidence that Any of us who were working in scienceand, by an unfortunate coincidence, wescientific work on weapons of maxi- before 1933 can remember what thepassed into a technological tempest too.mum destruction has been in any in- atmosphere was like.Itis a terrible The discovery of atomic fission broketellectual respect different from other bore when aging men in their fiftiesup the world of international physics.scientific work. But thereis a moral speak about the charms of their youth."This has killed a beautiful subject,"difference. Yet I am going to irritate youjust assaid Mark Oliphant, the father figure of It may bescientists who are better Talleyrand irritated his juniorsby say-Australian physics, in 1945, after themen than I am often take this attitude, ing that unless one was on the scene be-bombs had dropped.Inintellectualand I have tried to represent it faith- fore 1933, one hasn't known the sweet-terms, he has not turned out to be right.fully in one of my booksthat this is ness of the scientific life. The scientificIn spiritual and moral terms, I some-a moral price which, in certain circum- world of the twenties was as near totimes think he has. stances, has to be paid. Nevertheless, it being a full-fledged international com- A good deal of the international com-is no good pretending that there is not a munity as we are likely to get. Don'tmunity of science remains inothermoral price. Soldiers have to obey. That think I'm saying that the men involvedfieldsin great areas of biology, foris the foundation of their morality. It were superhuman or free from theexample. Many biologists are feelingis not the foundation of the scientific ordinary frailties. That wouldn't comethe identical liberation, the identical jpvmorality.Scientists have to question well from me, who have spent a frac-at taking part in a magnanimous enter-and if necessary to rebel. I don't want tion of my writing life pointing out thatprise, that physicists felt in the twenties.to be misunderstood. I am no anarchist. scientists are, first and foremost, men.Itis more than likely that the moralI am not suggesting that loyalty is not But the atmosphere of the twenties inand intellectual leadership of sciencea prime virtue. I am not saying that all science was filled with an air of benev-will pass to biologists, and it is amongrebellion is good. But I am saying that olence and magnanimity which tran-them that we shall find the Ruther-loyalty can easily turn into conformity, scended the people who lived in it. fords, Bohrs, and Francks of the nextand that conformity can often be a Anyone who ever spent a week ingeneration. cloak for the timid and self-seeking. So Cambridge or Gottingen or Copenhagen can obedience, carriedto the limit. The Physicist, a Military Resource feltit all round him. Rutherford had When you think of the long and gloomy very human faults, but he was a great Physicists have had a bitterer task.history of man, you will find that far man with abounding human generosity.With the discovery of fission, and withmore, and far more hideous, crimes For him the world of science was asome technical breakthroughs in elec-have been committed in the name of world that lived on a plane above thetronics, physicists became, almost over-obedience than have ever been com- nation-state, and lived there with joy.night, the most important military re-mitted in the name of rebellion. If you That was at least as true of those twosource a nation-state could call on. Adoubt that, read William Shirer's Rise other great men, Niels Bohr and Franck,largenumber ofphysicistsbecameand Fall of the Third Reich. The Ger- and some of that spirit rubbed off onsoldiers not in uniform. Si) they haveman officer corps were brought up in to the pupils round them. The same wasremained,inthe advanced societies,the most rigorous code of obedience. true of the Roman school of physics. ever since. To them, no more honorable and God- 17 9 fearing body of men could conceivablythe best informed of us always exag- acertainty,a sane man doesnot exist. Yet in the name of obedience,gerate these periods. hesitate. they were party to, and assisted in, the This we know, with the certainty of Itis the plain duty of scientists to most wicked large-scale actions in thewhat shall I callit?eng;neeringexplain this either-or. It is a duty which history of the world. truth.We alsomostofusareseems to me to come from the moral Scientists must not go that way. Yetfamiliar with statistics and the naturenature of the scientific activity itself. the duty to question is not much of aof odds. We know, with the certainty The same duty, though ina nrich support when you are living in the mid-of statistical truth, thatif enough ofmore pleasant form, arises with respect dle of an organized society. I speak withthese weapons are made, by enough dif-to the benevolent powers of science. feeling here. I was an official for 20ferent states, some of them are goingFor scientists know. and again with the years.I went into official life at theto blow up. through accident. or folly.certainty of scientific knowledge, that beginning of the war, for the reasonsor madnessthe motives don't matter.we posscss every scientific fact we need that prompted my scientific friends toWhat does matter is the naturc of theto transform the physical life of half begin to make weapons. I stayed in thatstatistical fact. the world. And transform it within the life until a year ago, for the same rea- All this we know. We know itin aspan of people now living. I mean, we son that made my scientific friends turnmore direct sense than any politicianhave all the resources to help half the into civilian soldiers. The official's lifebecause it comes from our direct ex-world live as long as we do and eat in England is not quite so disciplinedperience. It is part of our minds. Areenough. All that is missing is the will. as a soldier's, but it is very nearly so. Iwe going to let it happen? We know that. Just as we know that think I know the virtues, which are All this we know. It throws uponyou inthe United States, and to a very great, of the men who live thatscientists a direct and personal respon-slightly lesser extent we in the United disciplinedlife.I also know what forsibility. Itis not enough to say thatKingdom. have been almost unimagi- me was the moral trap. I, too, had gotscientists have a responsibility as citi-nably lucky. We are sitting like people onto an escalator. I can put the resultzens. They have a much greater onein a smart and cozy restaurant and we in a sentence: I was coming to hide be-than that, and one different in kind. Forare eating comfortably, looking out of hind the institution: I was losing thescientists have a moral imperative tothe window into the streets. Dov..1 on power to say no. say what they know. It is going to maketile pavement are people who are look- them unpopular in their own nation-ing up atus. people who by chance A Spur to Moral Action states. It may do worse than make themhave different colored skins from ours. Only a very bold man, when he isunpopular. That doesn't matter. Or atand are rather hungry. Do you wonder a member of an organized society, canleast, it does matter to you and me, butthat they don't like us all that much? keep the power to say no. Itell youit must not count in the face of theDo you wonder that we sometimes feel that, not being a very bold man, or onerisks. ashamed of ourselves. as we look out who finds it congenial to stand alone, through that plate glass? Alternatives away from his colleagues. We can't ex- Well.itis within our power to get pect many scientists to do it.Is there For we genuinely know the risks. Westarted on that problem. We are moral- any tougher ground for them to standare faced with an either-or. and wely impelled to. Vve all know that. if the on? I suggest to you that there is. I be-haven't much time. The either is ac-human species does solvethatonc. lievethat there is a spring of moralceptance of arestrictionof nuclearthere u illbe consequences which are action in the scientific activity which isarmaments. This is going to begin, justthemselves problems For instance, the at least as strong as the search for truth.as a token, with an agreement on thepopulation ot the world will become The name of this spring is knowledge.stopping of nuclear tests. The Unitedembarrassingl}large. But thatis an- Scientists know certain things in a fash-States is not going to get the 99.9-per-other challenge There are going to be ion more immediate and more certaincent "security" that it has been askingchallenges to ow intelligence and to than those who don't comprehend whatfor. This is unobtainable. though thereour moral nature as long as man re- science is.Unless we are abnormallyare other bargains that the United Statesmains man. Afterall.a challenge is weak or abnormally wicked men, thiscould probably secure. I am not goingnot. as the word is coming to he used. knowledge isboundtoshape ourto conceal from you that this course in-an ectise for slinking off and doing actions. Most of us are timid, but to anvolves certain risks. They are quite ob-nothing A challenge is something to extent, knowledge gives us guts. Per-vious, and no honest man is going tobe picked up. haps it can give us guts strong enoughblink them. That is the either. The or is For allthese reasons.Ibelieve the for the jobs in hand. not a risk but a certainty.Itisthis.world communitof scientists has a I had better take the most obviousThere is no agreement on tests. Thefinalresponsibiligupon ita greater example. All physical scientists knownuclear arms race between the Unitedresponsibilitythanis pressing on any thatitis relatively easy to make plu-States and the U.S.S.R. not only con-oth-r body ot men. I do not pretend to tonium. We know this, not as a jour-tinues but accelerates. Other countriesknow how the) will bear this responsi- nalistic fact at second hand, but as ajoin in. Within, at the most. six years.bilig. These ma be famous last words. factin our own experience. We canChina and several other states have abutIhave an inevinguishable hope. work out the number of scientific andstock of nuclear bombs. Within. at theFor. as i have said. there is no doubt engineering personnel needed for a na-most, ten years, some of those bombsthat the scientific activity is both beauti- tion-state to equip itself with fission andare going off.I am saying this as re-ful and truthful. I cannot prove it, but fusion bombs. We know that,for asponsibly as I can. That is the certaint).I believe that. simply because scientists dozen or more states, it will only takeOn the one side, therefore, we have acannot escape their own knowledge. perhaps six years. perhaps less. Evenfinite risk. On the other side we have athey also won't be able to avoid show- certainty of disaster. Between a risk anding themselves disposed to good. 18 10

cerned with the social implications of their work to say that the scientist, acting as a scientist, can press on wherever and as far as his curiosity and ability lead and permit, and that the same person, now acting as a citizen, can forget his scientific interests in helping to make decisions concerning science and its applications and its control. This is a com- forting doctrine, but is it any more realistic than to expect the scientist to open all the bottles to see what they contain while the same person, as citizen, leaves firmly stop- J.R. Wiggins, editor of the Washington same question, in a somewhat more manage- pered any that contains an ugly jinni? Post and Times Herald, has been askingable form. in asking C.P. Snow, after his Quite aside from the impossiblity of undo- some of his scientist friends: If you could put address at the 1960 AAAS annual meeting: ing the past, and quite aside from the im- the jinni back into the bottle, would you do If a scientist can see with reasonable claritypossibility of preventing others from doing it? Would you, if you had the choice, undo that continuing a particular line of research iswhat a particular person refrains from doing, the work that led to the release of atomiclikely to produce information that might becan we expect the scientistnot an idealized energy? The question is not historical, for turned to evil ends, should he continue, orabstraction but the ',uman being in the next obviously the past cannot be undone. Neither should he stop? When phrased in this way,officeto differentiate his role as a scientist is it a strictly scientific question, for if Otto the question poses a personal choice, butfrom his no- as a citizen? We do not expect Hahn, Lise Meitner, Enrico Fermi, and their only a personal one. A particular scientistthe cictgyman to forget his cloth when he collaborators had not released the atomic jin- can avoid personal responsibility for findingsgoes to vote. Nor do we ask the member of ni, others would have. The point of the ques-that may be used for evil purposes. But he another profession to stop and ask himself: tion is its social significance, not only forcannot prevent those findings from beingAm I as a member of my profession or atomic energy itself, but also as a forewarn-made. If he stops, someone else will contin-as a citizen of my country? What can we ing of problems that may lie ahead. Consider ue. fairly ask of a scientist? the moral, social, and political dilemmas that Among the several answers made to these Would you put the jinni back into the would folic N upon ability to control the questions is the statement that the scientistbottle if you could? The question can start a weather on a world-wide scale, to control plays two roles, one as scientist and the other lively discussion. It can also lead to a per- genetic material, or to control human beas citizen, and that he can and should keepplexing consideration of whether or not the havior. the two roles separate. The distinction goes scientist can separate his roles. WarrenW,,-.averposed essentially the beyond saying that scientists should be con-

concern Other aspects of man's effects on his environmentnotablyair and water pollutionalso stirred it up. Questions from the audience at a session on nest control, for instance, indicated widespread worry about the use of chemical pesticides whose residues last a long time, such as DDT. The questioners were looking for the kind of assurance they got from George L. Mehren, Assistant Secretary of Agricul- ture, that most Government research money inpesticidesthe1966 figure was 79 The recent meeting of the Americanpoint is that there is still time for reflective percentis now going into non-chemical Association for the Advancement of Science thought, for setting objectives, for weighingmeans. provided an impressive body of evidence alternative courses of actionin short, to act The impact of science on man's social en- that many scientists now are indeed worried responsibly." vironment drew concern, too, as the sessions about theirsocial responsibility. The an- In the kind of exhortation that had telling on the aces of humankind showed. The nounced theme of the week's sessions was effect on its audience 'Jut could earn littlerrtc..A heated area of dispute was on the ques- "How Man Has Changed His Planet," andspace in newspapers, Malone went on: "Iftion of how scientific inquiry would do least the phrase provided far more than a take-offthe exploration of weather modification addsto feed the fires of racial animosity. One point for bragging. It was a symptom of the one more small brick to the edifice that con- school held that the best thing to do was stay unease that permeated the meeting. tains world conflict and supports world away entirely from investigations of the dif- Thus Thomas F. Malone warned one ses-order, science will have served a noble pur- ferences between the races, which one schol- sion that the possible consequences of pose by enriching human life. The burden ofar labeled "pseudoscientific"; the other held weather modification must be weighed "be- responsibility for seeing that this happens is, that inquiry should go forward but that re- fore we are called upon to deal with them." I believe, on scientists." searchers have the obligation to denounce Malone, vice president of the Travelers In- It was not only the prospects of man'serroneous interpretations drawn from it. surance Company, told his audience: "Themodifying weather, however, that aroused Geneticist Theodosius Dobzhansky, an ex-

1 9 11 ponent of the latter argument, added: "Andallowed to forget the historical examples of rian, argued that "both our present science in our world a scientist has no right to be how science had hurt, rather than helped, and our present technology are so tinctured irresponsible." The aadience applauded his mankind. Loren C. Eiseley, a historian of with Christian arrogance toward nature" sentiment. science, taxed the 19th century's evolution- the attitude that it exists for the service of But exactly what is the scientist's respon- ists with characterizing races other than manthat "the remedy must also be es- sibility in the matter of racial differences? those of Western Europe as inferior, rather sentially religiousScience and technology, The day of arguments produced nocon- than simply different. The tags have per- he said, cannot answer all the questions they sensus. sisted, he noted. raise. Nor were those attending the meeting And Lynn T. White, Jr., another histo-

ety attempts to achieve a monolithic position on such issues, it does so over strong objections. The outcome convinces no one, serves littlepurpose, and leavesdebilitating wounds. The societies are more effective when they employ leverage fumished by other opinion makers. During the past decade, AAAS has met this challenge by providing forums in which technological problems that affect all of us were discussed. These presentations have been well covered by the mass media. A few decades ago, most scientists heldhumanity will squander resources and un- After the mass media begin to devote the view that their principal duty was towittingly conduct profoundly important ex- attention to a problem, public awareness in- advance the frontiers of knowledge. Corre- periments on itself and on the environment. creases, and politicians become interested. spondingly, the scientific societies limitedWho will evaluate such experiments and be However, in helping to create judicious pub- their activities to publications and meetings altrt to emerging problems? The man in the lic opinion, the scientific societies can have centered on their chosen fields. During thestreet can scarcely fill such a role. Govern- an important role. Especially useful are fact- past few years, the activities of scientists melt might, but its leadership is in the hands finding commissions and committees. Thus have expanded. Many of the principal sym-of politicians who rarely act until an issue is the Air Conservation Commission of AAAS posiums at the recent Boston meeting of crystallized by others. Scientists or engineers served a valuable function in early delinea- AAAS dealt with public policy aspects of in government service might act as watch- tion of facts concerning air pollution. Re- science and technology. dogs, but in general, politicians prefer that ports from committees organized by the Scientists have not unanimously approved the bureaucrats speak only when spoken to. National Academy of Sciences have been participation in policy matters by their col- Employees of industry are in much the same helpful in crystallizing public opinion on leagues. Some have objected that spokesmen circumstance. Thus academic scientists and such issues as birth control. In general, the certainly did not speak for them personally. the scientific societies have responsibilities reports have had an effect roughly pro- Others have pointed out that once facts have that they cannot escape. portional to the level of scholarship and become generally known, the scientist can In attempting to convert opinion into ac- objectivity which characterized them no longer determine how his discoveries may tion, scientists should avoid internal conflict. The goal of opinion-making should be be applied. To some degree, this argument is They form only a tiny fraction of the elector- constructiv:. action. A prerequisite for this is valid. Nevertheless, scientists will have con- ate, ant; at best their prest.ge is not such as to thorough planning based on an adequate tinuing and important roles in determining give much weight to partisan exhortations. fund of knowledge. Scientists can make how science is applied. One important func- Inmattersthatare more politicalthan imaginative contributions to planning, and tion is that of watchdog. scientific, members of societies are likely to they can help ensure that the factual bases for In exploiting scientific discoveries, be divided in their preferences. When a soci- decisions are as sounu as possible.

nn Ayv 12

them up. This is what Jacques Monod (3) wrote about Leo Szilard:

Mostscientists of course do not formulate any significant new ideas of their own. The few that do are inordinately jealous of. and unduly faithful to. their own precious little ideas. Not so with Szilard: he was as generous with his ideas as a Maori chief with his wives Indeed he loved ideas. especially his own. But he felt that these lovely objects only revealed all their virtues and charms by being tossed around, circulated, shared, and played with. I am not an anthropologist and cannot claim knowledge of how Maori chieftains Of all the traits which qualify a scien-keeping in mind the gereral code ofshare their wives, but Monod's description certainly characterizes Szilard and tist for citizenship in the republic ofscientificbehavior thathasevolved other unusual individuals. science, I would put a sense of respon- over the last few centuries. The pursuit of knowledge in basic sci- sibility as a scientist at the very top. The pattern of conduct that has devel- ence is inevitably full of rivalry and com- Ascientist can be brilliant, imaginative, oped in basic research serves to maintain petition, especially in the fields that are clever with his hands, profound, broad,what Robert Merton called the ethos of most active, but it usually proceeds in an narrowbut he is not much as a scien- science (2). It involves the acceptance or tist unless he is responsible. The essencerejection of reported findings of other atmosphere in which there is a great deal of scientific responsibility is the innerworkers on the basis of what Merton of free communication of ideas and active discussion. When obvious major drive, the inner necessity to get to the terms "preestablished impersonal cri- practical results begin to appear, a trend bottom of things: to be discontentedteria," and the public presentation of sci- toward secretiveness usually sets in. The until one has done so; to express one'sentific findings (usually, and preferably, most dramatic example is the effect on reservations fully and honestly; and toafter critical review by editors and refer- physicists of the discovery of nuclear fis- be prepared to admit error. ees) so that they are available to the sion and the secrecy that followed. More ALVIN WEINBERG (I)whole community. It also involves the than one distinguished physicist has re- social system of "organized skepticism" called nostalgically the intellectual free- I agree with this assessment of thethat subjects reported findings to con- dom of exchange in physics in the years central role of scientific responsibilitystant critical review, with no assurance before 1939. A somewhat similar change but not in all respects concerning whatof finality.Scientists are expected to appears to be taking place among the constitutes responsible behavior in somepoint out the limits of uncertainty in their molecular biologists today. as the tech- difficult situations. There are two majorfindings and the inferences they draw, niques of gene cloning hold forth the kinds of scientific responsibility. Thereand they are expected to acknowledge promise of manufacturing substances of is the pattern of responsible behaviortheir debts to others whose work, both great biological importance. cheaply and that is associated with basic researchpublished and unpublished, has contrib- and the communication of the results.uted to what they have achieved. Sci- on a large scale. Some of my younger And there are the problems that ariseence is a communal enterprise: every colleagues have told me that they find scientific meetings less interesting than when scientists deal with issues involv-contribution builds upon the work of oth- ing social responsibilitysuch matters ers. they were. even 5 or 6 years ago: too as thecontrol of nuclear and other This is an idealized picture. Acknowl- many people, theysay.are clearly hold- weapons,t!,euses and hazards of toxicedging the debt to other workers is in-ing back information, presumably with chemicals and radioactive materials, thedeed central in the ethos of science, yetan eye to applying for patents on new processes. There choice among various modes of produc-it would be intolerable to cite a massive haveevenbeen charges that some authors of reports are ing or conserving energy, or the criteriaset of references for an ordinary paper. deliberately failing to cite relevant work for deciding whether to dam a river or letAggressivescientistsaresometimes of others in hopes of claiming a patent on it flow freely. These are very differentskillful in getting credit for ideas that oth- some new biological process or product. problems from those involved in basicers may have published before, but they Thiscompetitiveatmospherehas research; the decisions reached involvemay also be genuinely ignorant of the sometimes led to publicity of a sort pre- value judgments. They are, and indeedearlier work. Even those who are quite viously not practiced among scientists. should and must be, political decisions.scrupulous may pick up ideas from pa- In a recent article entitled "Gene cloning Nevertheless, applied scientific knowl-pers for which they serve as referees, or by press conference." Spyros Andreo- edge is an important element in thefrom serving on a panel that reviews poulos (4) of the Stanford Medical Cen- making of such decisions.Scientistsgrant applications, and they may remain who enter these disputed areas encoun-quite unconscious of the source of their ter problems of responsible behaviorideas. Since recognition of significant The author is professor ementus of biochemistry, that are considerably more complex than Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. originality in discovery is the main road liar and University. 7 Divinity Avenue. Cambridge. those of the scientist who is workingto scientific prestige and honor, most sci- Massachusetts 02138, and former chairman of the AAAS Committee on Scientific Freedom and Re- out basic problems in the laboratory, orentists are understandably sensitive to sponsibility. This article is based on his address to a in thought and calculation. However the the failure of others to acknowledge their joint meeting of The Royal Society and the Amen- can Philosophical Society in London. England. on 5 two areas also have much in common,work. A few u'sual people are dramati- June 1980, published in a symposium on The Social and the problems of social responsibility cally different: they cast forth their ideas Responsibility of Scientists" (The (eoyal Society. London, 1980). It is reprinted with minor revisions, cannot be considered properly withoutfreely, and are happy to see others pick by permission of The Royal Society. 21 13 ter News Bureau quotes a letter fromcides should be the goal." President basic science, the disputes cannot be re- Joshua Lederberg to Senator Gaylord Kennedy released the report in May 1963solved in terms of "preestablished im- Nelson of Wisconsin. "The possibility ofand requested the responsible agenciespersonal criteria." Scientific facts and profitespecially when other funding isto implement its recommendations. value judgments are so closely inter- so tightwill be a distorting influence on The pattern of subsequent events iswoven that it is excecdingly difficult to open communication and on the pursuitcomplex; but it would not please either disentangle them, and the inferences to of basic scholarship," Lederberg wrote. the strong supporters or the fervent op-be drawn are inconclusive. Scientists although he noted that many, perhapsponents of chemical pesticides. Somecan honestly disagree as to what infer- most,universityscientistsdisagreed strong controls have indeed been im ences can legitimately be drawn from the with his views. Andreopoulos showed posed; DDT. which was the principal fo- facts. that some new developments announced cus of Carson's attack, has been banned; Thus we are operating in a quite dif- at press conferences receive wide public- but the general use of chemical pesti- ferent domain from that of basic science. ity. before they appear in the scientific cides in agriculture is probably as wide- The Federation of American Scientists literature, while other work of at least spread as ever, if not more so. Many of(FAS), which addressed this problem equal significance passes through thethe current pesticides are more toxic to(7). accepted as inevitable ". .. that sci- regular channels of critical reviewing be- humans than DDT. Other poisons, suchentists involved in public debate will fore it appears. Reports at press confer- as the polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB's),have to go beyond discussing what is sciences can be misleading; for example.used in industry rather than in agricul-entifically known flr certain,"since one new account of the production of hu- ture, have been recognized as seriouspublic policy matter_ involve the making man insulin by recombinant DNA tech- environmental hazards. Highly specific of decisions in the face of enormous un- nique:. created the impression that the pesticides for particular species of in-certainties. At the same time, the FAS product was biologically active; the later sects, such as the juvenile hormones,report said that scientists who take an publication of the data in a journalhave been developed but as yet haveactive part in public debates should showed that this was not so (4). found little practical use. avoid dogmatic claims, be willing to ad- The traditional patterns of scientific Mention of Carson's book can stillmit and correct errors in their state- reporting and communicationthe sci- rouse both enthusiasm and denunciation. ments, and reason with those with whom entific ethos. in Merton's phrase mayUndoubtably in some respects she exag-they disagree. However, the report con- be in danger of undergoing significantgerated the damage done by pesticides. cluded that professional scientific so- erosion. As a believer in the classical tra-My own view is that, on balance, she cieties are generally unqualified to mon- dition of operation in basic science,I performed a great public service and de- nitor and pass judgment on the conduct hope that the erosion may be halted. serves to be remembered with honor.of scientists involved in such debates. Certainly the sense of responsibility forThe societies are accustomed to dealing the environment that she inculcated is with more traditional patterns of conduct Independent Scientists and now implanted in a vast number of within the scientific community and are Issues of Public Policy people. unequipped to deal with the far more un- This episode exemplifies many of the ruly debates that arise when social and A more difficult subject is the roie ofproblems that scientists encounter when political questions are involved. It is the scientists in matters of public policy. Let they become involved in issues of socialcommunity of scientists who do take an me begin with a classic example from responsibility. Carson was a trained sci- active part in public debate on these con- nearly 20 years ago: the publication ofentist, but not in the field of agricultural troversial issues '. ho must work out ap- Rachel Carson's Silent Sprirg (5) with its ecology. She had much to learn, and shepropriate guidelines for responsible con- vigorous attack on what she considered did learn, in the process of preparing to duct. As the debate proceeds, it will be- the gross misuse of pesticides. She was write the book. The agriculturists stillcome clear who the scientists are who both a trainedscientist and a gifteddid not regard her as a real professionalare speaking responsibly and with due writer. The biological community had in their field. However, many, if notrespect for the facts. been concerned about the ecological most, of the agriculturists had financial Weinberg (/) holds that the essential damage from v. idespread use of pesti- and career ties to the use of pestipidessense of responsibility is being eroded in cides such as DDT, but no authoritative and to the industries that produced them.the current debates on such matters as body had made a critical study of theThe committees of the National Acad-energy policy and environmental pro- problem and publicized its conclusions. emy of Sciences that dealt with suchtection, with scientists making sweeping The book had an immense impact. It was matters in those day.. tended to be domi-pronouncemen:s on issues far outside also attacked by many agriculturists and nated by people who had similar biases.their own fields of competence. He be- nutritionists, who called it misinformed. The Academy has changed and now ex-lieves, for instance, that a scientist who fanatical, or even a hoax. The Presi- amines systematically the industrial andthinks he has evidence that current stan- dent's Science Advisory Committee,other connections of the members of its dards of environmental protection are however, took Carson's charges serious- committees. The aim is not to eliminate too lax should submit his findings to - ly and set up a special panel of experts toall people with possible biasthat would refereed scientific journal be ore put, investigate the problem. After 8 monthseliminate most of the experts, in somelicizing them. If the journal rejects the of hearings they produced a report (6) fields at leastbut to obtain a balancedreport, the author may honestly believe that in large measure vindicated Car- spectrum of people with different kindsthat the reviewers are biased. In that son's claims and also concluded thatof bias, together with some who might be case he may be justified in bringing the massive attempts to eradicate certain in- genuinely dispassionate in consideringmatter before the public, while admitting sects by pesticides were unrealistic and the issues. that others disagree with him. ecologically dangerous and that "elimi- Since nearly all controversial issues of There are many cases in which such a nation of the use of persistent toxic pesti- this sort involve technology, as well as procedure will help bring more rational-

L h.,9, 14

ity into the debate; but scientists dis- All attempts to rely on quantification inported certain violations of safety regula- cussing public issues are often involved such decisions as these, to create them out oftions at the hospital to the Nuclear Regu- in public discussions, or interviews on computer scenarios, to deduce them from cost-benefit balance sheets. are likely to make latory Commission, as he was in duty television, where the limited dime makes the decision worse, not better; for in the pro- bound to do by law. The hospital man- it impossible to state all the reservations cess of getting hard data, the fragile values, agement retaliated by abolishing his job. that a careful scientist might add to quali- the unquantified information, the emotive ele- A federal court eventually ordered his fy his remarks. In the heat of debate ments which nourish the public conscience, reinstatement, under the employee pro- all run through the filter and are lost, and so there is also the tendency to overstate the quantified information assumes an impor- tection section of the Energy Reorgani- the case. Politicians and others would tance out of proportion to its real value. zation Act, and the payment of back sal- like simple answers to complex ques- ary. The reinstatement has been chal- tions. Certainly scientists should be pre- lenged, however, and appealed to the pared to state publicly that they have U.S. Supreme Court. made erroneous statements, and correct Whistle-Blowing and Professional In another case. Morris Baslow, a ma- them; on this vital point there is no dis- Responsibility rine biologist, was fired after he pre- agreement between Weinberg's position sented evidence, in a court hearing on a and that of the FAS. Scientific and technical professional U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Among the value judgments involved employees, in industry or government, inquiry, concerning the effects of cooling in these controversial issues, a funda- on occasion have reason to sound warn- water from power plants on fish in the mental difference of view is often pres-ing,' of dangers about processes or prod- Hudson River (13). He urged his employ- ent. If, for instance, the evidence is in-ucts, or sometimes to call attention toers to present the evidence, but when conclusive about the toxicity of some in- opportunities for improvement that they they ignored his recommendations, he fi- dustrial product, should it be banned un-believe are being neglected. Obviously nally presented the data to the court di- til it is proved safe or used until it is employees should approach their superi- rectly. Eventually he reached an agree- proved dangerous? Until the last two orors, point out the source of trouble, and ment with his former employers, but three decades, the latter policy was most urge correction. If the superiors fail toonly after many months of delay, while commonly accepted. Recently the more respond and the issue is really serious,he was out of work. cautious policy has prevailed; the in-the employee can bring it before the pub- In these cases the whistle-blowers put creasingly severe standards for the li-lic. People who do this are commonly their jobs and reputations in jeopardy. It censing of drugs by the Food and Drug called whistle-blowers (10). is obviously in the interest of public Administration represent perhaps the Whistle-blowing is obviously a high- health and safety that such people should most striking example. Such caution hasrisk occupation. and those who practice be heard and fairly judged; and if their its penalties as well as its merits; for exit must be prepared for trouble. A classic views are upheld after a hearing by a ample, Carl Djerassi (8) pointed out the example arose during the building of the suitablebody,theydeservecom- difficulties in the development of new Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) system mendation, and perhaps promotion, not and better contraceptives that the strict in San Francisco (11). A major feature of discharge. Congress has passed several rules of testing have imposed. Some- the system was the automated train con- laws in recent years to protect the rights times more is lost than gained by exces-trol, developed under a contract with the of employees who report to their em- sive zeal in testing before release. This isWestinghouse Corporation. Three engi- ployers matters that call for correction. likely to be true for the selective pesti-neers, Max Blankenzee, Holger Hjorts- The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is cides that act by inhibiting the develop- yang, and Robert Bruder. concluded that now formulating rules that should en- ment of certain species of insects. the system design had grave defects, but courage employees to report matters of Decisions on such matters as buildingtheir concerns were disregarded by the concern to higher officials, with guaran- an airport or a power plant, or damming management. Finally, early in 1972, they tees against reprisals, whether or not the a river, inevitably involve value judg-went to BART's board of directorsemployee's recommendations are ac- ments as well as technical facts. Theywhich, after a hearing, voted 10 to 2 with cepted. This represents an encouraging require estimates of future needs, which management. The three engineers were trend in the Executive Branch of the are often highly unreliable. For exam-fired. Subsequent dangerous failures ofgovernment. Rules to protect employees ple, the estimates made a decade agothe automated train control, which oc- are still nonexistent in most private busi- about future needs for electric power incurred after the system started to oper-nesses, though a few firms have begun the United States have been drastically ate, fully vindicated the engineers. Thepioneer moves in this direction. David scaled down in the light of experience.California Society of Professional Engi- Ewing of the Harvard Business School Expert testimony in such matters is like-neers investigated the case and decided has outlined detailed proposals for fur- ly to be colored, consciously or uncon-that the dissenting engineers "had acted ther reform (14). consciou.ily, by the expert's system ofin the best interest of the public wel- Of course whistle-blowers are not al- values. fare." The California legislature con- ways right. They might be motivated by Cost-benefit analysis in such situations ducted an investigation that confirmed personal malice, they may be cranks, or of conflict is a treacherous game; thethe validity of the engineers' warnings. they may be honest, but mistaken. Both costs and benefits are usually quite in-The three then sued Westinghouse for common sense, and a sense of loyalty to commensurable; ultimately decisions are$885,000 but eventually settled out of the employer, dictate an earnest effort to likely to be made by the political processcourt for a relatively modest sum, which settle differences of opinion by working in which the public perception of what iswas probably quite inadequate com-within the organization. However, if desirable counts for more than the cost-pensation. higher authorities fail to respond, and if benefitcalculations of experts. Lord A more recent case involved Clifford the matter appears to involve serious is- Ashby (9) concluded that it is probably Richter, a health physicist at a state hos- sues of human safety and health, it may better so: pital in Columbia, Missouri (12). He re-be necessary to bring the matter to pub- 2,3 15

lic attention. The individual who takes responded vigorously (17). The gravity 5. R Carson. Silent Spring (Houghton Mifflin. Boston. 1962). such a Fisk obviously needs good legal of the hazard from industrial carcinogens, 6. U.S. President's Science Advisory Committee. "Use of pesticides" (The White House. Wash- advice and other kinds of help (15). Our to workers and others,isclear; but ington. D.C.. 1963): the report was reprinted in complex society needs increasing inputtheir relative role in the totality of human Chem Eng. News 41 (No. 21). 102 (1963). J. Primack and F von Hippel (Advice and from those who perceive otherwise un- cancers isstillhotly debated. In the Dissent:ScientistsinthePoliticalArena noted risks or opportunities and bring bitterness of such controversies, either (Basic Books. New York. 197,"pp. 41-461 provide a useful account of 4fect of the messages that may be unwelcome to es- side may distort data. As Peto remarked, report. tablished authorities. To use criticism "Scientists on both sides of the en- 7. Federation of Amencan Se; ts. "To whom are public interest scientists responsible" (Pub- and dissent constructivelyin dealing vironmentalist debate now have career lic Interest Report 29. Washington. D.C.. 1976). interests at stake." But it is important 8. C. Djerassi. Science 10, 941 (1970); Bull Am. with both risks and opportunities, clear Acad. Arts Sci. 32. 22 (1978). policies are needed, with definitions ofabove allthat the passion for getting 9. E. Ashby. Perspect. Biol. Med. 23. 7 (1979). 10. R. Chalk and F. von Hippel. Technol. Rev. 81. procedures for due processincon- at the truth should be the dominant pas- 48 (1979). troversial cases and, if necessary, formal sion for scientific workers when they are II. J. T. Edsall, Scientific Freedom and Responsi- bility (AAAS. Washington. D.C.. 1975). hearings and a possibility of appeal. trying to act as responsible scientists. 12. L. J. Carter. Science M. 1057 (1980). The polarization of opinions on someThat may appear sometimes to be an un- 13. C. Holden. ibid. 21. 749 (1980). J. L. Lawler. ibid. 211. 875 (1981). issues today is disturbing. The conflictattainable goal in the atmosphere of cur- 14. D. W. Ewing. Freedom Inside the Organization: between the advocates and enemies of rent debate, but it is worth striving for, Bringing Civil Liberties to the Workplace (Dut- ton. New York. 1977). See also A. F. Westin. nuclear power is one example; the dis- both to maintain the confidence of the Ed.. Whistle Blowing! Loyalty and Dissent in public and to keep confidence in our- the Corporation (McGraw-Hill. New York. pute over the origins of cancer is becom- 1981). ing another. Richard Peto (16) described selves. 15. P. Raven-Hansen. Technol. Rev. 82, 34 (1980). the distortions and untruths promoted by 16. R. Peto, Nature (London) 284, 197 (1980). References and Notes 17. S. S. Epstein. Nature (London) 289. 115 (1981): tobacco companies in their efforts to dis- - and J. B. Swartz, ibid., p. 127. Compare I. A. Weinberg. Minerva IC I (1978). credit the overwhelming evidence for the J. Cairns, ibid.. p. 353. 2. R. K. Merton. in The Sociology of Science 18.1 am much indebted to my fellow members of relation between smoking and lung can- (Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago. 1973). pp. 267-278: A. Cournaud and M. Meyer. Minerva the AAAS Committee on Scientific Freedom cer. At the same time he severely criti- and Responsibility for our continued joint work 14, 79 (1976). relating to many of the problems discussed in cized some of the alleged evidence that 3J. Monod. in Collected Works of Leo S:ilard: this articleI am particularly indebted to R. Scientific Papers. B. T. Feld and G. W. Szilard. Baum, F. von Hippel, J. Primack. and R. Chalk. would ascribe nearly all cancers to toxic Eds. (MIT Press. Cambndge. Mass, 1972). p. This article is. however, an expression of my substances introduced by man. S. S. Ep- xvi. personal views. This work was supported by 4. S. Andreopoulos. N. Engl. J Med 302. 743 grant SOC7912543 from the National Science stein, whom Peto sharply criticized, has (1980). Foundation.

perceptions. It is important that we seek to understand our profession in its current context and to take actions with due regard to the future. Surely all of those who read Science undesstand the integrity of science and are diligent in their efforts to ensure it is not violated. However, observations of what we do and what we say suggc:,4 that we are not acutely aware that science is two things, process and the body of knowledge generated by that process. and we may not appreciate that to understand the integrity of process is to under- It has been the custom for St lent t to Science Board, 1972-1978. and president stand the integrity of the body of knowl- publish atthis season of the year a of the American Chemical Society, 1978. edge generated. biography of the incoming president- I hrougir cooperation with its approx- By process, I mean all of those things elect of AAAS. I have bargained instead imately 300 affiliated societies. AAAS that are involved in the design of experi- with the Editor to use this space to has unique potential to serve an integra- ments or programs of observations, the explore with you some of my interests tive function in issues of general interest execution of these experiments or pro- and prejudices, hopes and fears. related and concern to the scientific community. grams, the processing of information and to science, technology, scientists, socie- The focus here shall be primarily on assessment of the validity of results in- ty and, of course, AAAS. The only bio- some of thosc general issues. the integri- cluding models that may have been gen- graphical information that is of signifi- ty of socn,e. Ow impact of science and erated. What are the assumptions on cance to you is thatI am a physical technology on society. the impact of which the work is based? What are the chemist by training with a modest track society on science and technology, the assumptions and approximations intro- record in research and long experience in culture of a realist', environment for duced in the generation of models? Sci- a liberal arts college that takes science, science and technology, the participation entific studies have been extended to research, and the development of its of scientists and scientific societies in students seriously and that I have served public decisions, and the culture of sci- Anna J liamson is Professor Ementus of Chem- istry at Mount Holyoke College. South Hadley, the larger community of scientists and entifi: manpower. Itis not important Massachusetts 01075 and president-elect of the society as a member of the National whether you agree or disagree with my AAAS.

4 16

more and more complex systems using 2) the benefits and the negative im- services essential to the public welfare or more and more complex methodologies, pacts may be experienced by differentat least to the benefit of some influential higher and higher levels of sophisticatedsubsets of society, and subset of society, or expand our intellec- instrumentation, and more and more pre- 3) the benefits and the negative im- tual perception of ourselves and all that rtckaged computer programs. We havepacts may be experienced in different surrounds us. continuously expanded our capabilitiestime frames. The allocation of funds among the var- and productivity and, in so doing, we The term "benefit/risk analysis"is ious disciplines and within the disci- have compounded the problems associ-consistent with the first premise, andplines is very significant in the determi- ated with the assessment of the validityhistorians tell me that this sweet/bitternation of both the direction and the rate of the product. By process, I also includeconsequence of technological innovation of extension of knowledge. Herein lie the scrutiny, testing, and revision to is a characteristic of all social, economic,thorny issues. If the scientific communi- which scientific knowledge is continu-and political change. Some of the long-ty cannot or will not provide the leader- ously subject. term consequences of technological in- ship in establishing relative priorities, It is generally accepted that the free novations can be surprising. Spectacularcongressional committees and private exchange of scientific know-how and sci- advances in medical technology have foundations will, by default, set prior- entific knowledge is a basic tenet of theenabled us and our descendants to live ities among the competing interests with scientific community. At the same time, longer: two consequences ,,re the escala-probable long-term disadvantage to all. it is well known that an individual maytion in the rate of consumption of re-We must plan for new thrusts and the create barriers to retard the flow of infor-sources and the escalation in pollution. development of promising innovations. mation within an institution, that an in-We must be alert to the total conse- Inequities are highly probable. Some dis- stitution may create barriers to inhibitquences, both positive and negative,ciplines are more skilled than others in the flow of information to other institu-both short-term and long-term, and be presenting a united front, and funding for tions, and that a nation may regulate the willing to seek courses of actions to some disciplines is much more strongly exchange of information with anotherminimize and more equably distribute challenged than for others by individuals nation. Herein lie very thorny issues, the the negative consequences of technologi- who may minimize the potential of those resolution of which has a great deal to docal innovations. disciplines to contribute to the public with the environment in which the scien- In a democratic society, it is the pub- good and may, to some degree, fear tlle tific community proceeds. Actions tolic, through its surrogates, that has the extension of knowledge in some areas. restrict flow of information reflect theright and responsibility to make deci- The characteristics of themarket- perceived short-term advantage of pro- sions in matters concerning the quality of place, patent laws, tax structures. tariff prietary scientific know-how and knowl-life and the quality of the environment. harriers, and a host of regulations are edge but discount our mutual dependen-Such decisions involve value judgments. manifestations of the social, economic, cy and the long-term benefits of the free Many other value judgments, internal to and political forces that shape the devel- exchange of scientific knowledge. Theindustry, determine the course of inno- opment and productivity of technology long-term costs of mistrust and stagna- vations. There has been some tendency and the research supported by industry. tion are significant indeed. Three typesto believe that if we all understood the I am convinced that a realistic envi- of situations that justify careful consider-science Involved, we would all make the ronment for science and technology is ation are the relation of national security same decisions concerning the use of essential for the welfare of the nation and considerations to the free exchange ofscience and technologyThisis,of thatthcentirescientificcommunity scientific information with Soviet scien-course, not true as has been amply dem- should devote its best efforts to the cul- tists. the relation of the proprietary inter-onstrated in regard to the use of nuclear ture of such an environment. I propose ests of industry to thc free flow of infor-power technologyEqually informed inthat the basic elements for a realistic mation within and from academic labora-dividuals may make entirely different environment are: tories, and the impact of the practicesvalue judgments and take quite different 1) thepublic understanding of the of individual scientists upon their col-positions in regard to a particular tech- powers and limitations of science and leagues and students. nology. Science education clarifies tech- scientists, If wv. Arc to understand the environ-nical matters butitis not a route to 2) thepublic understanding of the ment in which we work, we must under-unanimity in decisions involv ing value powers and limitations of technology and stand the impact of science and technol-judgments. technologists, and ogy on our intellectual perception of life If we are to understand the env iron- 3) the public understanding of the pro- a ad the world about us, on the quality ofmcnt in which we work. we must also cesses involved in making public deci- life, and on the quality of the environ-understand the impact of society on sci- sions concerning science and technolo- ment in which we live. Undoubtedly, theence and technology. It is evident that gy. greatest impact of science and technolo- I) the direction and the rate of exten- The word public is used here to encom- gy is on the first.I suspect that thosesion of scientific know ledge are to a large pass all of those who have the right to magnificent photographs of Earth fromdegree determined by social, economic. Influence public opinion and participate space broughtaboutanirreversibleand political factors, and in political processes. This, of course, change in our perception of our planet 2) the direction and the rate of devel- encompasses the scientific community. and its resources and this changed per-opment of technologyireto a large It is my impression that some time in ception broadened and intensified thedegree determined by social. economic. the pas:. either the scientific community environmental protection movement. and political factors. oversold or the public overbought sci- I suggest three premises: The allocation of public monies to the ence and technology. There are ques- I) everytechnologicalinnovation,support of basic resirch is an act oftions that science cannot address and regardless of how great its positive im-faith that the research results will, on things that science and technology can- pact on society, also has a negative im-balance, enhance our national image, not accomplish. We cannot guarantee a pact on society. lead to the deveiopment of goods and zero-level concentration, produce a risk- 25 17 less technological option, or solve soci- tial to have both positive aria negativeand the other is to provide what I call etal problems. We can alleviate a soci-impacts on society and then get on withinformed judgment, an opinion based etal problem such as waste management the public discussion of whether the total upon related knowledge and experience. by recycling, conversion to less toxic or benefits justify the total risks. Total im-The first is to deny the public the benefit more manageable materials, and design- pacts enconu..s a wide range of social,of informed judgment, the second may ing containment facilities and special- economic, and political changes the con-jeopardize personalcreditabilityand purpose incinerators, but it is the public, sequences of which arc extremely diffi-possibly the creditability of the disci- through its surrogates, that makes thecult or impossible to evaluate quantita-pline. In both, the scientist has respond- social and political decisions. tively with confidence. ed to a request to go beyond his or her I believe that to understand the integri- If value judgments concerning the im-level of expertise, and the difference ty of the process of science and thepact of science and technology on thebetween opinion and knowledge must be integrity of the body of knowledge that quality of !ife and the quality of theestaolished in the response. the process generates is very close toenvironment and the consequent deci- The culture of scientific manpower is understanding the powers and limita- sions are the prerogative of the public,fundamental to everything we do. The tions of science and scientists.I amwhat is the role of scientists and profes-term is being used here in a very compre- delighted to sec that an increasing num- sional societies? This is another thornyhensive sense to include the entirt pro- ber of TV science specials focus on question to be addressed by each scien-fessional life-span of scientists as well as process and suggest that we should re- tist and each professional society. Inthe recruitment and early development think thc goals of science education, most areas, I am quite clear on my own of scientists, but space is limited and I particularly science education at the pre- position. First and foremost, a scientis tshall simply propose that college level. It is my experience that is an individual and has the same spon- 1) curret.t scienc' education distorts individuals who have some concept ofsibilities and privileges as any oti.. indi- the recruitment and development of sci- process can absorb new knowledge with- vidual, This includes the right, as an entists, out great difficulty but that individuals individual, to espouse values and join 2) the current reward system within who have no concept of process have others in political action. dr profession distorts thc distribution of great difficulty absorbing new knowledge Scientists, either individually or col-scientific talent within the profession, and are incapable of being rationally lectively, as scientists hive the respon- 3) and both distortions are to the det- critical of positions presented as havingsibility to provide technical expertiseriment of the scientific comma ,ity and scientific validity. It is quite possible that based upon training and experience and the public's well-being. those who have had experience with to endeavor to provide that expertise in If academic education provides the science and those who have not perceive a manner comprehensible to those whoenvironment that enables a student to our world quite differently and that this need the information. In the role of ex-accomplish something, then we must re- difference in perception is greater than perts, scientists do not have the right tothink what it is students should be en- we realize. make a value judgment and then selec- abled to do. I nominate for the top of the McAmerican public knows remark-tively present scientific information topriority list "discover the intercity of ably little about technology and the steps support that value position. To do so isscience." involvedin technological innovation. to negate the integrity of science. In conclusion, attention is caits,c1 to There arc a few instances in which the Two types of situations are particular-some of the more visible AAAS activi- mass media have indicated a potential toly troublesome. In one, rational deci-ties related to issues touched on above: rectify this; there are also groups en- sions require technical information thatthe annual review, in collaboration with deavoring to define goals and develop i3 not available and cannot be generateda number of affiliated societies, of the mechanisms tointroduce technology through validated studies in the timefederal budget for research and develop. into the precollege educational system available: in the other, scientists arc ment, the consortium of affiliated societ- and the liberal arts component.. of col-asked to propose courses of action toies involved in international programs, lege and university curricula. All of these solve societal problems. Both go beyond the activities of the committee on scien- will require time to make a significant the technical expertise and, in some cas-tific freedom and -sponsibility, the pub- contribution. To me, the first step in the es, way beyond the level of maturity oflication of Science 82 for the reading culture of a realistic environment forthe science. public. and the recent AAAS long-term technology isto recognize that each There are two choices. One is to re-commitment to the improvement of sci- technological innovation has the poten-fuse to go beyond technical competence ence education.

/tJ gineering have emerged. The legacy of investigations of problem-solving is the body of engineering knowledge consisting of a data base. an array of methodologies. and an array of concepts. Technology is the process of production and delivery of goods and services Technological innovation. the activity more parallel to science and engineering, is the process of investigation leading more effective production avid of a good c'r service. production and delivery of a significantly modified good or service, or production and delivery of The American Association for the Ad-are approached as processes of investi-a new good or service. Process encom- vancement of Science is a unique organi-gation. each generating a body of knowl-passes everything investigators do from zation. AAAS encompasses more thanedge that consists of a data base. anidentification of concept to successful 135 thousand individuals involved in thearray of methodologies, and an array ofproduction and delivery of the good or investigation of physical, chemical, bio-concepts. service. Here again, technology and logical. behavioral,social. economic, technological innovation have been in- and political phenomena and the use of volved primarily with the use of physical physical, chemical, biological, behavior-Science, Engineering, and Technological and chemical phenomena in the produc- al, social, economic, and political knowl- Innovation as Processes of Investigation tion and delivery of goods and services. edge to achieve specific ends. An Inspec- Today, there is a rapidly expanding in- tion of AAAS activitiesindicates a Science is the process of investigationvolvement with biological phenomena. A strong commitment to expansion of sci-of physical, chemical. biological, behav-legacy of technological innovation is a entific and engineering knowledge andioral.social. economic. and politicalbody of technological knowledge con- utilization of the capabilities of science.phenomena. Process is used in the col-sisting of a data base, an array of meth- engineering, and technology in resolvinglective sense to include everything theodologies. and an array of concepts. societal issues and thus in enhancing theInvestigator does from the selection ofTechnological knowledge may also en- quality of life of this and succeedingthe phenomena to be investigated to thecompass a body of empirical know-how generationscommitments not limitedassessment of the validity of the results.derived over time through an arts-andby national boundaries. AAAS forumsProcess includes the selection of thecrafts approach to the production of effectively addressmultidisciplinarymethodology, the choice of instrumenta-goods and services. matters of concern to scientists and engi-tion, the delineation of protocol, the exe- It is true that science drives engineer- neers and also societal Issues of concerncution of protocol, the reduction of data,ing and technological innovation, but it is to scientists. engineers, and the generalthe development of constructs, and theequally true that both engineering and public. assessment of the certainty or uncertain-technology drive science. The three pro- In recent years.I have become in-ty of the results. The details of processcesses. science. engineering, and tech- creasingly aware of the confusion withinare dependent on the phenomena and thenologicalinnovationaresynergistic. the public, and also within the scientificrelative significance of observation. ex-Each is dependent upon the other two; community. as to the nature of science.perimentation. and theoretical modelingeach supports the other two. It is this engineering, and technology and the re-in the investigation. The legacy of thesynergism that so enhances the total lation of science. engineering, and tech-investigation of phenomena is scientificcapabilities of science. engineenng. and nology to society. To me. there are com-knowledge, consisting of a data base, antechnology. The productivity of this syn- monelementsandinterconnectionsarray of methodologies, and an array ofergismisabundantly evidentinthe within science. engineering, and technol-concepts. events that have and are propelling us ogy that are attractive and compelling. In Engineering is the process of investi-into an information society. In rapidly this article. I explore these relations andgation of how to solve problems anddeveloping areas of new technology at also the relation of science. engineering.includes everything the investigator doesthe forefront of scientific knowledge. the and technology to society. In avoidingfrom the acceptance of the problem todistinction between science and engi- theconstraintsofalanguagethatthe proof of the validity of the solution.neenng diminishes as scientists investi- evolved in less scientific and technicalEngineering has been primarily con-gate how to solve problems as well as times and of terms that have acquiredcerned with the use of physical phenom-investigate phenomena and engineers in- prejudicial and devisive connotations,ena and to a lesser degree with the use ofvestigate phenomena as well as how to the wording has to be, at times. bothchemical phenomena. This almost exclu-solve problems. Technology, of course, detailed and repetitive. siveinvolvementwithphysical andinvolves not only scientists and engi- My approach is both pragmatic andchemical phenomena is still evident inneers but many others working together simplistic. Itis not important whetherthe structure of many schools of engi-within an institutional structure essential you agree or disagree.Itis importantneering and in the structure of the Na-to the production of goods and services. that we make the effort to explore rela-tional Science Foundation programs in tions among science. engineenng. andengineering. Engineeringis now also Anna 1 Hamson .s professor emeritus of chemis technology and their relations to society.concerned with biological phenomena, try. Mount Holyoke College. South Hadley. Massa- In this simplistic approach. science, en-and subdisciplines such as medical engi- chusetts 0W75 This article is based on her presidential lecture at the AAAS annual meeting in New gineering, and technological innovationsneering. bioengineering, and genetic en- York City on 27 May 1984 19 Scientific, Engineering, and is not true. The most apt reply so far wasgyphysical plant, management. work Technological Knowledge proposed by a West Point cadet whoforce, product design, and quality con- suggested the flyswatter. trol. Viewed in this way, we could com- It is the combined body of knowledge Some consequences of technologit.aipare the productivity of our schools with derived from the processes of Investiga-change may be surprising. For example.the productivity of other institutions of tion that are science, engineering, andthe great success of medical technologytechnology. technological innovation that has be-in saving lives and enhancing the quality Is it possible that the forces that deter- come a resource of unprecedented valueof life is intensifying many social issues.mine the competitive position of automo- in local, regional, and world affairs.There is simply so many more of us tobiles and other products of technology in There is no term in the English languageconsume and to pollute. To recognizeworld markets are related to the forces to encompassthisconglomerateofthis is in no way to imply that efforts inthat determine the position of children in knowledge, and it may be incorrectlymedical innovation should be dimin-worldwide testing? If so. should we seek referred to as scientific knowledge. Toished. It does imply that issues related tofundamental causes of both with the ex- do so has escalated the erection of barri-high density populations must be ad-pectation that the strategies that enhance ers to free exchange of true scientific anddressed simultaneously. the position of our technological prod- engineering knowledge among scientists The subset of society that derives theucts in the marketplace may also en- and engineers throughout the world. benefits may not be the subset that bearshance the achievements of children in The integrated body of sck ..ofic, engi-the burdens of technological change. Thethe classroom? Do we expect a higher neering, and technological knowledge istime frame of the benefits may be quitelevel of commitment and diligence on the (i) the basis for the investigations ofdifferent from the time frame of the nega-part of children in their efforts to extend phenomena, problem-solving, and inno-tive impacts. And the magnitude of thetheir knowledge and understanding than vation in the production and delivery ofbenefits and the magnitude of the bur-we expect of their elders in continuing to goods and services; (ii) in part the basisdens of technology may be quite differ-extend their knowledge and understand- of our perception of the universe; ofent. The sweet-bitter characteristic ofing? physical, chemical, biological,social.technological change is not a unique economic, and political environmentscharacteristic of technological change; it throughout the world; of ourselves; andis a characteristic of changeof all so-The Resolution of Societal Issues of relations with others including rela-cial, economic. and political change. The tions among nations; and (iii) the basis ofgoal of technological transfer and tech- Some societal issues. such as the per- technological innovation, the productionnological innovation is to bring aboutceived potential of products of our tech- and delivery of goods and services, andchange. The great challenge is to usenological society such as the chloro- the effective use of the products of tech-technological change selectively to en-fluoroalkanes to diminish the ozone con- nology. hance the quality of life and to dispersetent of the stratosphere and permit more The first role, the basis of the expan-more equably the benefits and burdensultraviolet energy to reach the surface of sion of knowledge. ensures the enhance-of technological change throughout soci-the earth and the perceived potential of ment of the future capabilities of science.ety. This challenge has the potential tothe combustion of fossil fuels to increase engineering, and technology. The secondunite the endeavors of those in science,the carbon dioxide content of the atmo- role, the basis of perceptions. provides aengineering, and technology with thesphere and elevate the temperature of background for assessments. negotia-goals and endeavors of all society, in-the earth. are truly world issues. Other tions, and decision-making and is a sig-cluding. of course. scientists and engi-Issues. such as malnutrition, disease, nificant component of what is becomingneers. acid rain, waste disposal. natural catas- known as the new liberal arts. The third trophies. poverty, unemployment, dis- role, the support of technology, prom- crimination, and child abuse manifest ises to gratify, at least in part. the desireMedicine, Agriculture, and Education themselves locally and regionally and for the benefits of the products of tech- cah sometimes be resolved locally and nology and the contribution of technolo- Many endeavors such as medicine,regionally. In the sense that the prob- gy to the economy. This is a promiseagriculture, and education are in partlems are ubiquitous, they also are w,,.-;a viewed with cautious optimism by thosescience, in part engineering, and in partissues. who fear the negative impacts of technol-technology. I find it very illuminating to The manner in which societal issues ogy on the environment and on the quali-think of them in that way. For example,are perceived and the steps undertaken ty of life. investigating the chemistry of the brainto resolve or ameliorate them are signifi- and its relation to how we learn andcantly dependent on the available body remember is science. The endeavor toof scientific. engineering, and technolog- Benefits and Burdens of Technology solving problems of communication andical knowledge. Even so, the scientific, of the development of curricula and cur-engineering, and technological commu- Society is not home free with the bene-riculum materials isengineering. Thenity, a subset of the public, cannot re- fits of goods and services and the bene-schools themselves are institutions ofsolve societal issues. Such issues relate fits of economic development. Everytechnology delivering services that en-to the quality of life, vaiue judgments are technological change, be it by transfer orable students to expand their knowledgecalled for and value judgments are the by innovation and regardless of howand understanding of the universe andprerogative of the public and surrogates great the positive impact on society, alsoof the past and presentaspirations,of the public, elected officials and those has a negative impact. This is a state-achievements, and failures of the peo-appointed, either directly or indirectly. ment with no proof.I have for someples on the earth. The schools have theby elected officials. Only society can years challenged audiences to cite exam-institutionalstructureandproblemsresolve societal issues. Judgments ap- ples of technological change for which itcharacteristic of institutions of technolo-propriate to one society are not neces-

t; 8 20 sarily appropriate to another society noron knowledge and understanding of so- neering, and technology. are they necessarily appropriate to thecial, economic, and political structures The integrity of knowledge. Any mis- same society at a later time. The valuesand priorities of the local communities,adventure in the processes of investiga- of society are a continuously evolving states, regions, and nations involved as tion, for whatever reason, compromises characteristic of the culture. The prior-well as understanding of the relation ofthe Integrity of the knowledge generated ities of a society must reflect these val-proposed solutions to the structures and and initiates the diversion of resources ues and, at the same time, be responsive priorities. Tht. resolution of issues such into nonproductive endeavors. Fraud, to social, economic, and political pres- as child abuse or discrimination in access the deliberate corruption of process, is sures as well as the availability of renew- to education and employment are sought antiethical to the standards and practices able and nonrenewable resources. In re-in behavioral, social, economic, and po- of the scientific and engineering profes- sponse to these pressures, priorities may litical phenomena. Even though the reso- sions: its detection attracts wide public undergo rapid change. lution of issues such as toxic waste and attention and seriously diminishes public It is essential that decision-makers un-generation of adequate electrical powerconfidence in scientific and engineering derstand the probable consequences ofare sought through the utilization ofknowledge and also diminishes public each available option (Including the op-physical, chemical, and biological phe-confidence in scientists and engineers. tion to do nothing) sufficiently to makenomena, there are also a host of behav- As serious as fraud is, its occurrence decisions that are consistent with theioral, social, economic, and political is-can, in time, be detected: I am much values of the society. This is as true forsues that must be resolved. One of themore concerned about inadvertent mis- positions taken in regard to social, eco-effective measures in the resolution ofadventures, which I believe are much nomic, and political negotiations and ac-the electrical power issue has been self- more prevalent and pose a more insid- tions as for positions taken in regard toimposed conservation of electrical ener- ious threat to the integrity of process and technological changes involving physi-gy by the public. consequently to the integrity of knowl- cal, chemical, and biological phenome- If the social, economic, and politicaledge. The sophisticationof modern na. With increasing reliance on referen- issues are not resolved, it may become methodologies, of instrumentation, and dums in decision-making at the state andincreasingly difficult to implement tech-of computer capabilities enhances our local level and the increasing use ofnological options or to use effectivelyproductivity and also allows the opportu- initiatives to bring issues directly to the those that have been implemented. Tra- nities for misadventure to proliferate. voter, more individuals are involved inditionally, the focus has been upon theThe probability of misadventure is also making decisions about such sophisticat-utilization of physical and chemical phe-increased by the movement of scientists ed topics as land use, resource conserva- nomena to resolve societal issues: it isand engineers into rapidly developing tion, waste disposal, the use of nuclearnot at all clear how adequate has beeninterdisciplinary fields and into the in- energy, and disarmament. the incorporation of a more comprehen- vestigation of increasingly complex sys- The roles of scientists and engineerssive body of knowledge in resolvingtems utilizing a wide variety of method- are to identify issues, assess the naturethese issues. The current federal R&D ologies and concepts, some of which and the magnitude of the issues, identifybudget strongly supports the investiga- may be new to a number of investigators. areasrequiringfurtherinvestigation,tion and use of physical phenomena. It is probably more difficult to ensure the propose technological options, assess integrity of scientific and engineering the probable positive impacts and the knowledge today than it has ever been. probable burdens of each option. and Responsibilities of Scientists and To test, reevaluate, and revise constitute communicate these assessments to the the ultimate safeguard, but the necessity Engineers public or the surrogates of the public in to identify a high incidence of essentially such a manner that the assessments can Scientists and engineers are united by random misadventures is to be avoided be understood. These can be challenging responsibilities that are uniquely the re-thrcugh high professional standards in tasks. There are no generally accepted sponsibilities of scientists and engineers. teaching and in research supervision quality of life indicators, and the practice Five such responsibilities are identified Barriers to communication. Ban iers of using economic indicators is at best abelow, all of which are addressed withto the transfer of scientific, engineering, very inadequate substituteparticularly varying degrees of focus and diligence by and technological knowledge diminish if the data base cannot be disaggregatedAAAS: (i) to ensure the integrity ofthe utilization of this knowledge as a to monitor identifiable subsets of societyscientific and engineering knowledge. (II) base for further investigations, for new in successive time intervals. Economicto facilitate the identification and resolu- perceptions, and for the support of tech- indicators are valid components of thetion of barriers to communication amongnology, including the effective use of the assessment of the quality of life but inscientists and engineers and to assess to products of technology. Such barriers themselves are not sufficient to assessscientific and engineering knowledge,are worldwide societal issues. Current the quality of life. Once the decision is(iii) to maintain the distinction between electronic capabilities have the potential made to implement a particular option,the roles of a scientist or an engineer as to enable all the peoples of the world to sc-mtists and engineers may have large an expert witness and as an advocate, transfer information at the speed of light. roles in its implementation and the mom-(iv) to endeavor to enable all intim 'duals The barriers to access are the cost of toring of the consequences of the actionsto extend their knowledge and under-information services and the sequester- taken. standing of physical, chemical; biologi-ing of new knowledge to protect per- There are gr,.at variations in the utili-cal, behavioral, social, economic, and ceived short-term personal, institutional, zation of physical, chemical, biological,political phenomena, of engineering, and and national advantages Scientists and behavioral, social, economic, and politi-of technology throughout their lifetimes,engineers have the responsibility to en- cal knowledge in the resolution of soci- and (v) to ensure freedom from discrimi- sure that serious Issues raised by these etal issues. The approach to resolutionnation in education and in employment barriers are addressed as long-term soci- through negotiation is highly dependentopportunities related tc science, engi- etal issues, with a full assessment of total 29 21

costs and total benefits associated withcourts. A scientist or engineer called byimpossible, to use scientific knowledge the various options for resolving them. the court as an expert witness for theas a basis for decision-making. Experts and advocates. The roles ofcourt is not constrained to support any The schools, the museums, and the scientists and engineers as experts andargument and can, in fact, serve as anmass media are in the business of provid- as advocates are both honorable, butexpert witness. ing enabling experiences. If the public is they are different. Confusion about that Lifelong education. It is highly proba-to keep pace with science. engineering, difference on the part of scientists andble that most of what an individualand technology, scientists and engineers engineers as well as by lawyers and theknows and understands about science,must use their knowledge and under- general public has diminished the credi-engineering, and technology 10 or 15standing of the nature of the changes bility of scientists and engineers as par-years after terminating the formal aca-taking place to assist others to ensure ticipants in the resolution of societaldemic experience has been acquired sub-that appropriate enabling experiences issues. sequent to the formal academic experi-are made available to the public. To be an expert, the individual mustence. This follows from the rapid expan- Discrimination. For society to derive have attained and demonstrated compe-sion of scientific, engineering, and tech-the benefits of the creativity and produc- tence in the area of expertise, and thenological knowledge. Itis also highlytivity of the physically handicapped, mi- individual is obligated to delineate, with-probable that how much an individualnorities, and women in the scientific, out prejudice, what is known and to whatknows and understands 10 to 15 yearsengineering, and technological profes- degree of certainty it is known, what islater is highly dependent on the nature ofsions, it is essential that scientists and not known, and what is probably know-the formal academic experience. engineers be vigilant in ensuring freedom able utilizing current methodologies. The education of an individual is thefrom discrimination in accesto educa- The role of the advocate is to advanceconsequence of how that individual re-tion and in employment opportunities or defend a particular position or optionsponds to a great multiplicity of enablingrelated to science. engineering, and tech- through the selective presentation of in-experiencessome provided for the in-nology. formation to support a position or op-dividual and some created by the individ- tion. Scientists or engineers choose theual. The great challenge is to enable all role of advocate when they make a valueindividuals to continue to extend theirConclusion judgment in favor of a particular optionknowledge and understanding of sci- and support that option over others.ence,engineering,andtechnology The coherence of the scientific disci- This is their right as citizens. On thisthroughout their lives. It is frequentlyplines, the synergism of science, engi- particular issue they have chosen thethe new developments in science, engi-neering, and technology, the congruity role of advocate and waive the role ofneering, and technology that are mostof responsibilities of scientists, engi- expert. relevant to the resolution of societal is-neers, and the public in resolving soci- Circumstances can cast a scientist orsues. etal issues constitutes a tremendous po- an engineer in the role of advocate It has been my experience that intential to expand knowledge, to protect though it is not his or her intent to beendeavoring to communicate with legis-and improve the quality of the environ- such. For example. in the adversariallators, lawyers, business personnel, andment, and to enhance the quality of life structure of our courts, a scientist orjournalists, who may have little back-of all the peoples of the earth. I suggest engineer called as an expert witness byground in science, itis comparativelythat the great deterrents to the utilization one of the contending partiesis con-easy to bring them up to speed in recentof that potential are limited commitment strained to present information that isscientific advances if the individual un-to enabling all students, those who do consistent with the arguments of thatderstands the nature of scientific knowl-not become scientists and engineers as side of the case, even though the witnessedge and the nature of the process ofwell as those who do, to nave access to knows that there is equally valid infor-investigation that generates knowledge.meaningful experiences with mathemat- mation that would be supportive of theIn particular, it is essential that the indi-ics and science in the schools and limited other side of the case. This, in my opin-vidual understands the uncertainty asso-commitment to enabling all individuals ion, is demeaning and destructive to theciated with scientific knowledge and hasto extend their knowledge and undtr- expert witness and, in the long run,some concept of probability. Without thestanding of science, engineering, and destructive tothe credibilityof ourunderstanding, it is very difficult, if nottechnology throughout their lives. The authors in this chapter explore the relationship between mistrust that it has traditionally introduced into exchanges between science and freedom in two different ways. The first approach the worlds of science and religion. The culiaboration between reli- stresses the fuldamental importance of freedom of inquiry and gion and modern science is to the advantage of both, the Pope states, the need to protect scientific independence from intrusions by and just as religion requires religious freedom, science legitimately religious or political dogma. The second approach, an almost unique- claims freedom to carry on research. ly American perspective, equates scientific progress with the de- The editorials concerned with freedom and science in this chapter velopment of democracy and constitutional traditions. Building on also pursued themes shaped by contemporary events. Writing in the this latter argument, some writers have suggested that science and midst of early protests against racial segregation and apartheid, Bent- freedom go hand in hand, believing as they do that only within a ley Glass challenges the scientific community to dedicate itself to the democratic form of government can the fivedom of communication lefense of freedom of thought and the independence of scientific essential to scientific progress properly thrive. inquiry in resisting repressive racist policies. Can there be any ques- Various incidents have pror.ipted reflection on the need to protect tion, he asks, that the freedom of mankind and the freedom of and strengthen scientific freedom in order to preserve the traditional science along with it are threatened more by the defeats of Little autonomy and independence of the individual scientist. John T. Rock and Pretoria than by the Soviet success in launching Sputnik? Edsall, forexampie, responded sharply to the effects of McCarthyism Joseph Turner, in another provocative essay, resists the trend toward on the policies of the Public Health Service in the 1950s. In a endorsing democratic government as the only form of society in departure from customary practice, the PHS announced that it would which science can truly advance by suggesting that the overall effects withhold research grants on .f.e. basis of supposed1:. subversive act i vi- of totalitarian governments on the progress of science have not yet ties by the individual scientific in estigator. k r powerful testimonial 1,e_., fully determined. DeWitt Stetten, Jr., examines scientific free- on behalf of the importance of scientific freedom, Edsall argues that dom in the context of public debates over the uses and applications of government must support the independent, unfettered investigator recombinant DNA research and warns against the dangers of artificial who provides leadership in science and protect the conditions under constraints on the progress of science. which such work can flourish. Until governmental policies change How free should scientists be in pursuing their intellectual inter- Edsall states, he will not accept funds from any agency that denies ests? Is it enough to trust the character of the individual scientist in support to others for unclassified research for reasons unconnected setting boundaries on the methods and means used in developing with scientific competence or personal integrity. scientific knowledge? In presenting the case for freedom in science, No discussion a'svut the pi;aci,,es associated with scientific free- the authors in this chapter assumed that the unwntten norms of the dom would b complete without some mention of Galileo. In an scientific community would guide professional behavior. As will be address to the Pontifical Academy of Sciences in 1980, Pope John seen in the following chapter, others looked to a formal code of ethics Paul II reviews the details of the Church's actions against Galileo, and to regulate this freedom. RC invited further scholarly investigation of this incident to dispel the 24

by's statement had already aroused deep concern among scientists. For instance, on 15 April 1954, the American Society of Biological Chemists adopted a resolution strongly protesting such actions and requesting the National Academy of Sciences to investigate the situation. Similar action was later taken by the American Physiological Society (4) and by other scientific societies and groups. These protests and the vigorous action of the authorities of the National Academy in pursuing the problem have certainly played a major part in bringing about the inquiry that the National Academy Com- The vast growth of the support of scientif-search supported by the U.S. Public Healthmittee has been asked to undertake. ic research by Government has given theService. During the last decade, the Public Secretary Hobby's announcement is not a Government great powers over the careers ofHealth Service has established a splendidstatement of what might happen: it is a state- scientific investigators. On the whole, these record of achievement in its program of re-ment of what has happened and what is con- powers have been used thoughtfully and withsearch grants and fellowships, which havetinuing to happen. It was acknowledged in restraint by enlightened administrators whobeen administered with wisdom, and withthe statement itself that nearly 30 in- have worked in close collaboration with therespect and understanding for the conditionsvestigators had been affected by this ruling. scientists themselves. However, a seriousrequired by scientific men to achieve the bestOthers-1 do not know how manyhave threat to the freedo-a of the individual and tothat is in them. In the early spring of 1954,been affected since. In some cases the action certain basic right. has arisen lately. Re-however, reports began to circulate thattaken involves the refusal to award or to research grants for unclassified research bygrants for open, unclassified research werenew a grant, on grounds unconnected with men of high competence and generally un-beingrevokedordenied,ongroundsthe scientific qualifications of the in- challenged integrity have been withheld, orapparently political and unconnected withvestigator or with his personal integrity and abruptly revoked, because of unspecifiedthe competence or integrityof thein-character, as such terms are commonly allegations of supposedly subversive activi-vestigators involved. A statement of the poli-understood by ordinary men. In othercases ties. Therefore all scientists must welcomecy involved was made by Oveta Culp Hob-the action has been more drastic. it has in- boththerecentrequest from Shermanby, Secretary of the Department of Health,volved the sudden revocation ofa grant Adams, Assistant to the President, to DetlevEducation, and Welfare, on 28 April 1954.already awarded and approved, sometimes in W. Bronk, that the National Academy ofThis was published at the time in severalthe midst of a 3- or 5-year term of support. Sciences take the problem under considera-newspapers and has since been circulated byAction has been taken suddenly, perhaps tion, and Bronk's prompt acceptance of thisthe Federation of American Scientists. Thewith a month's notice, after which all funds responsibility on behalf of the Academy (/).most relevant paragraphs follow. were cut off. Explanation for the action has The issues involved are grave; they have been refused, but a double blow has been arousedwidespread concern amongthe We do not require security or loyaltyin- vestigations in connection with the award of re- dealt the investigator involved. First; he has members of the scientific community of the search grants When, however. intormation of a been deprived of funds vital to his research, United States Yet there has been little public substantial nature reflecting on loyalty of an in- often on extraordinarily short notice. discussion of the issues and apparently no dividual is brought to our attention, it becomes our Second, the action could be taken by some as duty to give it more serious consideration In those attempt at explicit formulation of principles ;mplying something dubious, possibly some- We may have confidence that the National instances where it is established to the satisfaction of this Department that the individual has engagedthing sinister, concerning the investigator's Academy Committee (2) that is to deal with or is engaging in subversive acti dies or that therepast. These implications are there, they are the problem will face the issues wisely andis serious question of his loyalty to the United intangible, nothing is revealed, no opportu- forthrightly. Yet committees like this one States. it is the practice of the Department to deny nity is given to the investigator to know the can operate effectively only on the basis of support. If the subject is an applicant, the grant is not nature of the implied charge: or to offer any informed and thoughtful opinion diffused awarded. If the subject is an investigator respon- reply. The revocation of funds, under such generally among American citizens,es- sible for a gram-supported project or is the recip- circumstances, can threaten his future career pecially those of the scientific world. As one ient of salary from the grant. the grant ister- and make other agencies reluctant to support of these citizens, I hays. set down the follow- minated unless the sponsoring institution desires his workIf he is in a position that lacks ing considerations, formulated gradually to appoint an acceptable substitute ThePublic Health Service supports a large seg tenure, it may even threaten the loss of his during many months of study and discussion ment of medical and related research through more job. It may be said that the careful avoidance with colleagues (3). CertainlyI claim no than 2,000 grants which involve some 14.000 per of publicity that has been maintained in these special wisdom or insight. Whatever may besons each year Although this practice has been matters is a protection for the individual inof valueinthis discussionisonlya followed since June. 1952. fewer than 30 pe ions have been denied support. volved However, when the investigator reaffirmation of principles long formulated turns to another agency to seek support. the and long honored but apparently often for- We may note that the policy, for whichfact that a grant has been revoked or denied gotten in the stre's of the atmosphere of cri-Secretary Hobby has taken responsibility inmust almost inevitably appear. and the sis in which w live today. this statement, was not initiated by her, forpotential threa. to his future career will arise We must first be explicit with regard toits beginning in June 1952 antedates thein acute form. where most of the trouble has occurred present Administration in Washington. This It should be reiterated here that the re- More than one Govemment agency has beenpoint is mentioned to emphasize that thesearch for which these men have been involved in actions of the type I am dis-issues 1 am discussing may be considered cussing; but the most numerous and mostapart from party politics. The author is at the Biological Laboratories. Harvard serious incidents have been related to re- The actions described in Secretary Hob- Univer ,,ty. Cambridge. MJSUChuscits 1 2 25 granted funds is not secret in any way Nolaw. If he has engaged in criminal subversive the obscure nature of the grounds on which threat to national secunty is involved in theiractivities he is subject to trial and to punish- support had been denied to others; they pursuingtheir work openly. They arement. Such activities, when they exist, arefeared for the younger people working in charged with no offense against the law. Theindeed frequently so cloaked in secrecy thattheir departments, whose future could be im- action taken against them has often involvedit may be exceedingly difficult to obtain theperiled by the denial of support, and they the breaking of a moral agreement, if not aevidence justifying a legal conviction, evenbecame more cautious because of this anxi- legal contract, by the supporting agency.when one may be convinced that the in-ety. Such fears are destructive. The struggle The action is taken outside the security sys-dividual is actually guilty. Such criminal ac-to guarantee to all men the right to speak tem and outside the law, in a no man's land oftivities, however, must be sharply dis-their minds on controversial issues without undefined accusations and vague suspicions.tinguished from expressions of opinion, nofear of repnsals has gone on for centures. A fundamental distinction between openmatter how repulsive the opinions mayThat nght is always in jeopardy and it must and classified research must be emphasized.appear to most of us. be constantly and actively maintained. It is Virtually all of us acknowledge the necessity For the most part, the identity of the per-certainly vital for scientific workers, to of a security system whenever secret work Issons who have been denied support for un-whom independent thinking is a basic neces- involved. In the present troubled state of theclassified research is unknown to me. I havesity in their work. worlda condition which is neither peacelearned the names of three or four of them, These fears are supported by Indications nor war and which has no earlier parallel inhowever, and they are men whom I knowthat information from anonymous accusers is the experience of most of ussome suchwell. They are outstanding in their fields ofbeing used as a ground for disqualifying in- system is indeed a somber necessity Theresearch. They have made major contribu- dividuals from holding grants from the Gov- rigorous requirements of security inevitablytions to our understanding of such subjects asernment. The actions taken have been so involve at times the barring of highly quali-the structures of biological macromolecules,carefully cloaked in secrecy that it is nearly fied individuals from access to secret In-immunologicalreactions,an0 metabolicimpossible for a private individual to know formation, if there is any reason for sub-processes. They are admired, respected, andwhat has been done. However. evidence stantial doubt concerning their loyalty or dis-trusted by their scientific associates. Some offrom anonymous accusers, not speaking cretion. On occasion the decision must bethem in the past may have upheld politicalunder oath, was employed against John P. taken to deny the individual such access,views that seem to me foolish or ill-judged,Peters in the hearing that led to his removal even though in fact he may be completelybut these are matters that they are free toas a special consultant to the Public Health loyal and trustworthy. If the system is wiselydecide for themselves. I do not know oneService. In the words of an editonal in the administered, such cases ; hould be rare. among my scientific colleagues who wouldWashington Post and Times Herald on 29 The application of the rules is not simple;question the integnty or character of theseNov. 1954 (5), the work of Peters "Involved the value of employing an unusually giftedmen or who would doubt in any way theirno access to confidential or strategic inindividual must be balanced against the riskssuitability to receive support for open andformation." Several eminent menCharles involved in his employment; for every per-unclassified research. W. Seymour, former president of Yale, son is to some extent a secunty risk. The The damage done directly to these men byCharles E. Clark, judge of the Second Cir- general principles, however, are clear, andthe policies of the U.S. Public Health Ser-cuit Court of Appeals, and C.N.H. Long, they differ in at least one fundamental re-vice is a serious matter. The actions takenformer dean of the Yale Medical School spect from the principles of the law Theare regarded as frankly outrageous by many,testified under oath on Peters' behalf. Yet assumption that an individual is innocent un- including myself. However, I submit that thethe verdict given upheld the anonymous hos- til proved guilty cannot be taken over di-gravest damage done by these policies is nottile informants, the identity of all but one of rectly into the secunty system. To workto the men whose grants are withheld. Thewhom was unknown even to the board that under that system is a privilege, not a right,few whose names are known to me standpassed on the case. and individuals may on occasion be rejectedhigh in the esteem of their colleages, both The case of Peters is still under consideraon suspicion, even if those suspicions arethey and we deeply resent the imputationstion by the Supreme Court, and it would be unfounded. We may grant these generalcast upon them. As yet I know of none ofimpertinent to express an opinion in advance principles underlying the operation of thethem who has not been able to obtain supportconcerning what the verdict should be. Let security system, but at the same time we mayfor his research elsewhere. This may not beus tentatively make the assumption that the raise grave questions regarding the wisdomtrue of all, some indeed, I am sure, fear thatSupreme Court will hold that Government with which they have been applied in specif-their ability to get support elsewhere ishas been acting within its rights in removing iccases. Overnalms application of thethreatened. All this is bad, but the worstPeters from his position.I would still hold rules, resulting in the exclusion of highly effects are upon other persons who continuethat Government, even if it has these pow- qualified individuals from service to theirto be approved and to receive support. Eachers, should refrain from exercising them ex- country for inadequate reasons, may in itselfone can picture himself also among thosecept for grave reasons of national security. If be one of the greatest of security risks that are in trouble, even though he, himself, a man has access to secret and vital informa- Withholding unclassified research grantsis in no danger, he may become more tion or if he is in a position in which he might on the basis of undisclosed information,guarded in his speech, some thoughts thatendanger national secunty by sabotage dur- however, is a policy that raises totally dif-come to him he may not speak to his col-ing a crisis, then accusations against him ferent issues. It is, in effect, an intrusion ofleagues as freely as before, hesitating now from any source must be carefully weighed. the security system into a realm that hasand then lest he may say something thatThey must be weighed with cautiona skill- nothing to do with secunty. Security con-might conceivably be used against him. fully worked anonymous accusation, frained siderations are a painful necessity, we accept Two of my colleaguesmen of greatby a clever Communist agent, could be a them as having compelling force within thecapacity, courage, and force of character powerful weapon in disqualifying a loyal ai.d area where secrecy must prevail. They arehave told me they have found this attitudegifted scientist from serving his country in a irrelevant and dangerous when invoked out-beginning to affect them. They granted thatsensitiveposition.Nevertheless,when side that area. on rational grounds they had nothing to fear;national securit, is involved, such warnings Whether he operates under the securitythey were clear in their consciences and incannot be disregarded.If a man working system or not, every person is subject to thethe eyes of the law; but they knew too wellunder the security system is removed from 26

his post because of anonymous charges made shown an admirable solicitude for the free- I shall neither ask for nor accept funds from against him, this need not imply guilt of any dom of the investigator. The laboratory with any Government agency that denies support sort; it merely means that there is considered which I have been associated for many years to others for unclassified research for reasons to be a risk in his employment in a sensitive has received generous and understanding unconnected with scientific competence or post, a risk that the responsible authorities do support from the Public Health Service, personal integrity. If I do receive funds for not feel justified in taking. which has made possible a long series ofresearch and I learn subsequently that the For a man who operates outside the securi- researches with which I am proud to have granting agency has adopted such a policy ty system, however, the usual standards ofbeen associated. All this I am happy to toward other individuals, I shall stop using our law and our society should prevail. Ifacknowledge. However, the recently de- such funds and shall return the unexpended such a man is trusted and respected by his veloped policy of the U.S. Public Healthbalance to the agency that awarded them to colleagues and neighbors, if they testify to Service with which I am concerned here, me. his integrity, anonymous accusations should while ostensibly designed to oppose subver- I state this as a personal policy without be ruled out of consideration in relation tosion, appears to me to be itself subversive urging that my colleagues join me in it.I his fitness to receive a grant for open re-subversive of the traditional liberties of the know many whose personal convictions are search. It is a dirty business to make such individual and of his right to be judged byessentially identical with mine but who feel accusations or to lend an ear to them when due process of law or by something analo- precluded from taking similar action because they are made; they poison the straightfor- gous to due process in matters that do not lie of their responsibility for obtaining funds for ward trust in dealings between men, which is strictly within the domain of the law. their departments and especaillyfor the the normal basis on which scientists, like Many will say that the issues involved are younger workers whose careers would be most other people, carry on their work not as grave as I depict them; that very few imperiled if funds were cut off. For myself, together. To strike at this basis of trust is to people are being hurt; that these disturbances however, I can say only that I see great dan- sow suspicion and hostility, to weaken thewill pass; and that we may endanger the ger in the present situation. Having freedom coherence of our society, and thereby towhole structure of Government support ofto speak and holding the convictions that I damage the national security itself. science by challenging the procedures now do, I feel that I cannot keep silent in the face The policies attacked here violate a long being adopted. I reject such arguments. Cer- of a policy which I believe to be a threat both traditiona tradition deeply rooted in En- tainly I do not share the fears of the alarmists to the freedom of science and to the basis of glish and American lawextending farwho believe that our society is rapidly the social order in which most of us believe. beyond the confines of the law as such. This becoming totalitarian; the fact that articles Immensely powerful forces are transform- tradition insists upon the right of the in- like this one can be published and freely dis- ing our society and the status of science and dividual, if an accusation is lodged against cussed is good disproof of such ideas. Yet scientists within our society. For a vigorous him, to know the nature of the accusation the trend toward totalitarian procedures is modern nation, a flourishing science is a and the identity of the accuser. One might present in the arbitrary actions that I have condition for national strength and even for attempt to evade the issue here by saying that discussed; and the time for resistance is now, survival. Scientists are urgently needed, and there is no accusationthat the Govemmentnot later. The men who are enforcing the the pressure grows increasingly strong to is free to grant or withhold funds as it decisions I oppose are certainly not ruthlessconsider the scientist as the servant of the pleases; that the receiving of funds forautocratsthey are probably conscientious state. Insofar as he operates under the securi- scientific research is a privilege, not a right, administrators, worried about maintaining ty system, or in any case in which he serves and that this privilege may be withdrawn at the flow of Govemmei funds for scienceas an adviser to Government, the scientist is any time by the granting authority at its own and fearful lest congressional investigators indeed a servant of the state. It is imperative, discretion. We may admit that technically should charge some recipient of a Govern- however, to preserve, in spite of the there is much truth in this. The Govemment ment grant with being a subversive char- portentous growth of the power of the state, may set the terms upon which it bestows acter. All this is human and understandable, the tradition of free scientific inquiry by per- these funds; if the proposed recipient dis- but I believe that it shows a dangerous timid-sons who in their work owe no allegiance approves the terms, he is free to refuse the ity on the part of certain administrators andexcept to the spirit of inquiry, the desire to proffered funds until the terms are altered. that it has done great harm. Even if only a understand, and the sense of beauty in dis- But our Government exists to serve the peo- few of our colleagues are hurtwhether it iscerning patterns of order amid the chaotic ple, and it is my conviction that the people one person or manyI believe that wemultiplicity of phenomena. It is the inare not best served by offering money forshould stand up and protest on their behalf. dependent, unfettered investigators who basic scientific research on such terms as In any case the threat is not to a few persons have made the great germinal discoveries, this. It is not enough, of course, for the sci- only; it is to all of us; for no one knows and if we do not provide the conditions in entists to be convinced of this fact; the ul- whether or not he will be the next victim, which such men can flourish, we shall lose timate decision is in the hands of the Amer- and whether or not he will find his own sup- leadership in science. Yet in our world of ican people and many will not accept the port cut away and his own future in today such scientists, like others who work point of view expounded here unless itis jeopardy. on problems of a more applied type, must fully and carefully explained to them. Inevitably the decision concerning proper receive much of the support for their work It is a matter of profound regret to me thataction in this grave situation is not easy for from Government. It is one of the great prob- the policies that are here attacked have been most scientists. Because I am not a depart- lems of our time to maintain a Federal Gov- formulated and applied by the U.S. Public ment head, and because I derive my research ernment that has at its disposal immense Health Service, which has performed mag- support from other agencies that have main- material resources and immense power, and nificent service during the years since thetained the tradition of freedom, I feel that I still to insure that the power is used with due war in the support of fundamental research in can speak more openly than many of my col- respect for the integrity of the individual and the United States. Its policies have, in gener- leagues. I can say only that the withholding for his personal freedom. It is, I think, one of al, been admirable. Its administrators have of research grants for unclassified research the great American achievements of the past shown an enlightened outlook in promoting on grounds unconnected with the scientific generation that we have largely succeeded, fundamental research; and, apart from the competence and integrity of the investigatorduring a period of profound social change, in lamentable issues here discussed, they have is abhorrent to me. Under the circumstances combining these almost incompatible objec- 34 27 tives. I believe that we can and must succeed REFERENCES AND NOTES Service. The reply mentioned none but stated that the in doing this in the field of Government sup- problem was still under study. 1 thcn decided to sub- I. Science 121, 7A (I I Feb1955). mit the paper for publication, after revising the open- port of science. To succeed requires in- 2. Science 121, 490 (8 Apr. 1955). ing statement to take account of recent events and cessant vigilance to prevent undue encroach- 3 A draft of this paper was sent to Oveta Culp Hobby, adding two paragraphs related to the use of an- Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and onymous informers 1 T E ments on personal freedom and a patient de- Welfare, on 23 Dec. 1954 The letter of acknowledg- 4 Science 120, 1010 (17 Dec 1954). termination that scientists and Goverment ment stated that the problems discussed in the paper 5Repnnted in Science 120. 1009 (17 Dec. 1954). were being considered On 27 Jan. 1955 [ again wrote administrators cooperate and understand one to Secretary Hobby asking whether the paper con- another to make the system work. tained any misstatements about the U.S. Public Health

enlightenment of a racially different ele- meAt. Apartheid preaches very plausibly the theory of the equal but separate development of white and nonwhite people in residence, in labor, in education. Yet it is plain to see that actually itis a barefaced effort of the whites to keep the black and colored people of South Africa in servitude and educational inequality. Education will not be entrusted to the natives themselves to develop in independence, but will be gently governed for them by a (white) Minister of Native Affairs, whose viewpoint is sufficiently expressed in In the 325 years since the ordeal of Galileo national Committee on Science and Free- his own words: "What is the use of teaching the physical sciences have been emancipated dom, of which Michael Polanyi is chairman. the Bantu child mathematics when it cannot from political and ecclesiastical domination This committee has published to date nine use itin practice? That is quite ab- and, as the globe-encircling sputniks testify, bulletins, of which the last three deal respec- surd. .. .Education must train and teach can thrive even in the shadow of the State's tively with "Self-government in Modern people in accordance with their opportunities adoption of dialectical materialism as itsBritish Universities," "Hungary, October, in life, according to the sphere in which they official philosophy. The life sciences, a cen- 1956," and "Apartheid, the Threat to South live... .Good racial relations cannot exist tury since Darwin, still stand embroiled, still Africa's Universities." Each of these is when the education is given under the con- struggle for ttnecessary freedom to grow engrossing reading. trol of people who create wrong expectations untrammelled by common prejudice and The academic freedom of the universitieson the part of the Native himself, ex- official disfavor. Yet in the end all science of the Western World and the freedom ofpectations which clash with the possibilities must stand free or become the slave of the science are inextricably interwoven. In fact,in this country." State, the prostitute of material desires. For the latter may be considered a very branch of The immediate threat is the exclusion, scientists there can, therefore, be no greater the former. No scientist can really afford to from the five "open universities" which now dedication than to the defense of their free- be unconcerned with threats to the academic admit them. of all nonwhite students, under dom of thought and of choice of investiga- freedom of any university, whether in his a Separate University Education Bill which tion. own land or abroad. will probably be passed early in 1958. Can The Congress for Cultural Freedom in a The Nazi doctrines of racial superioritythere be any question that in the long run the conference in Hamburg in 1953 undertook to are not dead. In one semblance or anotherfreedom of mankindand the freedom of arouse men to the defense of scientific free- they rear themselves wherever men of one science along with itis more imperiled by dom. That effort has been continued since dominant social group fear themselves the defeats of Little Rock and Pretoria than 1953 through the untiring work of the Inter- threatened by the numbers and growing by the success ofSputnik? 28

compatible with total bondage in another part. Research in its later stages, it is true, has a way of breaking down the very barriers that made earlier progress possible. If science is compartmentalized, it also strives toward unity. The turn of the century saw how increased knowledge about the structure of the atom broke down the barriers between chemistry and physics, and we are now watch- ing our growing knowledge of the structure of the gene break down the barriers between Because science depends so immediately one thing, freedom by itself is not enough. biology and the physical sciences. But unity, on freedom of inquiry, partisans of political Although Schliemann may have been free to in turn, produces new compartments. If freedom are t...npted to believe that democ- dig as deeply as he liked, he had first to where once stood a fence there is now a racy, whatever its shortcomings in producingamass the fortune necessary to finance his house, the house itself is a kind of enclosure space spectaculars, must in the end be thedigging. But what is more interesting is that and within it lives a new group of specialists. form of government best designed to pro-science has other characteristics besides the One point about a totalitanan government duce pure science. The argument is that theneed for freedom, and these other characteris clear. To the extent that it chooses to med- individual must be free to propose hypt th- istics suggest that this need if deep may not dle with the methods of research, or to dic- eses and test them. Heinrich Schliemann inbe broad. tate the results of research, science will be the 19th century, for example, had to be free Besides the posing and testing of hypoth- the loser. But without claiming that the pull both to believe that Hissarlik was the site of eses, science is also characterized by its pro- in science toward specialization is somehow Homer's Troy and to go to the spot and dig. cedure of not attempting to answer all ques- stronger than the pull toward unity, it is still If some government had held, as a conse- tions at once. Scientific knowledge is possi- possible to say that freedom to study a partic- quence of its metaphysics, that Troy never ',Ie because it is compartmentalized, because ular problem is not immediately dependent existed, or if some government had feared nossible to discover truths about oneon freedom to study every problem. What that the practice of digging for Troy might question and at the same time ignore other has yet to be fully determined is what hap- lead to a penchant for digging into other mat- questions. Hydrodynamics, for example, can pens when a totalitarian government chooses ters as well, then there would have been no be studied independently of thermodynam- to support some parts of science vigorously archeological confirmation of the Achaean ics, and the two disciplines together have and intelligently, because it sees the achieve- heroes. nothing to say about the sensory qualities of ments of science as contributing to its own This argument is sound, but the im-a cold drink of water on a hot day. It maygreater glory. plications for the superiority of democracy as well be that freedom of the most complete an environment for science are limited. For sort in one part of knowledge is entirely

ment of the Inquisition ;lost Galileo, which forbade certain lines of inquiryIn an otherwise impressive forward march of science in the Soviet Union, a generation of genetics research was lost by the constraints resulting from Lysenkoisrn Such losses must enter into the cost-benefit analysis in determining whether to encourage, permit, discourage, or forbid a particular line of in- 1,estigation. Among the lines of research against which voices have recently been raised are the The First Amendment to the Constitution Abridgments of freedom of speech and of following: explicitly forbids the Congress from abridg-the press have frequently occurred and have I) What are the genetic contributions to ing the freedoms of speech and of the press been contested. News media report move- intelligence? It imposes no comparable constraint abridg-ments in many communities tu l!mit freedom 2) What kinds of experiments may proper- ing freedom to learn, to teach, or to inquire,to teach, especially in areas such as sex ly be performed on informed consenting yet these may be construed to be impliciteducation. Analogously we encountLr today adults? Minors? Fetuses? Prisoners? freedoms and indeed seem to be of a compar-senous questions, arising in part from scien- 3) May one screen infants for a variety of able quality. All of these freedoms are, in tists themselves, about the appropriateness genetic defects, some with known, others fact, abridged from time to time, subject to of pursuing certain lines of scientific inquiry. with currently unknown clinical con- the test of a real and present danger. In the Some of the consequences of constraining sequences? absence of such demonstrable danger, thefreedom of inquiry are well known Jacob 4) Under what circumstances may one accepted position is and should be jealouslyBronowski recently reminded us that the loss tamper with the genetic process, as by the to guard the constitutionally guaranteed free- of Italy's lead position in the Renaissance of introduction of foreign genetic material into doms, both those expressed and those im- science followed immediately upon and the genome? plied. doubtless was caused by the adverse judg- 5) When may one meddle with human

S 6 29 conception and pregnancy as by artificial in-sorry state. binant molecules. On the other hand, it semination, abortion, cloning, in vitro Each man or woman will assess whether a strikes me that screening infants for abnor- fertilization, or the use of surrogate mothers? real and present danger exists in each partic- mal karyoty pes presents only such dif- In arrivir, at considered judgments onular line of inquiry The judgment will be ficulties and problems as practicing physi- these and a number of other problems, it isdifficult but not entirely unfamiliar. It is the cians cope with on a eail) basis. The wise suggested that we treat freedom of inquiry assame judgment we make in assessing everyphys,cian must try to minimize tae adverse we have learned to treat freedom of speech instance of censorship that comes to our con equences of unfavorable diagnosis. that is, agree to abstain when there is a real attention. Is the danger in pursuing a particu- It is fashionable to criticize the ethics and and present danger. By this test, the fact that lar line of research of such a magnitude that, humanity of scientists, as in othe times we the problem may be difficult, or that its solu- in another context, we would willingly abdi- have criticized the writers or painters. If his- tion may prove politically embarrassing orcate freedom of speech? tory is any guide, this too shall pass. Then unpopular, is insufficient ground for invok- Judgments will surely be individual. For we may amve at the balanced state wherr. al! ing constraint. Indeed, a science that shiesexample, I acknowledge the danger inherent questions may be asked save those which away from a line of inquiry merely becausein some of the scenarios composed for the pose a real danger to .he community, the the result may be difficult to manage is in a fabrication of certain types of DNA recom- environment, or the individual.

various evils that threaten it. ;here is no doubt that apolicd science has rendered and will render immense services to man if it is inspired by love, ruled by wisdom, and accompanied by the courage that defends it against undue interference by all tyrannical powers. Ap- plied science must be allied with conscience so that through the triad science- technology-conscience, the true good of humanity will be served. Unfortunately, asI had occasion to sayin my encyclical Redemptor Ito- minis, "Man today seems always men- Along with Your Excellency[Dr.this primary area of science feels all theaced by what he produces. ... This Chagas] and with Drs. Dirac and Weiss-fascination of the words of Saint Augus- seems to constitute the principal act of kopf, both illustrious members of thetine: "Intellection valde ama" (Epist.the drama of human existence today" Pontifical Academy of Sciences, i rejoice120, 3, 13: Patrologut barna 33, 459) (No. 15). Man must emerge victorious in this solemn commemoration of thethat is, to "love intelligence greatly" and from this drama, which threatens to de- centenary of the birth of Albert Einstein.its function, to know the truth. Basic sci-generate into tragedy, and he must redis- The Apostolic See also wishes to renderence is a good, worthy of being verycover his authentic kingship over the to Albert Einstein the honor that is duemuch loved, foritis knowledge andworld and his full dominion over the him for the eminent contribution he hastherefore the perfection of man's in-things he produces. Today, as I wrote in made to the progress of sciencethat is,telligence. Even more than its technical the same encyclical, "the fundamental to the knowledge of the truth present inapplications, it must be honored for it-meaning of this 'kingship' and of this the mystery of the universe. self, as an integral part of our culture. 'dominion'of man over thevisible I feel myself in full agreement with myFundamental science is a universal goodworld, which is given him as a task by predecessor Pius XI, and with those whothat all people must be able to cultivatethe Creator, consists in the priority of succeeded him to the Chair of Saint Pe-in complete freedom from every form ofethics over technology. the preeminence ter, in inviting members of the Pontificalinternational servitude or intellectual co-of people over things, and the superiority Academy of Sciences, and all other sci-lonialism. of spirit over matter" (No. 16). entists, to bring aboutthe progress of Basic research must be free with re- This triple superiority is maintained to the sciences ever more nobly and moregard to political and economic powers,the extent that the sense of the transcen- intensely, without asking anything morewhich must cooperate in its developmentdence of man over the world, and of God of them; this excellent aim and thiswithout impeding its creativity or sub-over man, is preserved. The Church, by noble effort represent a mission of serv-jugating it to their own ends. Like anycarrying out her mission of guardian, and ing the truth with which we entrustother truth, scientific truth must renderadvocate of both transcendences, bethem'' (Motu propno In mitts solm iu .account only to itself and to the supremelieves that she is assisting science to 28October1936,onthePontificaltruth that is God, creator of man and ofkeep its purity in the area of basic re- Academy of Sciences: Arta Apostolt«leall things. search and accomplish its service to man Sedis 28, 1936, p. 424). In its second aspect, science turns toin the area of practical applications. practical applications, which find their full development in the diverse tech- This article is based on the address by Pope John Science and Religion nologies. In the area of its concrete ap- Paul Hat the Einstein session of the Pontifical Acad. emy of Sciences. Vatican City, 10 November 1979. plications, science is necessary to hu- The Pope's speech. which was given in French. was translated for Science by Professor Robert Nicolich The search for truth is the task of baskmanity in order to satisfy the just re- of the Catholic University of America. washmg1on. science. The researcher who moves intoquirements of life and to overcome the D.0 20064. 7 30

On the other hand, the Church willing- found, too.amongChristians in- cal discoveries: "Qum' amnia ope Per- ly recognizes that she has benefited from sufficiently informed of the legitimate au- spialli a me et oOtaii ditina press science.It is to science, among othertonomy of science. Sources of tensions grow. pom i.t ahhinc dielms things, that we must attribute what theand conflicts, they have led many minds reperta. atque observata fuerudt" (Side- Council has said concerning certain as-to think that science and faith were op- reus Nun1iu.c,Venetiis, aped Thomam pects of modern culture: "New condi-posed." The reference to Galileo is ex- Baglionum. MDCX, fol. 4). "All of this tions have their impact finally on reli-pressed clearly in the note joined to this has been discovered and observed these gious life itself The rise of a critical spir-text, which cites the volume Vita e opere last days thanks to the 'telescope' that I it purifies it of a magical view of thedi Galileo Guile, by Monsignor Pio Pas- have invented, after having been enlight- world and of superstitions that still circu-chini, published by tile Pontifical Acad-ened by divine grace." late, and exacts a more personal and ex- emy of Sciences. The Galilean confession of divine illu- plicit adherence to faith; as a result, To go beyond this stand taken by the mination of the mind of the scientist many persons are achieving a more vividCouncil, I hope that theologians, scien-finds an echo in the text of the Council's sense of God" (Gaudiunt et spes. No. 7). tists, and historians, imbued with a spiritconstitution, on the Church in the mod- The collaboration between religionof sincere collaboration, will more deep- ern world: "Whoever labors to penetrate and modern science is to the advantagely examine Galileo's case, and by recog-the secrets of reality with a humble and of both, without in any way violating nizing the wrongs, from whatever side steady mind is being led by the hand of their respective autonomy. Just as reli-they may have come, will dispel the mis-God, even if he remains unaware of it" gion requires religious freedom, science trust that this affair still raises in many (hoc.cit.).The humility stressed by legitimately claims freedom to carry on minds, against a fruitful harmony be-the Council's text is a virtue necessary research. The second Vatican Council,tween science and faith, between the both for scientific research and for com- after reaffirming with the first VaticanChurch and the world. I give all my sup- mitment to the faith. Humility creates a Council the just freedom of the arts and port to this task, which will honor the climate favorable for a dialogue between human disciplines in the area of theirtruth of faith and of science and open the the believer and the scientist;it ca!ls own principles and their own methods.door to future collaboration. for enlightenment by God, recognized as solemnly recognizes "the legitimate au- Permit me to submit to your attention such or not, but valued in both cases by tonomy of human culture and especiallyand consideration some points that seem one who humbly seeks the truth. of the sciences" (Gaudium et spes, No. to me important for viewing Galileo's Galileo formulated important norms of 59). On the occasion of this solemn com- case in its true light. In this matter, thean epistemological character that are in- memoration of Einstein, I would like to points of agreement between religion and dispensable for reconciling Holy Scrip- confirm again the Council's declarationscience are more numerous and above allture and science. In his letter to the on the autonomy of science in its func- more important than the lack of under-Dowager Grand Duchess of Tuscany, tion of searching for the truth inscribed standing that has led to a bitter and pain-Christine of Lorraine, he reaffirms the during the creation by the finger of God.ful conflict drawn out over the followingtruth of Scripture: "Holy Scripture can Filled with admiration for the genius centuries. never lie, provided its true meaning is of the great scientist, in whom is re- He who is rightly cancel the founder ofunderstood, which-1 do not think it can vealed the imprint of the creative spirit, modern physics declared explicitly thatbe deniedis often hidden and very dif- without intervening in any way with athe two truths, of faith and of science,ferent from what a simple interpretation judgment on the doctrines concerningcan never contradict each other. "Holyof the words seems to indicate" (national the great systems of the universe, whichScripture and nature proceed equallyedition of the works of Galileo, vol. V, p. is not in her power to make, the Churchfrom the divine Word, the forme! as it315). Galileo introduces a principle of nevertheless recommends these doc-were dictated by the Holy Spirit, the lat-interpretation of the sacred books that trines for consideration by theologians in ter as a very faithful executor of God'sgoes beyond the literal meaning but is in order to discover the harmony that existsorders." as he wrote in his letter to Fa- accord with the intention and type of ex- between scientific truth and revealedther Benedetto Castelli on 21 Decemberposition proper to each of them. It is nec- truth. 1613 (national edition of the works of Ga- essary, as he affirms, thatthe wise men lileo, vol. V, pp. 282-285). The secondwho explain it should bring out their Vatican Council does not express itself'rue meaning." The Case of Galileo otherwise;itevenusessimilar ex- Ecclesiastical authorities admit that pressions when it teaches: "Methodical there is more than one way to interpret Mr. President, you said very rightly investigation in every branch of learning, the Holy Scriptures. In fact. it was ex- that Galileo and Einstein each character-if carried out in a genuinely scientific',kit!, stated in the encyclical Dirino of- ized an era. The greatness of Galileo ismanner and in accord with moral stan-flame Spiritu of Pius XII that there Are recognized by all, as is that of Einstein;dards, never truly conflicts with faith: fordifferent literary styles in the sacred but while today we honor the latter be-earthly matters and the concerns of faith books and therefore interpretations must fore the College of Cardinals in the apos- derive from the same God" (Gaudium et conform to the character of each. tolic palace, the former had to sufferspes, No. 36). The various points of agreement that I muchwe cannot deny itfrom men Galileo feels in his scientific research have brought to mind do not only resolve and organizations within the Church. the presence of the Creator who inspires all the problems of Galileo's case, but The Vatican Council has recognized andhim and aids his intuition, acting in thethey contribute to cleating a favorable deplored unwarranted interferences: inmost recesses of his spirit. With regard starting point for their honorable solu- "We cannot but deploreit is written into the invention of the telescope, hetion, a state of mind propitious for an number 36 of the Coustcir s constitutionwrites at the beginning of Sidereus Nun- honest and straightforward resolution of Gaudiurnet sees certainattitudescius, recalling several of his astronomi-old conflicts. 31

The existence of the Pontifical Acad- which eminent scientists belong today, is harmony that can exist between the truths emy of Sciences, with which Galileoa visible sign that shows to the people of science and the truths of faith. was, in a sense, associated through the of the world, without any form of racial old institutions that preceded the one to or religious discrimination, the profound

Legal Assistance, representing the California Agrarian Action Project, to block mechanization research in agriculture. One objective is to require the University of Cali- fornia to submit social impact statements on proposed research projects before they can be approved. This suit illustrates again the ways in which special interest groups attempt to regulate scientific research which they perceive is not beneficial to them. They do not accept the evidence that overall social and economic benefits far outweigh the costs. Each case is individually controversial and A series of events in recent months signals the use of pound animals has been met, the each decision sets a precedelit. Considered the need for attention and action by the advocates push on toward banning the use ofcollectively, the impact can be overwhelm- scientific community. On the surface, the animals from any source and for any scientif- ing. It is essential, therefore, that members events appear unrelated, but viewed col- ic purpose. of the scientific community become active lectively, the ramifications of each have sub- The second concern involves the suit filed participants in the debates. Highly com- stantial impact on the future of scientific In- by Jeremy Ram to block the release of mitted and articulate individuals and groups quiry. genetically engineered organisms into the are presenting their cases to the public and First, an active campaign has beenenvironment. The case in question centers on the lawmakers without equally articulate re- launched by various individuals and groupsa bacterium which, in its native state, serves buttal from scientists. Since litigation has be- to reduce, or ban altogether, the use of an-as a nucleus for ice crystal formation. The corn. the method by which policy to con- imals in scientific research. Initially, these removal of a single gene eliminates this strain scientific research is decided, scientif- factions rally against the sale and distribution characteristic. The next step was to have ic societies may well need to invest of pound animals. This is an emotionally been the introduction of the modified bacte- individually and collectivelyin legal repre- charged issuethe public readily identifiesria into the environment of crop plants, sentation to present their views in opposition with the homeless animals because of attach- replacing the native strain and reducing theto such constraints. ments to their own pets. Legislation in-potential for frost injury to plants. The As the National Science Board Commis- troduced to curtail the use of animals in re-restraining order against this, obtained by sion on Pre-College Education recently con- search passed into law in Massachusetts in Rifkin et al., is based on allegations that acluded, it is critical that all students return February. Although a similar measure wasNaticnal Institutes of Health review com- not only to the fundamentals of reading, defeated in the California legislature, the mittee failed to conduct an adequate study writing, and arithmetic, but also to scientific proponents may seek a public referendum. and submit a satisfactory environmental im- and technological literacy. In the interest of They may also seek to establish provisions pact statement. However, the basic issue is free inquiry and the advances that science for external review boards to make judg-that many supporters of the litigation are fun- has broughtand must continue to bring ments concerning which research proposalsdamentally oppose, ) genetic engineering to civilization, we must invest our energies involving animal experimentation are jus- and seek to block ;matron of the new on all fronts. To allow these and other anti- tified and which are not. Evidence thus far technc logy . science activities to go uncontested would be indicates that once the objective of banning Third is a suit brought by California Rural unconscionable.

9 32

however, undercut aeaocrnic freedom and open discourse, transforming the character of contemporary higher education and undermining the university's capacity to make positive contributions to society. Althoi.'gh academic freedom is not the only value that snould inform our actions, we should consider no erosion of academic freedom without carefully scrutinizing the reasons for it. Perhaps we could ask ourselves questions such as the following as we prepare for the discussions. 1) What is the source of the university's right to free inquiry and what is its relziton to Universities are being exhorted by a wide as a defining characteristic of universities the society that r. ants that righ' variety of interest groups to take official po- has become pervasive. lat, what obligations accrue from this nght? sitions on issues such as military research. This is a fundamental change 3 ^t the dis- 2) If the university as an institution takes a the U.S. corporate presence in South Africa, tinction between universitie. =Is institutions moral or political stand, what implication and restrictions on information flow. Often and faculty and students as individuals is does this have for members of the communi- the groups making such demands are per- often not recognized by the various publics ty with other points of view? plexed by the resistance they neet, since who support universities and who loot, to the 3) How do we identify those moral and they believe their particular perspective to be university as an institution for an affirmation political issues on which a university should in the long-term interest of the human com- or reaffirmation of particular points of view. adopt a particular point of view? For ex- munity and, therefore, of the university com- The work of the academic community is ample, is the range of admissible inquiry a munity as well. undeniably related to and supported by a par- matter for administrative decision? If so, It is essential to understand, however, that ticular set of values. These include the value under what circumstances do we allow re- over the past century American colleges and of knowledge, the benefit of fair and open strictions or teaching and research programs universities have been transformed from inquiry, respect for other points of view, andthat offend an individual s moral or political quiet centers of traditional moral, politicri!, the possibility of human progress. In addi- value? and social values into educational and re- tion, most universities are now on record as Experience indicates that transforming search centers at which inquiry is more im- taking a stand on some moral issues such as moral stmtiments into policy statements le- portant than dogma. It is only in recent times affirma:ive action and research on human quires carefully articulated ideas of the mis- that the faculties and students of colleges and subjects. We must, however. be very cau- sion of a university and the impact of teach- universities have acquired both the freedom tious aout adding to this list. Without de- ing and research on that mission. In this con- and the obligation to consider subjects and veloping a means of distinguishing ideas text,Ibelieve that a university remains a pursue lines of investigation that may con- from ideologies we risk the possibility of irzative part of society only as long as it tradict prevailing beliefs in science or undermining the environment that supports remains an intellectually open community threaten the vested interests of powerful so- our principal commitments and responsibili- and riot the ally of a particular point of view. cial and political groups. It is only in this ties. Returning to an earlier model of moral. stlitury that the notion of academic freedom political, and scientific orthodoxy would.

4 0 Should there be a universal code of ethics for scientists? The pros position that there needs to be an ethical basis for scientific activity to and cons of this issue became the subject of debate as the incorporate it into human affairs. His four basic principles for an ethic discussion of freedom and responsibility in science began to of science are: to cherish truthfulness, to avoid self-aggrandizement, raise ethical concerns among scientists. Calls were heard for develop- to defend the freedom of scientific inquiry and opinion, and to ment of a formal set of principles to guide the behavior of members of communicate one's findings through publication and instruction. the scientific community. An exchange of letters in 1963 provides a window on the thoughts Not everyone agreed with this approach. Many scientists strongly and passions attached to the proposed development of a code of ethics resisted the notion that their profession should adopt a formal code of for scientists. To Lawrence Cranberg's suggestion that scientists may ethics as had the professions of law, medicine, and engineering. It wish to emulate their engineer colleagues by developing a formal was suggested that such a code would do tittle to prevent willful code, F.R. Fosberg and Henry Lanz respond that such codes serve misconduct and might stifle creative thought by merely stressing little purpose in guiding truly virtuous conduct. Indeed, writes Lanz, formal etiquette. the "mere thought of setting up a code of ethics for scientists is In an early analysis of obstacles to developing a uniform code of insulting." A final letter from W.E. Graham describes briefly the ethics for scientists, Ward Pigman and Emmett B. Carmichael review efforts of the Society for Social Responsibility in Science to imple- rights and obligations to be considered prior to the adoption of a ment principles of personal moral responsibility for the consequences formal code and suggest steps to reconcile the traditions of science of professional work. Echoing sentiments expressed sporadically in with the emerging relationship between science and government. earlier times, the SSRS pledge is one of the few efforts by a scientific Bentley Glass, noting that science and ethics are both inescapably organization to require its members to adhere to principles of social subjective activities that are affected by evolutionary forces, takes the responsibility as a prerequisite of membership. RC

41 written into a formal code. We believe that such an action would maintain the advance of science, increase its public support, and improve the professional relations of scientists. Improved professional relations would better morale and increase productivity among research men. Mills (7) has pointed out the social implications of ethical behavior in the distribution of research grants. The planning of an ethical code for scientists should take into account first the scientist's general obligations asmember of soc- A new phenomenon of our present-dayperiod marked by the development of largeiety, and beyond that his special obligation society is the obviously important roleresearch groups, many in the pursuit of re-as a scientist to protect societyhere, there played by science. Only a short time ago search for profit. As a result, it is timely forare many problems related to warfare, to the science was considered by many "practical"the scientist to consider his professional health and general well-being of mankind, men as a plaything of inconsequential im- traditions and to relate them in terms of theand to nationalism versus intemationalism. portance in contributing to the welfare ofstructure of modem scientific work. Such a code should preserve the scientist's society. Although the significance of science These traditions are essentially an unwrit-ethical traditions and incorporate the was becoming more generally evident beforeten code of professional ethics. As pointedscientific method. It should state the scien- World War II, this war demonstrated to theout by Leake (2), the term "professional tist's obligation to explain the nature and public in general and to legislators and busi- ethics" as used generally includes the atti-purposes of science, and the policies in deal- nessmen in particular that science, especially tude of the individual scientist to society and ing directly with the public. It should clarify basic science, is much more than a scholarlyto other scientists. It will be so used here the scientist's attitudes toward patents and pursuitthat itis a vital force for theThis concept of professional ethics inextric-secrecy restrictions. It should affirm the sci- advancement or destruction of society. Sci-ably involves social obligations, questions ofentist's obligations to individualsto his ence is now "big business." As a result, theetiquette, and adherence to accepted tradi-employer, his associates, other scientists, scientist cannot and must not remain a schol-tions. Claude Bemard (3) has contributedand his assistants and graduatesand scien- arly recluse divorced from the remainder ofone of the better discussions of the ethicaltists' obligation as a group to other pro- society. His behavior and that of societyqualities needed in scientists, and the fessions. toward him will greatly influence the prog- relationship of these qualities in the scientific We have merely indicated the scope of the ress of science and, to an increasing extent, method, although his remarks apply in the problem. To deal with it fully in allits that of society itself. main to medicine and physiology. phases would require the efforts of scientists During its long period of development, Some of our professional organizations in many different fields of study and kinds of science :gas evolved a code of professionalhave established formal written codes of pro- employment. Some of these phases have tradition and ethics, largely in an unwritten fessional ethics (4). In the medical fieldalready received considerable attention. Be- form. This code, really the foundation of thenumerous papers and books have been writ-cause the results of atomic research have scientific method in many of its aspects, has ten on the subject. One of the first extensive such unmistakable implications for society, to a considerable extent been responsible for codifications was that of Percival(2) (1803), attention has been paid to the scientist's atti- the achievements of science. Polanyi's (1) but the general precepts of Hippocrates (cir- tude on the use of his discoveries, particular- description of the effect of disregard for ca 500 B.C.) have modem acceptance. Aly for military purposes, and to the necessity scientific traditions is applicable to many of major consideration at the first meeting ofof his being socially conscious (8, 9, 10, 11, our modern industrial and research organiza-the American MedicalAssociation in1847 7, 12). Other phases of the problem have tions: was the formulation of a code of professionalreceived little or no public consideration. ethics (2). The present code provides means Many of the scientist's obligations are Those who have visited the parts of the world for enforcement by its members. There has where scientific life is Just beginning, know of the reciprocal in the sense that the scientist has backbreaking struggle that the lack of scientific been some discussion of the professional re-grown to expect certain conditions for his sponsibilities of industrial chemists tradition imposes on the pioneers. !sere research (5)and a work, and to a considerable extent these con- work stagnates for lack of stimulus, there it runs code has been proposed for this group (6). ditions affect the quality of his work. Some- wild in the absence of any proper directive in- Scientific groups generally, however, have fluence. Unsound reputations grow like mush- times his obligations are conflicting. He may rooms: based on nothing but commonplacenot formalized their traditions but have at times be faced with the dilemma of obliga- achievements, or even on mere empty boasts. passed them on by example and by word oftions to his employer that conflict with Politics and business play havoc with appoint- mouth as an informal part of the graduate obligations to the public as a whole. What ments and the granting of subsidies for research. student's training. should his attitude be when his employer's However rich the fund of local genius may be, This failure of scientists as a group to con- such environment will fail to bring It to fruition. immediate interest causes harm to the gener- sider eth.- revealed in the fact that Chem- al public? Suppose that his employer is a The important achievements of science ical Abstracts, since it was founded in 1907,company that is pouring waste products into and its contributions to our civilization seem listed only four references under ethics in itsa stream and he knows that at a reasonable adequate proof of ':ie basic validity of these indices. It is true that professional codes at cost this pollution could be greatly mini- traditions. On the other hand, conditions ofbest can only express an ideal; their accep- mized. Should he assume, as a lawyer does, scientific work have changed greatly, and tance and application will depend upon thethat his primary obligation is to his client, obviously the traditions must be interpreted individual scientists. We believe, however,and become an automatic defender of the in terms of prevailing conditions. Science that the scientist's position in the world to-company's position? Or should he consider has emerged from a period in which the pre- day makes it extremely important that his dominant effort was made by individuals,time-proved traditions be reconsidered in The authors are at the University of Alabama. Medical 2n sometimes of almost amateur status, to aterms of modem circumstances and possibly Dental Schools. Birmingham. 42 35 that he has duties to society greater thanauthor has the responsibility of cssisting inthe rights of a researcher to his work. The those to the company? the integratior. of his work with that of pre-decision to try to publish or reveal his re- A group of very pressing problems is pre-vious workers. search once was the sole right of the scien- sented in the application of traditions related To many scientists, establishment oftist. Now, with the investigator receiving to the authorship and publication of scientific priority for new discoveries is important, and financial support from others in most cases, researches. In the early days of science most organizations that seek patent protection forthe final decision is tending to fall on the articles carried the name of only one worker, their work may set up involved and ex-provider of the funds. In the extreme case, whereas multiple authorship is now mostpensive procedures to establish the date ofwhat is there to pre,nt someone in authority common and sometimes ten or more persons discovery. Is this a tradition that should befrom taking over the work of an associate may be involved. As a detailed example ofcontinued? Some scientific journals do notand passing it off as his own work? What the need for a code of professional ethics, we carry the date a manuscript was submitted,should an editor of a scientific journal do if will discuss some of the problems involved and few indicate whether essential changeshe receives for publication a suitable manu- in authorship. of content have been made after that date. script from an established worker and simul- "Letters to the Editor" may require carefultaneously a letter from the supporting group controls to prevent abuses. saying that it should not be published? General Obligations of Authors Criticism and disagreement. The scientif- Should the supporting group be required to ic method requires that all research work beprovide satisfactory and convincing Quality of Papers. Everyone will agreeopen to critical examination and testing bygrounds? By tradition and perhaps even by that scientific articles should be of goodresearchers in the field. It also requires thatlegal mandate, the rights of an arti''I cer- quality, should be original in content, and dissenting theories and results be treatedtain phases of the disposition of his work should describe all work in a reproduciblewith tolerance, and not suppressed merelyhave been affirmed. Should these not apply fashion. These are fundamental requirements because they disagree with currentlyequally to the scientist, whose application of of the scientific method and yet most scien- accepted ideas. Many scientists would addhis science is often an art? tists would admit that many research articlesthat mistakes and errors should be publicly At least one established graduate institu- are published that are deficient in some or all acknowledged. tion has the policy that all doctoral theses are of these respects. The widespread violation of these princi-published solely in the names of the in- Claude Bernard (13) has described the im-ples today is affecting not only the progress dividual graduate students. In certain in- portance of adequate details. of science but our economy as well. Many stances, the idea was suggested by a member

Inscientific investigation, minutiae of method are commercial research organizations keepof the faculty, who carried out some pre- of the highest importance. The happy choice of an closed files of their researches as a matter ofliminary work, supervised the principal re- animal, an instrument constructed in some special policy, in the belief that they will have ansearch, drew or helped draw the conclusions, way, one reagent used instead of another, may advantage over their competitors. Most ofrewrote the thesis and wrote the final pub- often suffice to solve the most abstract and lofty them do not realize that lack of criticism oflished version. Is this an example of accept- questions. ...the greatest scientific truths are rooted in details of experimental investigation the worker by qualified colleagues in hisable ethics? which form. as it were, the soil in which these own field fosters the carrying out and per- Publicity. Some scientists violently op- truths develop. petuation of poor or erroneous work, thepose general publicity and popularization of Even casual inspection will show that continued employment and promotion of un-their work. Others seek publicity, and some many articles are not written so that the work qualified workers, and the perpetuation ofeven condone or support erroneous and mis- can be repeated. Traditional procedure is poor research policies. Criticism by mem-leading publicity. What should be the atti- often ignored in reporting new compounds; bers of the worker's organization and by tude of the scientist? Does he owe the public occasional articles will not give analyses ofconsultants is usually inadequate because ofa duty to attempt to explain the purpose and new compounds or the compounds will be the influence of personal motives and lack ofsignificance of his work? Should chicanery poorly described so that their identity isknowledge in the specific field. Objectionsand excessive or misleading publicity on the questionable. Scientific journals lack space to excessive secrecy in military researchpart of scientists and nonscientists be ex- to print all the good material they receiveshould take into account this principle as aposed as a function of scientific societies? It today, and understandably urge authors toprimary consideration. is of interest that the Principles of Medical shorten their articles, but great care is needed Classical examples of the value ofEthics includes a considerable discussion of to avoid eliminating important details. scientific controversy are well known. Whenthe impropriety of advertising and publicity- Direct responsibility to prior work. The properly conducted, such debates lead toseeking and that AMA members are required traditions of science demand that any report clarification and advancement of Knowledge. to advise the public against misrepresenta- of scientific work must consider prior work, But improperly conducted, they lead totion. A firm stand on this issue by scientists integrate it in the general subject, and citeenduring feuds, and because of tnis possibil-generally might he of considerable help in proper references to it. Frequent violations ity, there is a tendency among editors ofestablishing the professional status of the sci- of this principle must be familiar to all scien-journals to suppress scientific polemics. A entist in the public mind. tists. One of us has previously called atten-continuation or extension of this trend will tion to an instance of this type, particularlybe a severe blow to the scientific method. in relation to the naming of methods (14). However, as stated by Wise (/2) Multiple authorship The basic concept behind this principle, The research worker should not permit himself to even more tundamental than professional become embittered or involved in useless polem- With the change in status of research, ow- courtesy, is that frequently the solution to a ics. . simply means that his criticisms must ing to its being produced not by independent problem may already be in the literature and be objective and that they must not descend to the individuals but by several dependent workers needless repetition is economic waste. Thor- plane of personalities He must show that he is or even large groups, the scientific tradition dealing with a set of data, not with an enemy. ough literature searching can be defended in respect to the etiquette of authorship needs from an economic standpoint alone. In order Property rights of the scientist in his work. reinterpretation or extension. The responsi- to speed the incorporation of new work intoA currently controversial problem of thebilities involved in multiple authorship or the general body of basic knowledge, each application of scientific tradition involvesgroup research must be analyzed. "Senior" authorship and order of names. group research is an extremely important andfessional behavior are those definitely To many scientists, the order of the authors' as yet unexplored field. accepted by the public as having professional names on a publication has a significance. Is Preparation of manuscripts. The pub-status. this a tradition that should be preserved, clar- lished paper is the final record of the finished As we have pointed out, violations of pro- ified, and enforced, or is it an outmoded, research work, and the medium through fessional ethics on the part of scientists are unessential form of etiquette? In current pub- which the information is made genetatlyfrequent and familiar to all scientists. Some- lications, the application seems uncertain available and useful. With the present short- times they are deliberate violations for per- and haphazarditsShould the concept of the age of publication space, the preparation ofsonal power or gain Frequently, they are the "senior author" (the first one listed) be pre- the manuscript becomes more important thanresults of carelessness or unfamiliarity of re- served? If so, should the senior author be the ever. Rigid adherence to established scientif- search administrators or research workers person highest in the administrative rank, the ic traditions on the part of authors and editors with the established traditions. They may one who has done most of the laboratory becomes increasingly essential. even result from excessive pressure of work, work, the one who has written the paper, the To many persons, the preparation of a re-a condition that appears common in in- one who furnished the original idea, or the search paper may seem to be a routine mat- dustrial research. Some violations are the re- one whose technical skill and thoughts haveter, but actually it requires a high order ofsult of misguided attempts by editors and re- carried along the research? skill and technical knowledge and an ac- viewers of scientific joumals to shorten arti- Administrators and financial supporters.quaintance with scientific traditions. In cles. In publications, what consideration should many researches the actual preparation of the Is not the time opportune for our scientific be given to administrators and financial sup- manuscript, the integration of the findingsorganizations, or some agency of UNESCO, porters? Some scientists might say that theywith the prior related work, consideration ofto consider the manner of the application of should be indicated as authors only whenthe significance of the data, and arrange-scientific traditions to the newly developed their contribution to the actual solution of thements for publication may require a con-conditions of scientific research? We suggest problem has been substantial, continuous,siderable portion of the time and skill re-that the establishment of a definite code of and of a high level. Probably most scientists quired for the entire project. Possibly theprofessional ethics and conduct by our major would agree that mere general administrative actual preparation of the manuscript should scientific groups would have profound and supervision of a project or even the sugges- be a factor in defining the responsibilities offavorable effects for science, society, and tion of the original idea for the project isthe senior author. Laboratory workers with-the scientist. insufficient for an authorship. Certainly noout a good background of knowledge, and A mere statement of principles would be one should be granted authorship of any type research administrators without close daily of help. An extensive codification and at- merely because he has seniority or is incontact with the laboratory work and a thor- tempt to discipline or expose gross violations charge of a laboratory We cite aN au ex-ough knowledge of the field probably should might be desirable. Our societies have var- ample a man serving as technical liaison be-be discouraged from actual preparation ofious ways and means of enforcing regula- tween a company and a research organiza- the manuscript. On the other hand, simpletion.Exclusion from membership and con- tion who insisted that his mite be included manuscript revision, in spite of the poortrol of publications and means of publicity as an auti.or, before he would ask for wntinF ability of many scient;sts, should notare powers that cc uld be used to control un- supporting funds for the research, although gene, .11y be rn.,Je the bas..., for aumorship of scrupulous and continuous violations. There his tom! coirribution was limited to this ac-a research paper Still anothei mblem is de-may appear to be an anomaly in scientists' tion. termining the duties and responsibilities ofestablishing a formal code of ethics to pre- Graduate students "nd technicci assis-the referees of scientific articles. serve traditions that include independence in tants Criteria are necessary fir assessing the The interpretation of scientific traditions, their work, but this merely reflects an anom- role of ,...,-aduate students and technical assis- an,: their formal codification, if that is to bealy in present conditions of scientific work. tants in relation to authorship. Should notaccomplished, are essentially a task for sci- It seems far better for scientists to affirm senior authorship for a gra,nate student beentists. As this discussion demonstrates, thesuch a code positively than to be regimented lirr .d 10 those instance.; in which a re,.:problems of interpretation are manifold and to an increasing extent ..without any control ;catribwiion. beyond adequate laboratory if they are not solved they may severely hin-over the conditions under which they must work, has been made? Cn the other hand, isder the progress of science. The harm done work. A.V. Hill (II) puts the problem as it not the duty of the directinf. professor to may not only be general but may apply par- follows: encourage the student to his maximum per- ticularly to industrial research of the group formance rather than use him as a laboratory type. Incidental effects of the code, but of The important thing is not a creed "which ex- assistant? If a technical assistant is to be cept a man believe faithfully he cannot be saved considerable importance, would be the greatWhat matters is that scientific men should argue given authorship of an:ype, more than an improvement in morale among scientific and discuss the matter of scientific ethics as one of adequate performance of routine methodsworkers, the improvement in the quality ofinfinite importance to then... Ises and the rest of should be requ of him. scientific work, the assistance it -vould give mankind with the same honesty, humility and res- Group projects. An example of the large to editors of scientific joumals and researcholute regard for the facts they show in their scientific work. group projects that characterize modern sci- administrators, and the basis it would pro- If they do, then something will surely crystall- ence is the penicillin research during World vide for exposing poor work and even in- ize out from their discussion, and I have faith War II.Industrial organizations providestances of chicaneryIt would be of greatenough in the goodness lnd wisdom of most many more examples. Frequently there is noassistance in the training of graduate students scientific men to believe that the result on the whole will be good and wise It may in the end be attempt on the pa, administrators to set up in the scientific method. The preparation of a embodied in a new Hippocratic Oa: h, to it may be the program so that the work of individual formal code of professional ethics should be absorbed in trade union rules for the scientific pro- investigators is h.ept discrete. The improvedof considerable value in establishing the profession, or ethical behavior in science may just quality of work resulting from the establish-fessional status of the scientist in the public come to be accepted as an honorable obligation as unbreakable as that of accuracy and integrity ment of definite responsibility might be the mind. It seems more than a coincidence that basis for making a definite statement in re-the groups that already have formal state- We add that all problems will not be gard to this problem. The interpretation ofments of their social and professional re-solved, but science is expanding and mov- the scientific tradition in terms of modem sponsibilities and have definite rules of pro-ing. The rate of progress will be profoundly 44 37 affected by the consideration that is given to 4American Medical Association. Principles of Medi- 6.Gehrke, wH., Aneshansley. C.H , and Rothe - cal Ethics, 1942, p. 14. American Dental Associa- mund, P. Chem. Eng. News, 1947, 25, 2562 the maintenance and proper applicalion of tion, Principles of Ethics. 1947. p. 2, Amencan 7.Mills. C A. Science. 1948. 107. 127. time-proved scientific traditions as the con- Association of University Professors. Statements of 8.Blakeslee. A.F. Science. 1940. 92. 589 ditions of scientific work change. Principle in Academic Freedom and Tenure, 1949, 9.Carlson. A.). Science. 1946, 103. 377. 35, 66; American Institute of Chemical Engineers. 10.Condon. E U Science. 1946. 103. 415. REFERENCES AND NOTES Constitution. Article VIII; Engineers' Council for 11.Hill. Archibald V. Chem Eng. News. 1946, 24. Professional Development. Canons of Ethics for En- 1343. 1. Po lanyi, M. Sc. t Mon., 1945, 60. 141. gineers. Oct. 25, 1947; The Geneticists' Manifecto" 12.wise. L.E. Paper industry & Paper World. 1946, 2. Leake, C.D. (Ed.) Percival' s medical ethicsBalti- adopted at the Seventh International Congress of Ge- 28. 1299. more: Williams & Wilkins. 1927. netics. held at Edinburgh in 1939 Published In The 13.Bernard, Claude. op. cit.. p14 3. Bernard, Claude. An introduction to the study of ex- Journal of Heredity.September,1939. repnnts dis- 14Peoples. S A and Carmichael. E B Science. 1945. perimental medicine. Trans. by H.C. Greene New tributed by American Genetics Association 102. 131 York' Macmillan Co., 1927. 5.Femehus, W C. Chem. Eng. News. 1946. 24. 1664

porting accurately to other persons the movements of the stars. theplanets. and the sun and moon, the behavior and migrations of the food animals, the usefulness of certain seeds for food and of certain stems for fibers,the poisonouspropertiesof others.For generations all such practical lore was transmitted only by word of mouth, but the day came when useful know', edge could be written down and preserved inviolate from the forgetfulness It has been said that science has norection of blood flow; his embryonicand the twists of memory. These were ethical basis, that it is no more than aand fetal growth inside the mother andthe first simple steps in the develop- cold,impersonal way of arriving athis prolonged dependence upon ma-ment of science: observation, report- the objective truth about natural phe-ternal lactation; the slow maturationing,writtenrecords, communication. nomena. This view I wish to challenge,that enabled his brain to enlarge soTo such must ba added the processes since it is my belief that by examininggreatly; the keen vision so necessaryof human reasoning, at first mostly by critically the nature. origins. and meth-to the hunter using his weapons-allanalogy, so often wrong; then by im- ods of science we may logically arriveof these and many other importantprovedanalysis,by deduction from at a conclusionthatscienceisin-human characteristics that contributedan established truth, or by induction eluctablyinvolvedinquestionsofto the social nature of man and tx-of an established truth from a multi- values,isinescapably committed tomented the bonds of family and tribetude of observations. standards of right and wrong, and un-aroseadventitiously.were improved Seen aright, science is more than the avoidably moves in the large towardstep by step, and endured because theyinstrument of man's increasing power social aims. promoted human survival. Our high-and progress. It is also an instrument, Human values havethemse.vesestethicalvalues-theloveofthethe finest yet developed in the evolu- evolved. Man arose after some two bil-mother for her child and of the mantion of any species, for the malleable lionsof years of organic evolution,for his mate, the willingness to sacri-adaptation of man to his environment during whichspeciesafterspeciesfice one's own life for the safety ofand the adjustment of his environment originated, flourished, and fell, or oc- the family or tribe. and the impulseto man. If the human speciesisto casionally became the progenitors ofto care for the weak. the suffering.remain successful. this instrument must speciestl --t --ztvandbetterthehelpless-allofthesetoo hadbe used more and more to control the ..t -of the evol't-the came primitive beginnings. nature and the late of social and tech- or : i. ofile mess, like But these ethical values are always,nological change. as well as to pro- .it un . in the evolutionary scheme of things,mote it. In this sense, at least. science relative, and never absolute. Wheneverisfar more than a new sense organ Si at environment becomes changed, thefor comprehending therealrelations r.. ot t,: r-xisting traits becomesof natural phenomena and the regu- n ;Loc. ro...J.1 r mi. of naturallarities we call "laws of nature." Itis gene. LI a -i:. v. -or; )7 ,r! of thealso man's means ofadjustmeritto cies, h fizroate. al a:ttlati n rstti .Taal ma-:'s instrument for the crea- r. , ouiofhto au.1; - 6..4 .1. i .h?vier tion of an idte; environment. Since it orig. .1 r. Vv. Idification o -et. was ISprevniaentbi an ach:evemCilt of so- c.istIrGrIvrs-ftt ct: -4: s is -.S.1! Lc ct iis ,ion( - - letPc8a74/ 't n!1 is Academic vice President, State as boti:IVh.'ncf.. etoth:og war. .::yof 1,cw York. Stony brook. This art' - ^ condensa,ior, of a chapter from the vented; the hom-...-stati Jatiot. `OK and Ethic4 Values, just published his body tern;, -- and etc }.' the . , fi Carolina Press. Chapel Jf .b up... .41) the Munn= of the sure,breathing, prc'),-, ut- Or' ^ cial man, itsprimary function isnothe wrong for the nation; and that whatwhether reality conforms to our no- simply that of appeasing the individualis right for the nation may be wrongtions. scientist's curiosity about his environ-for the great brotherhood of man. Nor This line of reasoning lead!us to menton the contraryitisthat ofshould one stop at that point. Man asthe conclusion that the objectivity of adjusting man to man, and of adjust-a species isa memberonly one ofscience depends wholly upon the abil- ing social groups in their entirety tomany membersof a terrestrial com-ity of different observers to agree about nature,to both therestrictionsandmunity and an even greater totality oftheirdataandtheirprocessesof the resources of the human environ-life upon earth. Ultimately, whatis thought. About quantitative measurement. right for man is what is right for thements and deductive reasoning there is Ethics is a philosophy of morals, aentire community of life on earth. Ifusuallylittledispute.Qualitative ex- moral systemthatdefinesduty andhewrecks, that community, he de-periences like color, or inductive and labels conduct as right or wrong, bet-stroyshisownlivelihood.Inthistheoreticaltypes of reasoning,leave ter or worse. The evolutionist is quitesense, coexistenceisnot only neces-great room for disagreement. Usually preparedtoadmittheexistenceofsary but alsoright, and science canthey can be reduced to scientific treat- right and wrong in terms of the simplereveal to us the best ways to harborment only if the subjective color can functions of biological structures andour resources and to exploit our op-by agreement be translated into some processes. The eyeisfor seeing, anportunities wisely. quantitative measurement such asa evolutionary adaptation that enables an wavelength, only if the reasoning can animal to perceive objects at a dis- be rendered quantitative by use of a tance by means of reflected light rays.The Subjectivity of Science calculus of probability. It nevertheless Sight conveys information about food, remains a basic fact of human exist- water, danger, companionship, mating, From the foregoing description ofence that the subjectivity of the indi- the whereabouts and doings ofthescience as itself an evolutionary prod-vidual personality cannot be escaped. young ones, and other vitally impor-uct and a human organ produced byWe differin our genes, each of us tant matters. Should one not then say,naturalselection,itmay already bepossessing a genotype unique through- "To see is right; r-Nt to see is wrong"?guessed thatI do not adhere to theout all past and future human history Similarly, the mind reasons as it doesview that either the processes or the(unless we happen to possess an identi- because in the countless ages of evolu-concepts of science are strictly objec-cal twin). To the extent that our genes tionary developmentitscharacteristictive. They are as objectiveas manendow us withsimilar,thoughnot mentalprocessesledtosuccessfulknows how to make them, that is true;identical, sensory capacities and nerv- coping with the exigencies of life. Hu-but man isa creature of evolution,ous systems, we may make similar mans whose mental processes. becauseand science is only his way of lookingscientificobservations,and we may of different genes, too often led thematnature. As long as scienceisaagree to ignore the existence of the to wildly erroneousconclusionsdidhuman acm..y. carried on by indi-variablesin our natures that prevent not so often leave children to reasonvidual men and by groups of men, itus from ever making exactly the same in similar ways. Itis thus right to bemust atbottom remaininescapablymeasurements as someone else or ar- guided by reason, wrong to distrustsubjective. riving at exactly the same conclusions. it. Doesitnot follow,finally, from Our sensory apparatus and the struc-But itis perilous to forget our genetic consideration of the socialrole andture of the human nervous system,individuality and our own uniqueness function of science, that itis right towithin which arise our sensations, growof experience. These form the basis of utilize science to develop and regulateand develop as they do from the firstthe ineradicable subjectivity of science. human sociallife,adjustmenttobeginnings in the human embryo be-In the last analysis science is the com- change, and rate of social transforma-cause of the particular genetic consti-mon fund of agreement between indi- tion? Conversely, itis wrongmorallytutions we inherit from our parents.vidual interpretations of nature. What and ethically wrongnot to do so.First and foremost, we are human sci-science has done is to refine and ex- We must use whatever light and what-entists, not insect scientists, nor eventend the methods of attaining agree- ever reason we have tochart ourmonkey scientists. The long pastofment.Ithas not banished the place course into the unknown. ourevolutionaryhistory,with itsof the individual observer, experiment- Those whodistrustscienceas acountless selections and rejections ofer, or theoretician. whose work is per- guide to conduct, whether individualvarious kinds of genes and combina-haps subjective quite as much as ob- or social, seem to overlook itsprag-tions of genes, has made us what wzjective. matic nature, or perhaps they scorn itare. Try as we will, we cannot break These considerations may seem so for that very reason. Rightly under-the bonds of our subjective interpre-obvious as not to require the emphasis stood, science can point out to us onlytations of the physical events of na-just given them. YetIbelievenot. probabilities of varying degrees of certure. We are born blind to many reali-Somehow therehascreptinto our tainty. So, of course, do our eyes andties, and at best can apprehend themwritings about the nature and methods ears, and so does our reason. Whatonly by translating them by means ofof sciencea dictum thatscienceis science can do for us that otherwiseour inst-uments into something we canobjective while the humanistic studies we may he too blind or self-willed tosense wit!' our eyes or ears, into some-are subjective, that science stands out- .ccognizeisto helpustosee thatthing we can thenbeginto reasonside the nature of man. What a pro- what is right enough for eht. individualabout by developing abstract mentalfound mistake! Science is ultimately as may he wrong for him as a memberconcepts about them, by making pre-subjective asall other human knowl- of a social group, such as a fzznily;dictions on the basis of our hypotheses,edge, since itresides inhe mind and that what is right for the family mayand bytesting ourtheoriestosee the senses of the unique individual per- 4 6 39 son. Itis constrained by the presen'used, of concepts that must be under- So Bronowski. If his reasoning be evolutionary state of man, by the limi-stood and be properly utilized. In allaccepted. and to me it seems unargu- tations of his senses and the even morethese ways. knowledge is a social con-able, we must conclude that the cement significant limitations of his powers ofstruct, science a collective human en-of society is nothing less than the basic reason. Allthat can be claimed forterprise, and verificationis no proce-ethicaltenetofscienceitself.The science isthatitfocuses upon thosedureofthenaked,unlettered,re-very possibility of verification, the as- primary observations about which hu-sourceless man but an application ofst:rance that one's own conclusions are man observers (most of them) canthe collective tools of the trade andnot dreams,hallucinations,or delu- agree,andthatitemphasizes thosethe practiced logic of science to thesions rests upon confirmation by oth- methods of reasoning which, from em- matter at hand. Itis a fallacy to as-ers, by "competent" observers whom pirical results or the successful fulfill-sume that one can test what is truewe trust to tell the truth. ment of predictions, most often leadand what is fa..,e unaided. But then it The scientist's integrity. Ethics rests to mental constructs and conceptualmust follow thatallverification,allupon moralintegrity.Sciencerests schemes that satisfyallthe require-science, depends upon communicationupon the scientist's integrity. This is so ments of the known phenomena. with others and reliance upon others.implicit in all of our science that itis Thus we come straight to the oughtrarelyexpressed and may be over- Science, Integrity, and of science, for we must be able tolooked by novice or layman. Bronow- trust the word of others. A full andski inentions examples of what hap- Intellectual Freedom truereportisthe hallmark of thepens when this basic moral command- From a consideration that science is scientist, a report as accurate and faith-ment is violated by a scientist. Lysenko a human activity, inescapably subjec-ful as he can make it in every detail. isheld up to scorn throughout the tive, and a product of biological evolu-The process ofverification dependsworld and eventuallyis deposed (2). tion, it is possible to derive a genuineupon the ability of another scientist,Kammerer commits suicide(3).Itis ethical basis of science. J. Bronowski,of any other scientist who wishes to,veryinterestingthatbothofthese in an essay entitled "The Sense of Hu-to repeat a procedure and to confirmnotorious examples. andothdrsless man Dignity" (/, p. 63), has sketched an observation. well known, such as that of Tower. a a treatment that serves well for a be- Neither the philosophy of dialecti-quondam professor of biology at the ginning. The values and duties whichcal materialism nor that of the indi-University of Chicago. have related to are the concern of ethics are social,vidualist accords with the basic natureattempts to "prove" or bolster the the- he affirms. The duties of men hold aof man and of scientifictruth. Theory oftheinheritance ofacquired societytogether,he says; and "theextreme social position leaves no roomcharacteristics. The singular attractive- problem of values arises only whenfor the conscience of man and theness of this theory for violators of men try tofit together their need toexercise ofintellectualfreedom be-scientific integrityis no doubt owing be social animals with their need tocause the community dictates what isto its social significance. since if true be free men." Philosophy must dealright and what a man ought to do.it would offer a quick and easy way withboththe social and individual Yetthepositivist'spositionisalsofor man to control the direction of aspects of value. Most philosophicalfaulty because "how a man ought tohuman evolutioi and would lessen the systems have found this very difficultbehave is a social question, which al-obdurate qualities of genes modifiable todo. Thus dialecticalmaterialismways involves severalpeople; andifonly by mutation in uncontrollable di- swings far to the side of social valueshe accepts no evidence and no judg-rections. and leaveslittle scope for individualment except his own, he has no tools Itis not so gent rally recognized by freedom. Positivism and analytic phi-withwhichtoframeananswer"these superficial evolutionary philoso- losophy, as typified by Bertrand Rus-(1. p. 72). Again, "All this knowledge,phers that.if true. the inheritance of selland Wittgenstein, on theother all our knowledge, has been built upcharactersproduced throughmodifi- hand, emphasizethevalues ofthe communally; there would be no astro-cations of the environment would call individual. physics.there would be no history.in question the value of all evolutionary Hence,continuesBronowski,be- there would not even be language. ifgains,sincethemodifiedcharacters cause the unit of the positivist or theman were a solitary animal" (1, p. 73).would themselves have no real genetic analyst is one individual man, "posi- "What follows?"asksBronowski,permanence and would shift and vary tivists andanalysts alike believe thatand answers (I,p.73):"Itfollowswithevery change ofenvironment.. the wordsisand ought belong tothat we must be able to rely on otherThey also do not recognize one of the different worlds. so that sentences con-people; we must be able to trust theirmost essential aspects of heredity. the structed with is usually have a verifia-word. That is, it follows that there is aprotection of the genetic nature against ble meaning, but sentences constructedprinciple which binds society together.vicissitudes. The reason why death is so with ought never have" (1, p. 72). because without it the individual wouldnecessary a part of lifeisthatthe The issue. then,is simply whetherbe helpless to tell the true from theground must be cleared for fresh life. verification can indeed be assumed tofalse.Thisprincipleistruthfulness.The reason why the genotype must re- roe carried out by one man. BronowskiIf we accept truth as a criterion, thenmain unmodifiable by ordinary environ- concludes, and Ifinditimpossible towe have also to make it the cementmental causes is because the course of deny. thatin the practice of scienceto hold society together." Whence helifefor every individual involves the this supposition is sheer nonsense. Ver-derives the social axiom: cumulative effects of injury, disease. and ification dependscompletely on the "We OUGHT to actin such a waysenescence. The new generation must existence of records ihai shay be coo-that what iS truecanbeverifiedtoindecd start freshthati,,frcc from suited.ofinstrumentsthat may bebe so." all the disabilities incurred during life 47 40

by its parents and remoterancestors.the occasional overt lapse of honestyto refuse to referee any manuscripts Evolution through the action of natu- on the part of some referee whosup- that might conceivably have arela- ral selection upon mutations, most ofpresses prompt publication of a rival'stionship to one's own research work. which are harmful and nonadaptive.work while he harvests thefruit byThe consequences while only a - editors left with rare exemplar amongquickly repeating itperhapseven ex-piles of unevaluate nanuscripts might themispossibly advantageous.isa tending itand rushing into publica-become desperate, were there not,as process slowin the extreme. Butittion with his own account. What isI believe, a reasonable solution in the preserves the gains of thepast. andfar more dangerous, I believe, becausepossibility that the role of referee could it permits every generation to be born it is far more insidious and widespread. belimitedtoscientistswho have anew, unburdened by decrepitude. tois the inevitable subconscious germina-ceased to do active experimental work try outits varieties of genotypes intion in the mind of any referee of thethemselves. What with die increasing each niche of the environment. ideas he has obtained from theun-life span and the large number ofre- The loss ofscientific integritypublished work of anotherperson. Iftired but mentally vigorous older sci- through deliberate charlatanry or de-we are frank with ourselves, none ofentists, the supply of competent ref- ception isless common than the vio-us can really state where most of theerees would perhaps be sufficient. To lationof scholarlyhonesty throughseminal ideas that lead us toa par-be sure, the criticism may be raised plagiarism. The theft of another man'sticular theory or line of investigationthatthe older scientific men cannot ideas and the claim that another's dis-have been derived. Darwin franklyac-properly evaluate the significance and covery is one's own may do no in-knowledged the ideas of Malthus whichmerit of really revolutionary new ideas jury to the body of scientific knowl-led him tothe Theory of Naturaland lines of work. Neither. for the edge. if the substance of what is stolenSelection: but although he wasone ofmost part, can the young! A combi- be true.It may even do no harm tothe most honest of men, andone whonation of older referees in the field the original discoverer. who may bewas deeply troubled when Alfred Rus-and younger ones knowledgeable but dead or in no need of further creditsel Wallace sent him in 1858 the briefnot workinginthe samespecialty to advance his own career. It is never-paper setting forthhis own parallelmight solve this difficulty. theless a canker inthe spirit of thederivation of Darwin's theory. Dar- What has been said about referees thief and does damage to the fabric ofwin nevertheless never made the slight-applies with even greater forceto the science by renderingless trustworthyest acknowledgment of theideaofscientists who sit on panels that judge the witness of the scientist. natural selection which he had surelythe merit of research proposals made Plagiarism shadesinto unacknowl-read in the work of Edward Blyth into government agencies or to foun edged borrowing. Which of us in fact1835 and 1837 (4). We may guessdations. The amount of confidential in- can render exactly the sources of all that Darwin's reasoning atthe timeformationdirectlyapplicableto a his ideas? Psychologists have now am-went rather as follows: man's own line of work acquired in ply demonstrated the ease with which Blyth's conceptionis thatnatural selec-this way in the course of severalyears self-deception entersinto the forget-tion leads to a restriction of hereditarystaggerstheimagination. The most fulness of borrowed benefits. The win-variation in populations. Through elimi-conscientious man in the world cannot try wind of man's ingratitude blowsnation of the more variable specimensforget allthis, although he too easily ina species. only on the donor of benefits forgot. nature keeps thespecies forgets when and wherea particular Around the self-deluded recipient blowtruetotype and preventsitfrom becoming maladaptedtoitsenvironment. idea came to him. This information only themildest. gentlest zephyrs ofBlyth's Natural Selection not an evo-consists not only of renorts of what spring. The newer patterns of scientificlutionary force atall, but insteadis ahas been done in the recent past but publication and support of researchforce for maintenance of the status quo. of what is still unpublished. It includes have multiplied a thousandfold the op- Yet itis very hard to understandalso the plans and protocols of work portunities frrthe scientist'sself-de-why, when the full significance of thestill to be r erformed. the truly germi- ception. Ee;tors of scientific journalsactionof naturalselectiondawnednal ideas that may occupya scientist today customarily rely upon refereesupon Darwin. he did not reexaminefor years to come. After serving for for opinions regarding the merit ofthe ideas of Edward Blyth. It shouldsome years on such panelsIhave manuscripts submitted for publication. have beerperfectly evident to himreached the conclusion that this form The enormous expansion of scientificthat the very same force that wouldof exposure is most unwise. One sim- activity and the development of hun-eliminate variation and maintain theply cannot any longer distinguish be- dreds of new specialties have made status quo of the species in a stationary tween what one properly knows, on this referee system necessary. The best environment would operate quite dif- thebasisof publishedscientificin- referee is of course some other scientist ferentlyina changing environment.formation, and what one has gleaned who is working closely on the sameWill we then ever know the extent tofrom privileged documents. The end of scientific problems butisnot associ-which Darwin was really indebtedtothis road is self-deception on the one ated with the author in the actual workBlyth, or how the ideas he probablyhand, or conscious deception on the in other words, a competitor, since rejectedasinvalidactually preparedother, since in time scientists who must we must not forget that scientists arethe way for his reception of Malthus's make research proposals learn that it people who must earn a living, andthoughts in 1838? is better not to reveal what they really since compensation and repute follow The conscientious referee of unpub-intend to do, or to set down in plain productivity and publication. Naturallished scientific manuscripts is similar-language their choicest formulations of selection is at work among scientists. ly a gleaner in the harvest fields ofexperimental planning,but instead too! What is most alarming about theothers. The only possible way to avoid write, up as the inugium of their fu- workings of the referee system is nottaking an unfair advantage would beture work what they have in fact al-

48 41 reedy performed. Again, the integrity like every other social phenomenon iscurbing to settled religious beliefs or soof scienceisseriously compromised.limited by the injury or benefit it con-cialconventionsandpractice.The Scienceandintellectualfreedom. fers on the community. ... The ideapyre of Bruno and the ordeal of Gali- The first commandment in the ethicalof free and unfettered science...isleo led directly in spirit to the attucks basis of scienceis complete truthful-absurd." Those werethewords ofon Charles Darwin 250 yearslater ness, and the second is like unto it: Adolf Hitler, as reported by Hermannand to latter-day instances of the social Rauschning (5). In Soviet states a simi-suppression of scientific findings. The Thou shalt neither covetthyneigh- lar view is held officially; and in thedistortionofgeneticsbyracistsin bor'sideasnorstealhisexperiments. Western democracies, likewise, not aNazi Germany finds a counterpart in The third is somewhat different. It re- few scientists as well as laymen havethe United States. Mendelian genetics quires fearlessnessinthe defense ofupheld a similar opinion. The Britishin the U.S.S.R. and the nutritive quali- intellectual freedom, for science can-biologist John R. Baker has pointedtiesof oleomargarineinWisconsin not prosper where there constraint out that this view shades through oth-share a similarfate. The third com- upon daring thinking, heresociety ers, such as the admission that scien-mandment then reads: dictates what experiments may be con- tistsworkbestifthey enjoytheir ducted, or where the statement of one's work, and the supposition that science Thou shalt defend the freedom of sci- entificinvestigation and the freedom of conclusions may lead to loss of liveli-has valuein broadening the outlookpublication of scientific opinion with thy hood. imprisonment, or even death. and purging the mind of pettiness, tolife, if need be. This ;sa hard ethic to liveby.It the view that a positive and primary brought G rdano Bruno to the stakevalue of scienceliesinitscreative Science and communication.Inas- in1600. The recantation of Galileoaspect "as an end in itself, like music,much as science is intrinsically a social wasan easier way; thetimidityofart, and literature" (6). "Science aimsactivity and not asolitarypleasure, Descartes and Leibniz. who left un-at knowledge, not utility," says Albertanother primary aspect of the ethics published their more daring scientific Szent-Gyi5rgyi (7); and Alexander vonof scienceisthe communication to thoughts. was understandably humanHumboldt wroteinhismasterpiece,the world atlarge. and to other sci- but even less in the interest of scienceCosmos, that "other interests, besidesentists inparticular. of what one ob- or. ultimately. of the society that feltthe material wants of life, occupy theserves and what one concludes. Both itself threatened. Whether in the con-minds of men" (8). theinternationalscopeofscientific flictof science with religion, or with Itisreadily demonstrated that theactivity and the cumulative nature of politicaldoctrine(asinNazi Ger-social usefulness of the conclusions ofscientific knowledge lay upon the inmany). or withsocial dogma (asin science can rarely be predicted whendividualscientistan overwhelming the Marxist countries), scientists mustthe work is planned or even after thedebt tohis colleagues and hisfore- be willing to withstand attack and vili-basic discoveries have been made. Johnrunners. The least he can do inre- fication. ostracism and punishment.. or R. Baker, in his book Science and theturn. unless he is an ingrate.is freely science will wither away and societyPlanned State, has cited numerous ex-to make his own contributions a part itself,in the end. be the loser. amples that show the impracticabilityof the swelling flood of scientific in- From the beginning the inveterateof too narrowly planned a program offormation available toallthe world. foe of scientific inquiry has been au-scientific research. The sphere of in- There are atleast five distinct ob- thoritythe authority of tradition, ofvestigation must be determined by theligations hic indebtedness places upon religion, or of the statesince scienceinvestigator'schoiceratherthan byeach scientist. The first of these is the can accept no dogma within the spherecompulsionby perception of a prob-obligation to publish his methods and ofitsinvestigations. No doors mustlem to be solved rather than by ahis results so clearly and in such de- he barredtoitsinquiries, except bydogma to be accepted Sciencetail that another may confirm and ex- reason of its own limitations. Itis themust be free to question and investi-tend his work. The pettiness and jeal- essence of the scientific mind not onlygate any matter within the scope ofousy that lead some scientists, in their to be curious but likewise to be skepti-its methods and to hold and state what-effortto stay ahead of the ruck, to cal and criticalto maintain suspendedever conclusions are reached on thewithhold st me significant step of pro- judgment until the facts are in, to bebasis of the evidenceor it will perish.cedure or some result essential to full willing always,in thelight of freshBut science is represented only by theunderstanding of the stated conclusions knowledge,tochangeone'sconclu-individualscientists.Thesepersonshave no place in the realm of science. sions. Not even the "laws" of sciencemust acknowledge the moral impera-In other instancesitis sheer laziness are irrevocable decrees. They are meretive to defend the freedom of scienceorprocrastinationthatisatfault. summariesofobservedphenomena,at any cost to themselves. Every Dar-Whatever the only-too-human reason, eversubject torevision. These lawswin needs a Thomas Henry Huxley.science suffers. and concepts remain testable and chal-Every Lysenko demands his martyred A second obligation that is far more lengeable. Science is thus wholly de-Vavilov, his hundreds of displaced gen-frequently neglectedisthe obligation pendent upon freedomfreedom ofeticists before heisfinallydeposed.to see that one's contributions are ptop- inquiry and freedom of opinion. Modern science, from its very begin-erly abstracted and indexed, and thus But what is the value of science tonings near the end of the 16th century,madereadilyavailabletoworkers man, thatitshould merit freedom?became immediately concerned with aeverywhere. Many scientists ignore this There are those, indeed, who say thatmajor politicalissue, the freedom ofobligationcompletely.Yet,asthe science has value only in serving ourthe scientist to pursue the truth wher-sheer volume of scientific publication material wants. To quote one of them:everit might lead him, even thoughpasses a half-million and soon a mil- "Science is a social phenomenon, andthat conclusion might he highly dis-lion articles a year.itis obviously in- dO 42

sufficient to add one's own leaflettogrowing reluctance on the part ofthe To every scientistto some sooner, to the mountains of paper cramming thebestqualifiedscientiststodevotethe some only latethere comes thereali- scientificlibraries of the world. Thenecessary time and energy tothistask. zation that one lifetime is too short and Often itfalls by default to the journey- need tohavescientific that other hands and other minds must findings ab-man of modest talent, a compiler rathercarry on and complete the work. Only stracted and indexed has been fullythan critic and creator, who enriches thea few scientists are therefore content to recognized by such international bodiesscientific literature with a fresh molehilllimit their entire energies to exploration as the International Council of Scien-in which later compilers may burrow. and discovery. Research is one end, but tific Unions: its Abstracting Board has the other must be thetraining of the urged every author to prepare an ab- new generation of scientists,thetrans- All this need not be so, but it willre-mission of knowledge and skill, of insight stract in concise, informative style, tomain so without a deeper sense of the and wisdom. The latter taskis no less be printed at the head of each scien-obligation of the scientist to synthesize necessary, no less worthy. From the be- tific paper; and theeditors of mostand present his broadest understand- ginnings of human history, the exponen- scientific journals have now made thising of his own fieldof knowledge.tiallyacceleratinggrowthofhuman power .,. . Tomorrow's has required each generation a requirement for acceptance and pub- sciencestandson the to instruct and inform the next. lication of a paper. Nevertheless, fewshoulders of those who have doneso. This is the challenge that faces every authors preparetheirabstracts with-no less than on the shoulders of theteacher of a science as he steps into the out a reminder, and few heed the re-great discoverers. classroom or guides the early efforts of quirements for a concise, informative A fourth obligationis communica-an individual student. Here, inthis sea summary that of fresh faceshere, amidst thestum- will permit proper in-tion to the general public of thegreat blings and fumblingsmay be the New- dexing of the major items treatedinnew revelations of science, the impor-ton or Einstein, the Mendel or Darwin the paper. tant advances, the noble syntheses ofof tomorrow. For fewso very few A third obligation is that of writingscientificknowledge. There haveal-men are self-taught. The teacher cannot criticalreviews,whichwill hetrueways been a few eminent scientists who supply the potentialities of his students, but heisneeded to seethatthepo- syntheses of the knowledge accunnilat-did not scorn to do this: Thomas Henrytentialities will unfold, and unfold fully. ing in some field.I firmly believe thatHuxley.John Tyndall.and Louis His is not only tt,.task of passing on there is no scientificactivitytodayPasteursetthepatterninthe19th the great tradition of the past, withits more necessary and at the same timecentury, andin our own time ere skills and accumulated knowledge; he must less frequently well done than this one.have indeed been many who followed also provide breadth and perspective, self- I their criticism and judgment, in order that a have said elsewhere(9): precedent.Yetthere seemsto well-balanced scientist may grow to full hea growing tendencytoturnthis stature and continue the search. To he sure. thescientist seeks for facts obligation over to professional science Of allthe resources of anation,its or better, hestarts with observations. greatest are its boys and girls, . . writerswho,howevergood.should its young . Rut Iwould saythatthereal men and women. Like other material re- scientist, if not the scholar in general.is not replace thedirect.personal. and no quarryman, but is sources, these can be squandered or dis precisely and ex-authoritative appeal of the scientist to sipated. They are potential greatness, but actly a buildera builder of facts andthe general public. As our culture and they are only potentialities. Science cre- observati'-ns into conceptual schemes and ates knowledge and knowledge generates intellectualmodels thatattempt to pre-civilization become day by daymar: sent the realities of nature. It completely based on scientific discov- power, but knowledgc resides only in the is the de- minds of men who first must learn and fect and very imperfection of the scientistery and technological application,as that so often he fails to build a coherent be taught, and power is tyranny unless it human exploration becomes evermore be guided by insight and wisdom, justice and beautiful structure of his work. . . restricted The creativity of scientific writing lies tothe endlessfrontiers ofand mercy. The greatest of men have precisely here. The task of the writer ofscience, everycitizen must know been teachers, and the teacher is greatest among men (10). a critical review and synthesis ...is notwhereby he lives and whereupon he onlyindispensabletoscientificadvance leans. A democracy rests secure only it surely constitutes the essence of theupon abasis of enlightenedcitizens The Social and Ethical scientific endeavor to be no merequarry- man but in some measure a creator ofwho have imbibed the spirit of scienceResponsibilities of Scientists truthandunderstanding. Theaesthetic and who comprehend;.natureas element that makes scientist akin to poetwell asitsfruits. In fugling the re- The scientist escapes lightlyinstead andartistis expressed primarilyinthis quirement of our age for the publicof ten commandments only four:to broader activity. understanding of science the scientist cherish complete truthfulness; to The critical nature of the criticalre- view grows from our constant forgetful-must shirk no duty. avoid self-aggrandizement atthe ex- ness of allthis.The young scientistis A final obligation in the total pur-pense of one'sfellow-scientist;fear- taught carefully znd methodically to be aview ofscientificcommunicationis lessly to defend the freedom of scien- quarryman or a bricklayer. He learns tothe obligation to transmit the best andtificinquiry and opinion; andfully usehis tools wellbutnottoenlarge fullest of our scientific knowledge to to communicate one's findings through his perspective, develop his critical pow- each succeeding generation. Itis well ers, or enhance his skillin communica- primary publication, synthesis, and in- tion. The older scientist is too often over-said that genetic transmission of hu-struction. Out of these grow the social whelmed by detail, or forced by the com-man characteristics and powers is now and ethical responsibilities of scientists petition of the professional game to stickfar overshadowed by cultural inherit-that 'n the past 20 years have begun tothe processesof "originalresearch"ance. The transmission of knowledge to loom ever larger in our ken. and "training." The vastness of the sci- is the role of the teacher, and the obli- These may be considered under the entificliteraturemakesthe searchfor general comprehension and perception ofgation of the scientist to teachishis three heads of proclamation of bene- new relationshipsand possibilities everylast and highest obligation to theso- fits,warning of risks, and discussion day morearduous.I heeditorof theciety thatgives him opportunity to of quandaries. The first of these, the critical review journal finds evP-v yeara achieve his goals. advertisement of the benefits of sci- 43 ence, seems to be sufficiently promoteddiscussions of theeffectsof falloutnebulous realm of quandaries. Man in these days when science is so wellfrom nuclear weapons tests on personsmust choose goals, and a choice of supported by government and privatenow living and on the generations yetgoals involves us in weighing values agencies and when grants are justifiedunborn, scientistsplayed a very im-even whole systems of values. The on the basis of social benefits. Everyportant role. In no small measure, Iscientist cannot make the choice of bit of pure research is heralded as abelieve, historians of thefuture w illgoals for his people, and neither can stepinthe conquest of nuclear orrecognize how great a part was playedhe measure and weigh values with ac- thermonuclear power, space explora- bythescientistsinbringingaboutcuracy and objectivity. There is none- tion, elimination of cancer and heartthe partial nuclear weapons test ban.theless an important duty he must per- disease, orsimilardramatic accom-Scientists are now deeply involved inform, because he and he alone may plishments. The ethical problem herepolitics, and naturally enough often onsee clearly enough the nature of the is merely that of keeping a check-reinbothsides of the argument, foral-alternativechoices,includinglaissez on the imagination and of maintain-though they may agree upon the basicfaire, which is no less a choice than ing truthfulness. But the truth itself isscientific facts which are relevant to theany other.Itisthe social duty and so staggering thatitis quite enoughissue, there are rarely enough estab-function of the scientist in this arena to bemuse the public. lishedfactstoclinchthe argumentof discussion to inform and to demand Since 1945 more and more scientistsand thereis always room for differ-of the people, and of their leaders too, have become engaged in warning ofences of opinionininterpreting thea discussion and consideration of all the great risks to the very future offacts. In these matters the ea.::: of thethose impending problems that grow manofcertainscientificdevelop-matter requires the scientist to stateout of scientific discovery and the am- ments. First the atomic bomb and thenhis opinion on matters of social con-plification of human power. Science is the hydrogen bomb brought swift real-cern, but atthe same time to dis-no longercan never be againthe ization of thepossibility of the de-tinguish clearly between what he statesivory tower of the recluse, the refuge struction of allcivilization and evento be fact and what opinion he holds.of the asocial man. Science has found the extinction of all human life wereMoreover, his opinion about mattersits social basis and has eagerly grasped anuclearwartobreakout.Thewithin his technical sphere of compe-for social support, and it has thereby atomicscientists,conscience-stricken, tenceisan "informed" opinion; hisacquired socialresponsibilities and a united to secure civilian control of nu-opinion about other matters, even oth-realizationofitsown fundamental clear energy. Albert Einstein and Ber-er scientific matters, is that of a lay-ethicalprinciples. The scientistisa trand Russell issued an appeal to sci-man. He mustinallhonesty makeman, through his science doing good entists to warn the world of the tragicclear to the public in what capacity heand evil to other men, and receiving consequences of overoptimism and ofspeaks. from them blame and praise, recrimi- an unbridled arms race. Joined by a Nuclear war is only one of the direnation and money. Science is not only dozen notable scientists, they initiatedmisfortunes that are poised above theto know, itis to do, and in the doing the "Pugwash" Conferences on Sciencehead of modern man. The unrestrictedit has found its soul. and World Affairs in1957. In theseand appalling rate of population in- conferencesscientistsofEastand crease in most countries of the world, References Westsat down together totalk,in if projected just a few decades into the 1. J.Bronowski,Science and Human Values future, staggers the imagination with (Messner, New York, 1956). ehjective scientific terms, of the mili- 2. B. Glass, "Dialectical materialism and scien- taryandpoliticalproblems ofthe its consequences. Effective control of tific research." Quart. RetBrol. 23, 333-337 (1948); D.I.Greenberg, Lysenko: Sovie: world and their resolution. It was not the birth rate is the only conceivable scicnce writes finis to geneticist's domination that the scientists at all felt themselvesanswer to effective reduction by mod- of nation's biological research," Science 147,, 716-717 (1965). to be more highly qualified than diplo-ern health measures of the death rate. 3. R. B. Goldschmidt, "Research and politics," matsandstatesmen,economists orThis is the world problem second in im- Stance 109. 219-227 (1949). 4.1.. C.Eiseley."CharlesDarwin,Edward lawyers, to find solutions of the mostportance at the present time, and must Blyth, and the Theory of Natural Selection," engage the conscience of the scientist. Proc. Amer. Phil. Soc. 103, 94-158 (1959). difficult and delicate problems of in- 5. 11 Rauschning. Hitler Speaks: A Series of ternationalrelations. They acted on The problem of the futureisthe Polulcul Conversations with Adolf Hider on ethical problem of the control of man Mr Real Aims (Butterwonhs, London, 1939). two grounds only:thatthey und0r- PP. 220-221. stood the desperate nature of the situ-over his own biological evolution. The 6. J. RBaker, Science and the Planned State (Macmillan, New York, 1945). ation about which the world must bepow s of evolution now restinhis 7. A. Szent-Gyorgi, World Digest 55. 50 (1943). hallos. The geneticist can define the 8. A. von Humboldt, Cosmos: A Sketch of a warned in time; and that they hopeci Physical Description of the Uniterse, E. C. discussions by persons accustomed tomeans and prognosticatethefuture Otte. trans!. (Bohn. London, 1849). 9. B. Glass. "The criticalstate of the critical argt:-inobjective,scientifictermswith some accuracy. Yet here we en- review anicle," Quart. Rev. Biol. 39, 182-185 might pave the way for better under-ter the third great arena of cthirtal dis- (1964) -The scientist and thP science standing and more fruitful negotiationcussion, passing beyond the benefits of teacher." Amer on toe part of officials. In the ensuingscience and the certainrisksto the 50. 267-21:8 (1964).

)7 d4

Ore relevant factor, clearly,istheour thoughtful attention to this matter. traditionalremotenessofscientists Very strongin my ow nscientific from the temptations of the marketupbringing was the principle of "scien- place and from stresses generated bytific honesty" and the complete realiza- competition for professional advantage,tion that thisis the very essence of for power, and for influence. But evenscience.Ihave also seen one or two in 1950 Pigman and Carmichael wereinstances of how rapidly and com- observing that this remoteness was apletely even outstanding scientists dis- 27 September 1963 thing of the past. Today, such a world-appeared from thescientific commu- ly problem as conflict of interest (6)nity when caught in an overt violation is far from a trivial concern for manyofthisethic.Itcertainly never oc- Ethical Code for Scientists? scientists, and one can readily arguecurred to me that this was a matter that,inhisroleas government ad-on which we should vote! I wonder if In recent months a bibliography (1)viser, government contractor, govern-adoptingitformally would makeit more effective. hasbeen assembledentitled"Somement official dispensing large sums of ethical problems of science and tech-public money, grantrecipient,entre- F. R. FossErto nology." It covers the period from Jan-preneur, consultant, supervisor, or em-212 Holmes Run Road, uary 1955 to July 1963 and includesployee, the scientist is at least as muchFalls Church, Virginia about 300 references in English in aenmeshed inethical problems as the compilation characterized as "not ex- engineer. Cranberg,inhis discussion of an haustive." Perhaps scientists have merely beenethical code for scientists, seems sur- Thisbibliographysuppliesample somewhat slow to adapt to the greatprised that no action has been taken evidence of the interest of scientists,changes which have taken placeso in this area. Could it be that the scien- engineers, and the public in the ethicalrapidly in the scientific professions intific community as a whole feels that aspects of the relationships of scien-recent years. Perhaps the reasons forsuch a code is unnecessary? My guess tists and engineers to society and tothe difference in approach lie deeper. .*.ould be "yes"! one another. There emerges, however,In any case, the record of nee:: and From certain points of view a code one item of substantial difference be-of precedent suggest that a course ofof ethics is implicit in the wordscien- tween the approaches of the engineerspositive action in the area of ethics is tist.The game of scienceisplayed and the scientists to their ethical prob-something which merits the thoughtfulundercertainrulesuncodified,yes, lems, which deserves attention. Engi-attention of the scientist and the scien-but nevertheless present and adhered to neers have shown a definite interest intist-educator. and of their professionalby most scientists. Cranberg's examples organized action(2)to improve ethi-organizations. of codes in certain professions are not cal practicefor example. by empha- LAWRENCE CRANBERG applicable to scientists. By and large, the medical profession, lawyers, engi- sisonethicalconsiderationsintheLos Alamos Scientific Laboratory, training of engineers, and by the adop-Los Alamos. New Mexico neers, psychologists, and so on have codes set up primarily for legal pur- tion of formal codes of ethics by the References poses, not for moral purposes. various professionalsocieties of engi- I. 3A. Freed, "Some ethical problems of science neering. Except among the psycholo- and technology: a bibliography of the litera- The mere thought of setting up a ture from 1955." Los Alamos Scientific Labo- code of ethics for scientists is insulting! gists, who have :!_lopted a set of "Ethi- ratory Document D-1311,45 (1963). pis.I and 2. cal Standards for Psychologists" (3),2. P. L. Alger, Elm Eng. 77, 42 (1958). HENRYLANZ 3 Am Psychologist18. 56(1963). Veterans Administration Hospital, there is no evidence of similar action 4 W. Pigman andE.B.Carmichael.Science Iii.643(1950);A. Wi:tenberg,ibid. 137, Dallas, Texas by scientists, who seem to have con- 468 (1962) 5 Ann. fined their efforts in the area of ethics Ant.Acad. Po ID.Soc.Sci.297, 1 (1955). to discussion. 6. Association of the Bar of the City of New It is true that it has been proposed York. Conflict of Interest and Federal Sen. ice (Harvard Univ. Press. Cambridge.1960), atleast twice(4)that scientists as a especiallychap.8:E.Langer,Science140, 6 December 1963 group should adopt a code of ethical 882 (1963). practice. In their proposal, Pigman and Carmichael,in1950,discussedthe Ethical Code for Scientists? scope of such a code in some detail, 15 November 1963 but thus far therc has been no indica- LawrenceCranberg!Science141, tion thatthese, or any similar pro- 1242(1963)) makes thepointthat posals, are being acted upon. Code of Ethics scientists have been dilatory. as com- In taking formal action in the area pared to engineers. in doing more than of ethics, engineers are in accord with Lawrence Cranberg states[Sciew.e merelytalkaboutformalcodesof traditions long established in other pro-141, 1242 1196311 that,incontrast toethics for their professions. I am not in fessions (5) and with a strong trendengineers, psychologists, and membersa position to equate the efforts of the inmany other occupationalgroupsof other professions, scientists have novarious professions in making clear the towardethicalself-regulation.It is code of ethics,probably because ofrelationship of their work tosociety. tempting, therefore, to speculate on thetheir remoteness from the marketplaceHowever, I wish to point out that one reasons for the divergence of scientistsor their slowness to adapt to the greatgroup of scientists, the Society for So- from what has become substantiallychanges which have taken place in re-cial Responsibility in Science, has taken the norm of social conduct. cent years. He suggests that we devote its social responsibilities seriously. 52 45 Each scientist, in becoming a mem-in order that they may intelligently useapart from the main body of prt,f^s- ber of thissociety, agrees:"(1) tothe tools which science provides." slim:0 scientific organi7ntions only em foresee, insofar as possible, the results This is,in effect, a code of ethics,phasize the dispstrities which exist be- of hisprofessional work, (2)toas- which, as Cranberg says, is much need-tween scientists and other occupational sume personal moral responsibility fored today. groups with respect to ethical education the consequences ofthis work,not W. E.GRAHAMand regulation. Thesedisparitiesre- delegating this responsibility to his em-973 Woodmere Drive, main to be justified or eliminated. ployer, (3) to put his own efforts onlyWestfield, Ncw Jersey LAWRENCE CRANBERG into that work which he feels will be Department of Physics, of lasting benefit to mankind, and (4) University of Virginia, to share his scientific knowledge, and However worthy the SSRS may be,Charlottesville such ethical judgments as are basedits concern with a limited. special range upon it, with government and laymenof ethical problems anditsexistence While the authors in the preceding chapters were expressing she calls for stronger efforts to explicate the real nature of scientific their concerns about the increasing connections between activity in order to assist its incorporation into Liman culture. science, government, and the rest of society, other mem- In describing the life and times of Albert Einstein, Carlos Chagas bers of the scientific community were turning attention to the general captures the essence of Einstein's professional and political develop. lack of public understanding of science. In a culture dominated by the ment, giving particular emphasis to Einstein's battles against anti- applications of scientific work, public awareness of the human side of Semitism, his efforts to promote world peace, and his postwar activi- science, especially understanding of the details of daily life in the ties dedicated to educating others about the horrors of nuclear war. laboratory, was not keeping up with the astounding pace of scientific Chagas observes that Einstein, perhaps one of the few scientists easily development. recognized and understood by the public at large, was a visible This isolation of the affairs of scientists from the affairs of ordinary conscience for many in a world of anguish. life is dangerous, several writers noted, because it leads to false The increased emphasis on the humanity of scientists led to more images and stereotypes that perpetuate myths based on ignorance and awareness within the scientific community of the human dilemmas ilIse hopes. If the proms: of science did not live up to the public's faced by its members. The first chair of the National Academy of belief in its power to produce certainty and progress. the backlash Sciences' Committee on Human Rights, Robert W. Kates, describes would be enormous. the committee's effort to respond to human rights violations affecting Gerald Holton's introduction 0 these themes appeals to inscientists throughout the world. He.entifies the troubling issues tellectuals within and outside the world of science to diminisn the related to the nature of human rights, the choice of casts for action by separation between scientists and humanists. To foster greater public the Academy, and the method of protest. understanding of the meaning of progress in scientific research. In an cditonal in 1978, William D. Carey notes that the boundaries Holton urges colleagues to shatter false images of science in literature that once clearly separated science from ordinary life no longer and the arts and to replace these with a contemporary picture in remain intact. He encourages scientists to overcome tneir in- keeping with the role of science in the modern world. difference to human rit,hts violations, to respond to government robert S. Monson, obstry mg a gre-., ing skepticism about the controls on sciencextbooks, and to deepen their involvement with value of ratio/. iity throughout society, fears that skeptic' might the rights of the physically handicapped, women, and minorities. eventually cro,.'public support for science. He concludes that sci- Questions of freedom, responsibility, and ethics in science ul- ence can no ',Tiger afford to be comfortably isolated from ordinary timately lead to cracks in the strict barriers that once existed between human alias., and urges the scientific community to redouble its the abstract pnnciples derived from observations of natural phe- efforts to present science as a fully understandable process nomena and the social values that govern everyday life. These cracks One of the more stnking consequences of increased concerns about appear most noticeably in situations where individual scientists be- public understanding of science has been the search for new ways to come advisers and advocates in public debates designed to influence observe and record the actual behav tor of scientists and engineers as government decisions or regulatory actions The authors hi this chap- they carry out their professional work. June Goodfield, in her plea for ter, in calling more attention to the human side of science. set the more humanity in science, calls for a study of science "as it is done- as stage for blumng distinctions between the role of scientist as scientist a prerequisite of reconstructing the history of science. In particular. and the role of scientist as citizen RC

fi 4 The Atomization of Loyalties

In the qualitative sense, and particularly among intellectuals,the symptoms are no better. One hears talk of the hope that the forces of science may be tamed and harnessed to the general advance of ideas, that the much deplored gap between scientists And humanists may be bridged. But the truth is that both the hopes and the bridges are illusory. The separationwhich I shallexaminefurtherbetweenthe When future generations look backscience and technology turn out, onwork of the scientist on the one hand to our day, they will envy us for hav-more thorough study, to mask a deepand thatof theintellectualoutside ing lived at a time of brilliant achieve-affliction of our culture. And indeed,science on the other is steadily increas- ment in many fields, and not least inanyone committed tothe view thating, and the genuine acceptance of science and technology. We are at thescience should be a basic part of ourscience as a valid part of culture is be- threshold of basic knowledge concern -intellectualtraditionwillsoonfindcoming less rather than more likely. ii g the origins of life,the chemicalgrounds for concern. Moreover, there appears at present elements, and thegalaxies. We are Some of the major symptoms of theto be no force in our cultural dynamics near an understanding of the funda-relativelynarrowplacescience,asstrong enough to change this trend. mental constituents of matter, of theproperlyunderstood,reallyoccupiesThis is due mainly to the atrophy of process by which the brain works, and inthe totalpicture are quantitative.two mechpnisms by which the schism of the factors governing behavior. WeFor example, while the total annual ex-was averted in the past. First, the com- have launched the physical explorationpenditure for scientificresearch andmon core of their early ..ation and of space and have begun to see how todevelopment in this country is now atthe wide range of their idterests was conquer hunger and disease on a large the high level of over $10 billion, basicapt to bring scholars and scientists to- scale. Scientific thought appears to beresearchthe main routs of the treegether at some level where there could applicable to an ever wider range ofthat furnishes scientific knowledge andbe mutual communication on the sub- studies. With current technicalinge- the fruits of technologyhas a share j:ts of their individual competence; nuity one can atlast hope to imple-of about 7 percent at best (2). Cor-and second, the concepts and attitudes ment most of the utopian dreams of respondingly, a recent manpower studyof contemporary science were made a the past. showed that of the 750,000 trainedpart of the general humanistic concerns Hand in hand with the quality of ex-scientists and engineers, only 15,000of the time. In this way a reasonable citement in scientific work today goesare responsible for the major part ofequilibrium of compatible interpreta- an astonishing quantity. The world-wide the creative work being done in basictions was as felt to evst. during the last output is vast. There are now over 50,-research (3). Another nationwide sur-century,betweentheconceptsand 000 scientific and technical journals,vey found that in 1958 nearly 40 per-problems of science on the one hand publishing annually about1,200,000 cent of the men and women who hadand of intelligent common sense on articles of significance for some branch attended college in the United Statesthe other: this was as also true with re- of research and engineering in the phys-confessed that they had taken not aspect to the scientific and the nonscien- icalid life sciences. Every year theresingle course in thephysicaland bio-tific aspects ot the training of intellec- are about 60,000 new science bookslogical sciences (4.p.150). Similarly,tuals.Specialists. otcourse. have al- and100,000researchreports(1). in contrast to the overwhelming amount .i)s complained of being inadequately And the amount of scientific work be-of, and concern .ith science and tech-appreciated-, whatismore, they are ing done is increasing at a rapid rate,nology today. the mass media pa, onlyusually right. But although there were doubling approximately every 20 years.negligible attention to their substance:some large ;nd spots and some bit- Every phase of daily and national lifethe newspapers have been found to giveter quarrels, the two sides were not, is being penetrated by some aspect ofless than 5 percent of their (nonadver-as they are now in danger of coming this exponentially growing activity. tising) space to factual presentations ofto be, separated by a gulf of ignorance Itisappropriate,therefore,thatscience, technology, and medicine, andand indifference (6). searchingquestionsarenowbeing television stations, only about 0.3 per- Itis of course not my purpose here asked about the function and place ofcent of their time (4, pp. 1-3: 5). Into urge better science education at the this lusty giant. Just as a man's vigor-short, all our voracious consurnptior. ofewense of humanistic and social stud- ously pink complexion may alert thetechnological devices, all our talk abouties. On the contrz'ry: the latter do not trained eye to a grave disease of thethe threats or beauties of science. andfare much better than science does. and circulatory system,so too may theall our money spent on engineering de-the shabby effort devoted to science is spectacularsuccessandgrowthofvelopment should not draw attentionmerely the symptom of a more exten- from the fact that the pursuit of scien- The author is professor of rhysics at Harvard sive sickness of our educational sys- University. This articleisreprinted, with some tific knowledge itselfisnot a strongtems. Nur do I want to place all blame amplification, from the anthologyThe Intellec- tuals[George B. de Huszar. Ed. (Free Press, component of the operative system ofon educators and publicists. Too many Chicago, 1960)J, with permission. general values. scientists have forgotten that especially 5 5 49 at a time ot rapid expansion of knowl-learn the art of number, or he will notthe theory of geological evolution, con- edge they have an extra obligation andknow how to array his troops: and thecerning the descent of man before the opportunity with respect to the widerphilosopher also, because he has to risetheory of biological evolution, and con- public, that some of the foremost re-out of the sea of change and lay noldcerning the origin of our galaxy before searchmen,including Newton andof true being.... This will be the eas-modern cosmology. The advance of Einstein, took great pains to write ex-iest way for the soul to pass from be-knowledge therefore made inevitable positions of the essence of their dis-coming to truth and being." an apparent conflict between science coveries in a form intended to be ac- The main flaw in this image is thatand religion. It is now clear how large cessibletothe nonscientist. And init omits a third vital aspect. Sciencea price had to be paid for a misunder- the humanities, too many contributorshas always had also a mythopoeic func-standing of both science and religion: and interpreters seem to scoff at Shel-tionthat is,itgenerates an impor-to base religious beliefs on an estimate ley'scontentioninhisDefence oftant part of our symbolic vocabularyof what science cannot do is as fool- Poetrythat one of the artist's tasks isand provides some of the metaphysicalhardy as it is blasphemous. to "absorb the new knowledge of thebases and philosophical orientations of The iconoclastic image of science sciences and assimilateitto humanour ideology. As a consequence thehas, however, other components not as- needs, colorit with human passions,methods of argument of science,itscribable to a misconception of its func- transform itinto the blood and boneconceptions and its models, have per-tions. For example, Arnold Toynbee of human nature." meated first the intellectual life of thecharges science and technology with Itis through the accumulation oftime, then the tenets and usages ofusurping the place of Christianity as such neglects just as much as througheveryday life.All philosophies sharethe main source of our new symbols. deterioration in the quantity and qual-with science the need to work withNeo-orthodox theologians call science ity of instruction given our future in-concepts such as space, time, quantity,the"self-estrangement"of man be- tellectual :eaders that the acceptancematter, order, law, causality, verifica-causeitcarries him withidolatrous of science as a meaningful' componenttion,reality. Our language of ideas,zeal along a dimension where no ulti- of our culture has come to be ques-for example, owes agreat debttomatethat is, religiousconcerns pre- tioned. Again, this process is to a largestatics, hydraulics, and the model ofvail. It is evident that these views fail ement merely one aspect of the in-the solar system. These have furnishedto recognize the multitude of divergent creasing atomization of loyalties with-powerful analogies in many fields ofinfluences that shape a culture, or a in theintelligentsia. The writer, thestudy. Gui ling ideassuch as condi-person. And on the other hand there scholar, the scientist, the engineer, thetions of equilibrium, centrifugal andis,of course, a group of scientists, teacher, the lawyer, the politician, thecentripetalforces, conservation laws,though not a large one, which really physicianeach now regards himselffeedback, invariance, complementaritydoes regard science as largely an icono- first of all as a member of a separate,enrich the general arsenal of imagina-clastic activity. Ideologically they are, of special group of fellow professionals totive tools of thought. course, descendants of Lucretius, who which he gives almost all his allegiance A sound image of science must em-w rote on the first pages ofDe rerurn and energy; only very rarely does thebraceeach ofthethreefunctions.natura,"The terror and darkness of protessionalled a sense of responsi-However, usually only one of the threemind must be dispelled not by the rays bilitytoward. or of belongingto. isrecognized. For example. folkloreof the sun and glittering shafts of day, larger intellectual community. This lossoften depicts the life of the scientistbut by the aspect and the law of na- of cohesion is perhaps the most relevanteither as isolated from life and fromture: wIlose first principle we shall be- symptom of the disease of our culture.beneficent action (7) or. at the othergin by thus stating, nothing is ever got- foritpoints directlyto one ofitsextreme, as dedicated to technologicalten out of nothing by divine power." specific causes. As in other cases ofimprovements. In our day this ancient trend has as- this sort, this is a failure ot image. sued politicalsignificance owing to the fact that in Soviet literature scien- Iconoclasm tific teaching ;Ind atheistic propaganda Pure Thought and Practical Power are sometimes equated. A second image of long sanding Each person's image of the role ofthat of the scientist as iconoclast. In- science may differ in detail from thatdeed, almost every major scientific ad-Ethical Perversion of the next, but all public images arevance has been interpretedeither tri- in the main based on one or more ofumphantly or with apprehensionas The third image of scienceis that seven positions. The first of these goesa blow against religion. To some ex-of a force which can invade, possess, hack to Plato and portrays science astent science was pushed into this posi-pervert, and destroy man. The current an activity with double benefits: Sciencetion by the ancient tendency to provestereotype of the soulloss, evil scientist as pure thought helps the mind findthe existence of God by pointing toisthepsychopathicinvestigatorof truth, and science as power providesproblems which science could not solvescience fiction or the nuclear destroyer tools for effective action. In book 7 ofat the time. Newton thought that theimmoral if he develops the weap- theRepublic.Socratestells Glauconregularities and stability of the solarons he is asked to produce. traitorous why the young rulers in the Ideal Statesystem proved it "could only proceedif he refuses. According to this view, should study mathematics: "This, then.from the counsel and dominion of anscientific moralityisinherently nega- is knowledge of the kind we are seek-intelligent and powerful Being." andtive.It causes the arts to languish, it ing, having a double use. military andthe sameattitudegovernedthoughtblights culture. and when applied to hu- philosophical; for t''. mo,n of war mustconcerning the earth's formation beforeman affairs,Itleads to regimentation 5 6 50

and to theimpoverishment of life.the level of casual conversation. Forchoice what he shall do. Indeed it is Science is the serpent seducing us intowhen the man in the streetor manyerroneous to think of him as advancing eating the fruits of the tree of knowl-an intellectualhears that you are atoward knowledge; it is, rather, knowl- edgethereby dooming us. physicistormathematician, hewilledge which advances towards him, The fear behind this attitude is genu-usually remark with a frank smile, "Oh,grasps him, and overwhelms him. Even ine but not confined to science:itis I never could understand that subject";the most superficial glance at the life directed against all thinkers and inno-while intend:Ag this as a curious coin-and work of a Kepler, a Dalton, or a vators. Society has always foundit pliment, he betrays his intellectual dis-Pasteur would clarify thispoint.It hard to deal with creativity, innovation,sociation from scientific fields. It is notwould be well if in his education each and new knowledge. And since sciencefashionable tr confess to a lack of ac-person were shown by example that assures a particularly rapid, an4 there-quaintance with the latest ephemera inthe driving power of creativity h as fore particularly disturbing, turnover ofliterature or the arts, but one may evenstrong and as sacred for the scientist ideas, it remains a prime target of sus-exhibit a touch of pride in professingas for the artist. picion. ignorance of the structure of the uni- The second point can be put equally Factors peculiar to our time intensifyverse or one's own body, of the b..-briefly. In order to survive and to pro- thissuspicion.Thediscoveriesofhavior of matter or one's own mind. gress, mankind surely cannot ever know "pure" scie-,ce often lend themselves too much. Salvation can hardly be readily towidespreadexploitation thought of as the reward for ignorance. through technology. The products ofThe Sorcerer's Apprentice Man has been given his mind in order technologywhether they are better that he may find out where he is, what vaccines or better weaponshave the The last two views held that man ishe is, who he is, and how he mayas- characteristics of frequently being very inherently good and science evil. Thesume theresponsibilityfor himself effective, easily made in large gland-next image is based on the opposite as-which is the only obliga:;on incurred in ties, easily distributed, and very ap-sumptionthat man cannot be trustedgaining knowledge. pealing. Thus we are in an inescapablewith scientific and technical knowledge_ Indeed, it may well turn out th. dilemmairresistibly tempted to reach the He has survived only because he lacked technological advances in warf: ).. have for the fruits of science, yet, deep in-sufficientlydestructive weapons; nowbrought us to the point where society side, aware that our metabolism may he can immolate his world. Science, in-is at last compelled to curb theaggres- not be able to cope with this ever-in-directly responsible for this new power,sions that in the east were condoned creasing appetite. ishere considered ethicallyneutral_and even glorified. Organized warfare Probably the dilemma can no longer But man, like the sorcerer's apprentice,andgenocidehavebeenpracticed be resolved,andthisincreasesthe can neither understand this tool northroughout recorded history, butnever anxietyandconfusionconcerningcontrol it. Unavoidably he will bringuntil now have even the science. A current symptom is the pop- war lords upon himselfcatastrophe, partlyopenly expressed fear ofwar. In the ular idetintication of science with thethroughhis naturalsinfulness,andsearch for the causes and prevention technology of superweapons. The bombpartly through his lust for power, of is taking the place of the microscope, of aggression among nations, we shall, which the pursuit of knowledge is aI am convinced, find scientific investi- Wernher von Braun, the place of Ein- manifestation. It was in this mood thatgations to be a main source of under- stein. as symbols for modern sciencePliny deplored the development of pro-standing. and scientists. The efforts to convincejectiles of iron for purposes of war: people that science itself can give man"This last I regard as the most criminal only knowledge about himself and hisartifice that has been devised by the hu- environment. and occasionally a choiceman mind; for, as if to bring deathEcological Disaster of action, have been largely unavail-upon man with still greater rapidity, ing. The scientist as scientist can takewe have given wings to iron and taught A change in the average temperature little credit or responsibility either forit to fly. Let us, therefore, acquit Na-of a pond or in the salinity of an ocean facts he discoversfor hedidnotture of a charge that belongs to manmay shift the-ological balance and create themor for the uses othershimself." cause the death of a large number of make of hisdiscoveries, for he gen- When science is viewed in this planeplants and animals. The fifth prevalent erally is neither permitted nor speciallyas a temptation for the mischievousimage of science similarly holds that fitted to make these decisions. Theysavageit becomes easy to suggest awhile neither science nor man may be arecontrolledbyconsiderationsofmoratorium on science, a period ofinherently evil, the rise of science hap- ethics.economics,orpoliticsandabstinenceduringwhichhumanitypened, as if by accident, to initiate an therefore are shaped by the values andsomehow will develop adequate spirit-ecological change that now corrodes historical circumstances of the wholeual or social resources for coping withthe only conceivable basis for a stable society (8). the possibilities of inhuman uses ofsociety. In the words of Jacques Mari- Thereareother evidences of themodern technical results. Hem I needtain, the "deadly disease" science set off widespread notionthat scienceitselfpoint out only the two main misun-in society is "the denial of eternal truth cannot contribute positively to culture.derstandings implied in this recurrentand absolute valuer." Toynbee, for example, gives a list ofcall for a moratorium. The main events leading to this state "creative individuals," frost; Xenophon First, science of course is notan oc-are usually presented as follows. The toHindenburg and from Dante tocupation, such as working in a storeorabandonment of geocentric astronomy Lenin, but does not includea singleon an assembly line, that one may pur-implied the abandonment of du:con- scientist.I cannot forego the remarksue or abandon at will. For a creativeception of the earth as the center of that there is a significant equivalent onscientist,itisnot a matter of freecreation and of man as its ultimate pur- 51 pose. Then purposive creation gavephies, inspired rightly or wrongly bysizable group working under a contract way to blind evolution. Space, time,science, point out that absolutes have awith a substantial annual budget. In the and certainty were shown to have nohabit of changing in time and of con-researchinstituteof oneuniversity absolute meaning. All a priori axiomstradicting one another, if they invitemore than 1500 scientists and techni- were discovered to be merely arbitrarya re-examination of the bases of socialcians are grouped around a set of mul- conveniences. Modern psychology andauthority and reject them when thosetimillion-dollarmachines;thefunds anthropology led to cultural relativism.bases prove false (as did the Colonistscome from government agencies whose Truth itself has beet dissolvedintoin this country), then one must notultimate aim is national defense. probabilistic and indeterministic state-blame arelativisticphilosophyfor Everywhere the overlapping interests ments. Drawing upon analogy with thebringing out these faults. They wereof basic research. industry, and the mil- sciences, liberal philosophers have be-there all the time. itary establishment have been merged come increasingly relativistic, denying In the search or a new and sounderin a way that satisfies all three. Science either the necessity or the possibility ofbasis on which to build a stable world,has thereby become a large-scale oper- postulating immutable verities, and soscience evil! h' indispensable. We canation with a potential for immediate have undermined the old founda..onshope to match the resources and struc-and world-wide effects. The results are of moral and social authority on whichture of society to the needs and poten-a splendid increase in knowledge, and a stable society must be built. tialities of people only if we knowalso sideeffect;thatare analogous It should be noted in passing thatmore about man. Already science hasto those of sudden and rapid urbaniza- many applications of recent scientificmuch to say that is valuable and im-tiona strain on communication facil- concepts outside science merely revealportant about human relationships andities, the rise of an administrative bu- ignorance about science. For example,problems. From psychiatry to dietetics,reaucracy,thedepersonalizationof relativism in nonscientific fields is gen-from immunology to meteorology, fromsome human relationships. erally based on farfetched analogies.city planning to agricultural research, To a large degree, all this is unavoid- Relativity theory, of course, does notby far the largest part of our total sci-able. The new scientific revolution will justify itself by the flow of new knowl- find that truth depends on the point ofentific and technical effort today is con- materialbenefitsthat view o! the observer but, on the con-cerned, indirectly or directly, with manedge and of trary, reformulates the laws of physicshis needs, relationships, health, andwill no doubt follow. The danger so that they hold good for every ob-comforts. Insofar as absolutes are toand this is the point ' here scientism entersis that the fascination with the server, no matter how he moves orhelp guide mankind safely on the long where he stands. Its central meaningand dangerous journey ahead, theymechanism of this successful enterprise As that the most valued truths in science may change the scientist himself and surely should be at least strong enoughsociety around him. For example. the are wholly independent of the point oftostand scrutinyagainst the back-unorthodox, often withdrawn individ- view. Ignorance of science is also theground of developing factual knowl- only excuse for adopting rapid changes ual. on whom most great scientific ad- edge. vances have depended in the past, does within science as models for antitradi- not fit well into the new system. And tional attitudes outside science. In real- Scientism society will be increasingly faced with ity, no field of thought is more conserv- the seductive urging of scientism to ative than science. Each change neces- While the last four images impliedadopt generally what is regardedof- sarily encompasses previous knowledge.a revulsion from science. scientism mayten erroneouslyas the pattern of or- Science grows like a tree, ring by ring. be described as an addiction to science.ganization of the new science.'Ile Einstein did not prove the work ofAmong the signs of scientism are thecrash program, the breakthrough pur- Newton wrong; he provided a largerhabit of dividing all thought into twosuit. the megaton effect are becoming setting within which some contradic-categories. up-to-date scientific knowl-ruling ideas in complex fields such as tions and asymmetries in the earlieredge and nonsense: the view that theeducation, where they may not be ap- physics disappeared. mathematical sciences and the largeplicable. But the image of science as an eco-nuclear laboratory offer the only per- logical disaster can be subjected to amissible models for successfully employ- more severe critique (9). Regardless ofing the mind or organizing effort: and Magic science's part in the corrosion of ab-the identification of science with tech- solute values, have those values reallynology, to which reference was made Few nonscientists would suspect a given us always a safe anchor? A prioriabove. hoax ifitwere suddenly announced absolutes abound all over the globe in One main source for this attitude isthat a stable chemical element lighter completely contraoictory varieties. Mostevidently the persuasive success of re-than hydrogen had been synthesized. of the horrors of history have beencent technical work. Another resides inor that a manned observation platform carried out under the banner of somethe fact that we are passing through ahad been established at the surface of absolutistic philosophy, from the Aztecperiod of revolutionary change in thethe sun. To most people it appears that mass sacrifices to the auto-da-fe of thenature of scientific activitya changescience knows no inherent limitations. Spanish Inquisition, from the massacretriggered by the perfecting and dissem-Thus, the seventh image depicts science of the Huguenots to the Nazi gas cham-inatii:g of the methods of basic researchas magic, and the scientist as wizard, bers. It is far from clear that arso-by teams of specialists with widely dif-cleuc e.r machma, or oracle. The at,i- ciety of the past did provide a mean-ferent training and interests. Twentytude toward the scientist on this plane ingful and dignified life for more thanyears ago the typical scientist workedranges from terror to sentimental sub- a small fraction ofits members. If,alone or with a few students and col-servience. depending on what motives therefore, some of the new philoso-leagues. Today he usually belongs to aone ascribes to him. s 8 52 Impotence of the tual or the philosarhie. ;e -%t n- .tc u.cr- Modern Intellectual the b id effects of 'Iv` . . .nodecn en en- culture and scientific thisrlh. Th. of The prevalence of these false images feelingofbewildermentand . 76Corter is a main source of the alienation be-homelessnessisthemostterr:ryitr !33.: tem tween the scientific and nonscientificHere is the reason. it seems to me, in-Soy.' fr r t._

elements in our culture, and thereforethe ineffectiveness and self-denigration m:.n that _ the failure of image is import-nt busi-of our contemporary intelle. "s. Nor i y: "N art v."!.0 ness for all of us. Now to pin much ofare the scientists themselves protected measar : "-1 nn the blame on the insufficient instruction from this fate, for it has always beer..a trat. , and t izr in science which the general student re-and must alvs be, the job of thewho :oundecl rarer/ wing ir. .cri ceives at all levels is quite justifiable.humanist to construct and disseminateon norm oe quant:ty, also nas en- I have implied the need, and most peo-the meaningfultotalpicture of thedowed h a ad which cai_ ple nowadays seem to come to this con-world. comprehend .nese norms:" Was not the clusion anyway. But this is not enough. To illustrate this point concretely weuniverse of Dante and Milton so pow- We must consider the full implicationsmay examine a widely and properlyerful and "gloriously romantic" precise- of the discovery that not only the manrespected work by a scholar wh' warm-ly because it incorporated, and thereby in the street but almost all of our intel-ly understands both the science and therendered meaningful, the contemporary lectual leaders today know at most veryphilosophy of the 16th and 17th cen-scientific cosmology alongside thecur- little about science. And here we cometuries. The reader is carried along byrent moral and esthetic conceptions? to the central point underlying the anal-his authority and enthusiasm. And then,Leaving aside the question of whether ysis made above: the chilling realiza-suddenly, one eneounters a passage un-Dante's and Milton's contemporaries, tion that our intellectuals. for the firstlike any otherin the book, an an-by and large, were really living ina time in history, are losing their hold ofguished cry from the heart (10): "Itrich and fragrant world of gladness, understanding upon the world. was of the greatest consequence forlove, and beauty, it is fair to speculate The wrong images would be impos-succeeding thought that :tow the greatthat if our new cosmos isfelt to be sible were they not anchored in twoNewton's authority was squat aly be-cold, inglorious, and unromantic, itis kinds of ignorance. One kind is igno-hind that view of the cosmos Whichnot the new cosmology which isat rance on the basic level. that of factssaw in man a puny, irrelevant spectatorfault but the absence of new Dantes what biologysays aboutlife.what (so far as a being, wholly imprisoned and Miltons. chemistry and physics say about mat-in a dark room, can be called such) of And yet, Built correctly reflects the ter, what astronomy says about the de-the vast mathematical system whosepresent dilemma. What his outburst velopment and structure of our galaxy.regular motions according to mechani-tells us, in starkest and simplest form, and so forth. The nonscientist realizescal principles constituted the world ofisthis: By having let the intellectual that the old common-sense foundationsnature. The gloriously romantic uni-remain in terrified ignorance of mod- of thought about the world of natureverse of Dante and Milton, that set roern science, we have forced him into a have become obsolete during the lastbounds to the imagination of man as itpositionoftragicimpotence; heis two generations. The ground is trem-played uver space and time, had nowblindfold in a maze which he cannot bling under his feet: the simple inter-been swept away. Snace was identifiedtraverse. pretations of solidity, permanence. and with the realm of geometry, time with Once this is understood, the conse- reality have been washed away. and hethe continuity of number. The worldquence also becomes plain. I findit is plunged into the nightmarish ocean;hatpeople had thoughtthemselvesremarkable that the intellectual today of four-dimensionalcontinua, proba-living ina world rich with colour anddoes not have even more distorted im- bility amplitudes. indeterminacies. andsound, redolent with fragrance, filledages and hostile responses with regard soforth. He knows only two thingswith gladness, love and beauty, speak-to science, that he has so far not turned about the basic conceptions of model aing everywhere of purposive harmonymuch more fiercely against the source science:that he does not understandand creative idealswas crowded nowof apparent threats to his personal posi- them. and that he is now so far sepa-into minute corners in the brains of scat-tion and sanity (11)in short, that the rated from them that he will never findtered organic beings. The really im dissociation has not resulted in an even out what they mean. portantworldoutside was aworld more severe cultural psychosis. On the second level of ignorance. thehard, cold, colorless, silent, and dead; But this, I am convinced, is likely to contemporary intellectual knows just as a world of quantity. a world of mathe-he the result, for there is at present no little of the way in which the mainmatically computable motions in me-countercyclicalmechanismatwork. facts from the different sciences fit to-chanical regulari.,. The world of qual-Some other emergencies of a similar or gether in a picture of the world takenities as immediately perceived by manrelatednature have been recognized as a whole. He has had to leave behindbecame just a curious and quite minorand are being dealt with: We need him. one by one, those great syntheseseffect of that infinite machine beyond.more good scientists, and they are now which used to represent our intellectualIn Newton, the Cartesian metaphysics,being produced in greater numbers; we and moral homethe world view ofambiguously interpreted and strippedneed more support for studies in hu- the book of Genesis. of Homer. ofof its distinctive claim for serious phil-manitiesad social science, and the Dante. of Milton, of Goethe. In theosophicalconsideration,finallyover- base of support is growing gratifyingly. mid-20th century he finds hin,self aban-threw Aristotelianism and became theWe sorely need to give our young sci- doned in a universe which is to himpredominantworld-viewofmodern entists more broad humanistic studies an rincolvahie nua7le nn either the and itI have not dwelled on this it S9 53 is because,in principle, this can beat all. Moreover, while some time lagchallenge that intellectuals face today. dtine with existing programs and facil-between new discoveries and their wid- ities; for the existing tools of study iner dissemination has always existed, the References and Notes the ht,manities, unlike the tools in sci- I. "Improving the Availability of Scientific and increase in degree of abstraction, and Technical Information in the United States," ence, are still in touch with our ordi-in tempo, of present-day science, com- President's Science Advisory Committee Re- port (1958). nar sensibilities. But hardly anythinging precisely at a tine of inadequate 2. "Reviews of Data on Research and Develop- being done or planned now is adequateeducational effort min by old stand- ment,"NationalScience FoundationRept. No. 15(1959); "Federal Funds for Science," to deal with the far more serious prob-ards, has begun to change the lag into National Science Formdmioa Rept.No. 8 lem, the cultural psychosis engendereda discontinuity. (1959). 3.Nmal Research Advisory Committee Report bytheseparationofscienceand This lapse, it must be repeated, is on Basic Research In the Navy(1 June 1959), culture. vol.I,p. 29;ibid.vol. 2, p. 34. not the fault of the ordinary citizen; 4.The Public lm, ct of Science in the Mass One may of course speculate as tonecessarily, he can oniy take his cue Media(Univ. fMichigan, Ann Arbor, how one could make science again a 1958). fromtheintellectualsthescholars, 5. Thereisevidence that thesefigures have part of every intelligent man's educa-writers, and teachers who deal profes- been increased by a factor of perhaps 1.5 sincethesurveywasconducted. See H. tional equipmentnot because sciencesionally in ideas. It is among the latter Krieghbaum,Science129, 1095 (1959). is more important than other fields, but 6. Perhaps the most eloquent and influential that the crucial need lies. Every great voice among those who have recently ad- because it is an important part of theage has been shaped by intellectuals of dressed themselves to this problem is that of whole jigsaw puzzle of knowledge. Athe stamp of Hobbes, Locke, Berkeley, C. P. Snow in the Rede Lecture,The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution (Cam- plausible program would include soundLeibnitz, Voltaire, Montesquieu, Rous- bridgeUniv.Press, Cambridge and New and thorough work at every level of York,1959).I recommend his book,al- seau, Kant, Jefferson, and Franklin though with certain reservations. See also educationimaginative new programsall of whom would have been horri- E. Ashby,Technology and the Academics a1,,1curricula; strengthened standards (Macmillan, London, 1958) ano w. Burkhardt, fied by the proposition that cultivated Science and theHumanities (Antioch Press, of achievement; extension of collegemen and women could dispense with a Yellow Springs, Ohio, 1959). work in science to comprise perhaps 7. See, for example, the disturbing findings of good grasp of the scientific aspect of M. Mead and R. Metraux, "Image of the one-third of the total number of coursesthe contemporary world picture. This scientist among high-school students,"Science 126, 384 (1957). I have presented the ap- taken by the nonscience student, astradition is broken; very few intellectu- proach in this middle section in the "Adven- used to be the rule in good colleges tures of the Mind" series,Saturday Evening als are now able to act as informed Post,9 January 1960. some 50 years ago; greater recognitionmediators. Meanwhile, as science moves 8. It is, however, also appropriate to say here of excellence; expansion of opportunity that there has been only a moderate success every day faster and further from the in persuading the average scientist of the for adult education, including the pres-bases of ordinary understanding, the proposition that the privilege of freely pur- entation of factual and cultural aspects suing a field of knowledge having large-scale gulf grows, and any remedial action secondaryeffectsimposes on him,inhis of science through the mass media. But capacity as citizen, a proportionately larger becomes more difficult and more un- burden of civic responsibility. while some efforts are being made herelikely. 9. See, for example, C. Frankel,The Case for and there, few people have faced the Modern Man(Beacon, Boston, 1959). To restore science to reciprocal con-10. E. A. Burtt,The Metrphysical Foundations real magnitude of the problem, awaretact with the concerns of most men of Modern Science(Doubleday, New York, ed. 2,1932), pp. 238-239. of 'he large range and amount of sci-to bring science into an orbit about us 11. For a striking recent example see the virulent entific knowle-Jge that is needed beforeinstead of lettingit escape from our attack on modern sc'ence in the final chap- terof Arthur Koestler'sThe Sleepwalkers one can "know science" in any senseintellectual traditionthat is the great (Macmillan, New York, 1959).

technology than they once were. The evidence is of various kinds. Perhaps the most quantitative is provided in the United States by the relative decline in students entering the sciences and the scientifically based professions. In some instances, such as engineering, the numbers have fallen absolutely in the face of a steady increase in the total number of potential students in each age class. Even more quantitative, and certainly more Like all people with some scientific cine so that I retain considerable respect compelling to the individual scientist, is training, I suffer from feelings of unease for clinical intuition and judgment. This the evidence provided by the slowdown when attempting to deal with the actions, discussion relies much more on these in appropriations foc science. Third, one and especially the attitudes, of people. elusive instruments than it does on quan- may cite the intuitions and reflections of For one thing, I do not have at my titative scientific analysis. thoughtful socialclinicians like Rene command the sampling and interview As a matter of fact, it puts no great The authorisdirectorof thedivisionof techniques wielded with so much aplomb strain on one's clinical intuition to ob- biologicalsciences,CornellUniversity,'theca, by my colleagues in the social sciences. serve that large numbers of people in New York. Thisarticleisadapted from an address presented at a conference on "Science Fortunately for my own piece of mind, various parts of the worldincluding, and the Future," held in Boulder, Colorado, from my scientific !I-lining wq accompanied 13to19 April under the joint sponsorship of perhaps most significantly, ti,e advanced ihe British Association for the Advancement of by enough exposure to the art of medi- partsare less happy about science and Science and the AAAS.

c 54

Dubos (1), who has so courageouslythe Communist Party is the only largespace into which the water is pushed by summarized the shortcomings of scien-social organization that has ever serious-atmospheric pressure? If one looks back tific approaches to human problems.ly believed that man himself may be im-40 or 50 years, one seems to remember True enough, he finally draws the con-proved through improving his materialthat rather less than the majority of clusion that what we need is not lesscircumstances. Among Christians,asone's classmates really enjoyed physics science but more. Nevertheless, the argu-among adherents of many other reli-and chemistry and the kind of picture ment depends on a careful demonstra-gious faiths, there has always been athey give of the world. Perhaps a some- tion that science raises new problems ofsubstantial body of opinion which holdswhat larger number found satisfaction in increasing complexity as it continues tothat the reverse is true and that ma-biology, with its greater emphasis on im- solve the older and simpler ones. terial prosperity has, in fact, an adversemediate experience and the pleasure one effect on the human soul. gets from contemplating nature's wide The progress of science undoubtedlyvariety rather thanitsunifying me- Earlier Attitudes toward Science has had some effect in reducing the gross-chanics. er forms of superstition. One supposes, World War H called a great deal of Before going on to a discussion of thefor example, that must men are in someattention to science and made many possible reasons for a decline in publicsense grateful for being less afraid ofpeople grateful for its role in enabling regard, we should pause to remind our-thunder and lightning than man used toEngland and its allies to maintain the selves that the change may not be sobe. But, here again, it is doubtful thatintegrity of the free world. Along with large or so profound as we might sup-the scientific way of looking at the worldthe extraordinary buildup of military pose. It is not very clear that there everhas ever completely displaced older, technology came a very great increase in was a time when a substantial part ofmore magical approaches to the deepbiological knowledge of a kind which the population really understood science,questions. It does not appear that Presi-could be applied to medicine and pub- cared much about the kind of knowl-dent Nixon, when making up his mindlic health, and to agriculture. edge it produces, or thought much aboutwhether or not to deploy the ABM sys- The press sho ved increasing interest itsultimate effects.Improvements intem, consulted an astrologer, but it isin reporting scientific events, and the technology were welcomed because ofnot unknown for heads of states inquality of scientific reporting has greatly the increased production of what wereother parts of the world to do so, andimproved in the quarter century since generally regarded as good things at lessmost of our metropolitan daily news-the war. Most significantly, a grateful cost in human effort. On the other hand,papers maintain an astrology column asand more understanding public provided the reduction in human labor was soonwell as the more sophisticated servicesvastly increased financial support for recognized to have a negative side. Inof Ann Landers. Indeed, it is estimatedwhat the scientist wanted to do. the first place, as the Luddites saw verythat there are 10,000 professional astrol- On the scientist's side there was a early, it tended to throw men out ofogers but only 2000 astronomers in theburgeoning of interest in making science work, at leasttemporarily. What wasUnited States (2). more accessible to the general public. even worse from the psychological point Putting aside the grosser forms of su-Most noteworthy in this movement, at of view, the machine tended to changeperstition and turning to better-developed least in the United States, was the effort the status of skills which had been ac-and better-thought-out ways of lookingof outstanding university scientists to quired with much effort over long peri-at the world, I would hazard a guessimprove the presentation of science to ods of years. Nevertheless, on balance,that the metaphysical outlook of moststudents in elementary and secondary the industrialization of production bothpeople, even in the United States,isschools. There islittle doubt that this on the farm and in the factory has beenmore influenced by Plato and Aristotleeffort has greatly improved preparation regarded by most people as a net good;than by Galileo and Hume. Indeed, itfor college in all branches of science. far, it must be remembered, even at themight be interesting for a graduate stu-the generous men who initiated the height of the Medieval and Renaissancedent in intellectual history to survey thisprogram hoped for something more, for periods, skilled craftsmen constituted on-very question. For example, do you sup-they felt that, if the story could only be ly a very small portion of society. Thepose the majority of Americans wouldpresented properly, anyone of average great bulk of mankind labored in theconsider the following statements to beintelligence would share the pleasure of most unimaginative and unrewardingtrue or false? "Other things being equal,the most able scientist in discovering the way as farmhands with a status littleheavy bodies fall faster than light ones."orderly arrangement ofthenatural better than that of serfs. Somewhat later"Metals feel cold to the touch becaus, world. Nothing could be more admirable than the general recognition of techno-that is their nature." "Justice and honestythane dedication and self-sacrifice of logicalimprovementsinproductionare real things and part of the divinemen like Zacharias and the late Francis came an even greater appreciation forplan of the universe; men try to estab-Friedman, and nothing more charming the contributions of science to medi-lish justice through the machinery of the in its humility than their apparent belief cine and public health. law and the courts, but their efforts willthat almost everyone is potentially just Most men probably never did takealways fall short of the higher ideal ofas bright as they themselves. Unhappily, much interest in what might be calledjustice as it exists in the divine plan."it has not turned out as they hoped. the philosophical aspects of science. Few Coming down out of the clouds, weElegant though the Physical Science really read Condorcet or the other En-might ask ourselves how many peopleStudy Committee Physics Course un- cyclopedists, and it is doubtful that anyever really got much fun out of studyingdoubtedly is,it has not proved much but a small handful of intellectuals evermathematics and physics in high school?more successful than any other method thought that science would provide aHow many felt pleased to discover thatin making physics attractive to secondary way of life free of undue aggressions,a Action pump doesn't really suckschool students. anxiety, loneliness, and guilt. Perhapswater, but merely creates a potential Nevertheless, on balance, public in- 61 55 terest in science became greater after thethe desirability of a National Sciencewhich used to be a world leader in re- war than it had been before, and it wasFoundation. Those who come upon theducing infant mortality rates, has now further stimulated by the orbiting ofsituation for the first time, however. seefallen to 15th place. Sputnik. It is very difficult to say howalmost nothing but a conspiracy be- 4) It is not only the maldistribution much of this interest was due to com-tween some of the best brains of theof resources that concerns the general petition for ever more sophisticatedcountry and the unenlightened military.public; they are becoming increasingly weapons, how much to a pure culturalIn any case. it must he admitted thatuneasy about the moral and ethical im- rivalry which puts the moon race intoscience and technology appear to con-plicationsofadvancesinbiological the same category as an Olympic tracktribute disproportionately to the morescience. In many respects these advances meet, and how much to the age-old wishfiendish aspects of an evil businesstheseem to threaten the individual's com- to cast off the shackles which bind us todefoliation of rice fields, the burning ofmand over his own life. a single planet. However one apportionschildren with napalm, and the invention Actually, of course, theindividual the credit among these three factors, itof new and more devastating plagues.never did have Its much control over his seems reasonably clear that an apprecia- 2) Until fairly recently, the contribu-own life as he felt he had. Science may tion for basic science, as the scientiststions of science and technology to in-have simply made his own impotence understand science, played a relativelycreased production both in industry andclear to him by showing how human small role. in agriculture have been generally re-behavior is molded by genetic and en- garded as on the plus side. Even here,vironmental influences. Like everything however, doubts are beginning to arise.else, it seems, human behavior is deter- Reasons for the Change of Mood Much of the increased production comesmined quite precisely h j a long train of at the cost of a rapid exhaustion ofpreceding events, and the concept of free The decade of the 1960's has certainlynatural resources and the increasing con-will has become more difficult to defend seen a slackening in public approval oftamination of what is left of cnr naturalthan ever. science. Is this change simply a returnenvironment. Nor is it clear that all of perhaps more immediately threaten- to the earlier, more or less normal statethe goods and services produced reallying is the fact that science puts power of ignorance and indifference, or are wedo a great deal to increase the sum totalto control one's behavior in the hands of witnessing an actively hostile movement?of human happiness. Indeed, it can beother people. Intelligence and personal- In either case it may do us all goodshown that the modern affluent con-ity tests place a label on one's capacity to tryto identify some of the moresumer is, in a sense, a victim of syntheticwhich is nsed from then on by those important reasons for the change ofdesires which are created rather thanwho make ciecisions affecting one's edu- mood. satisfied by increased production (3).cational and employment opportunities. I) Science is identified the publicOn the other hand, a substantial per-New methods of conditioning and teach- mind largely with the manipulation ofcentage of the population remains with-ing threaten to shape one's behavior in the material world. It is becoming clearercut even the bare essentials of life. Rapidways whichsomeone elsedecides are and clearer that the mere capacity to increases in agricultural production havegood. Drugs of many kinds are available manipulate the world does not insurepretty well abolished famine in the ad-for changing one's mood or outlook on that it will be manipulated for the netvanced countries of the world, but thelife, for reducing or increasing aggres- lo-nefitof mankind. Nowhere isthis revolution inrurallifehas benefitedsive behavior, and so on. So far, these more obvious, perhaps, than in the mat-only a few of the most successful farm-drugs are usually given with the cooper- ter of national defense. As pointed outers. The rest are clearly worse off thanation of the individual himself, exc.-pt in above, the generation that knew at leastthey were before; and, indeed, the largecases where severely deviant behavior is one of the great world wars is gratefulmajority of them are hastening into theinvolved, but the potential for mass con- to the scientist for having fashioned thecities, where they create problems whichtrolisthere. Indeed, there is already means of victory over a grave threat tohave so far proved insoluble. Further-serious discussion about the ineffective- a free world. The oncoming generationmore, the advanced technologies whichness of family planning as a means of views the situation in quite a differentmake the increased production possiblecontrolling the world's population, and way. To them the obvious alliance be-are now found to in dcing as muchsuggestions are made for introduction, tween the scientific community and theharm to the environment as the moreinto food or water supplies, of drugs military is an evil thing. far from makinglong-standing and better recognized in-that will reduce fertility on a mass basis. the world more secure, it has produceddustrial pollutions. As if these assaults on individuality an uneasy balance of terror, with the 3)Surely everyone can agree thatwere not enough, some biologists are weight so great on both sides that anyscience has done wonderful things forproposing to reproduce standard human slightshift may lead to unimaginablethe improvement of health. But, evenbeings, not by the usual complicated and catastrophe. here, uncomfortable questions are beinguncertain methods involving genetic re- It seems undeniable that those of usasked. Have our best doctors becomecombination, but by vegetative cloning who have groan up with this situationso preoccupied with the wonders of theirfrom stocks of sor.gatic cells. In the face have also grown somewhat callous to thetechnology that Ciey have become in-of all this, can we blame the great ma- fact that such a high percentage of sup-different to the plight of large numbersjority of ordinary men for feeling that port for university science comes fromof people who suffer from conditionsscience is not greatly interested in hu- military sources. We tend to remember,just as fatal but much less interesting?man individuality and freedom? for exar the man elously enlightenedEven the most earnest advocates of in- 5) Science is not as much fun as it policy of the Office of Naval Research,creased research in heart disease, cancer,used to be, even for its most devoted which did so much to foster pure scienceand stroke must be a little hit embar-practitioners. The point here is that sci- while the Congress continued to dcuaterassed by the fact that the United States,ence encounters more ant: more difficul- 12 56 ty in providing a satisfyingly coherenthave relatively little interest in the factsEveryone who has done much science and unified picture of the world. Theof science and lack the capacity to findon his own knows that the next step he flow of pure scientific data is now sopleasure in its generalizations. Whethertakes is determined in large part by the prodigious that no one can keep up withthe failure is primarily intellectual, in thesteps that have gone before. It follows more than a small fraction of it. Al-sense that students simply have difficultythat the progress of pure science, at though most of us still retain some sortin understanding the nature of the gen-least, is determined by the internal dy- of faith that the universe, with allitseralimtion, or whether itis emotionalnamics of the process and by the open- infinite variety of detail, can in someand esthetic, in that they derive littleing up of new leads rather than by pub- way be reduced to a relatively simplepleasure from the generalization once itlic demand to meet new needs. The set of differential equations, most of usis understood, is not easy to determine.practical applications to human welfare, recognize that this goal is, in practice,In either case, the prospect of unifvinitwhen looked at in this philosophical receding from us with something likethe community around a common un-framework, become accidental bits of the speed of light. That simple set ofderstanding of science seems relativelyfallout, as the nuclear bomb itself "fell physical and chemicalprinciples onremote. out" from the innocent effort of J. J. which the older generation grew up is An article by Richard N. Goodwin inThompson, Rutherford, Bohr, Fermi, now turning out to be not very simplethe New Yorker, entitled "Reflectionsand others to understand the nature of at all, and the relation between thesesources of the public unhappiness" (4)matter. No doubt all these men felt com- simple principles and the complex eventsputs some of the difficulties of sciencepletely in command of their own re- of biology are not nearly so clear asinto a larger perspective. It provides asearch programs, but the public does not they were when Starling enunciated hisbrilliant analysis of the unhappiness notlook at itthis way, and, in a curious "law of the heart." only of our obviously dissident left-wingsense, the public may be more right than Although itis probably too easy toyouth but of the many members of thethe scientists. This line of thought brings exaggerate the degree to which theforgotten middle class who, during theus to point 7 in our bill of indictment. progress of science results in the frag-last election, swung rather wildly be- 7) The continuing momentum of sci- mentation of knowledge, tile beginningtween George Wallace and Eugene Mc-ence toward goals of its own choosing student in the sciences finds a great dealCarthy. Goodwin discusses this phenom-appears, be coupled ever less closely of difficulty in relating his courses inenon in terms of the traditional Jeffer-to solving problems of clear and press- chemistry, physics, and biology to oneson-Hamilton model and comes to theing consequence to human welfare. As another. Even within a single discipline,conclusion that a great many Americanswe now see, enlightened congr:ssmen he feels overwhelmed and frustrated byfeel that they have lost control of cer-and senators, well aware of the power the number of apparently isolated factstain crucial factors in their life styles.of the scientific method but skeptical of that he has to learn. Although I am far from being as con-its capacity to guide itself automatically 6) Closely related to the foregoingvinced as Goodwin is that it will be pos-to the points of greatest human concern, thoughts on the growing complexity ofsible to return a large portion of ourare making explicit legislative attempts science and the decline in the intellec-decision-making to states and local com-to mobilize science to solve the problems tual satisfaction generally derived frommunities, I agree with much of his anal-of the pollution of our environment and itis the question of student attitudes,ysis of the underlying problem. He isthe crime in our cities,if not, indeed, for most of us make our first seriousparticularly convincing,forexample,the unsatisfactory nature of our life in acquaintance with science as students.when he shows how Secretary Mc-general. Realizing that nuclear physics My overall impression, in returningNamara, in his apparent efforts to ra-is not very closely coupled to these mat- to a university after a lapse of 20 years,tionalize the Department of Defense ardters, they are turning to social science is one of disappointment that Lo fewbring the military more closely underin the ;Jape that thereis a group of students seem to have very much funcivilian control, actually succeeded inscientists who can do for society what either in their science courses specificallyconstructingaFrankensteinmcnsterthe physicists have done for the natural or in university life in general. This lackwhich began to control him, as "whenworld. of pleasure is certainly more striking inhe was compelled against his own judg- the first 2 years, when the student is ad-ment to go ahead with an anti-ballistic justing to a totally new social environ-missile system." Skepticism about Rational Systems ment and devoting his attention to build- For our purposes, the key word here ing the groundwork for later, more ex-is "rationalize." Our rationalized systems Skepticism about rational systems is, citing studies. But I keep asking myselfdo, indeed, seom to have developed theof course, not confined to science. In- why these first 2 years of foundation-capacity to live lives of theit own, soiced, it well may be that the antipathy laying have to be so unsatisfying. that mere men are compelled, againsti.o science is merely a bit of fallout from In the fire, place, I have come to be-their will, to follow where the logicalthe growing artipathy to rational systems lieve that we discourage many studentsprocess leads. As we saw above, thein general (5). The movement has been by expec ing too much of them. Wemedical profession is following in thea long time in the making. Lionel Tril- want them all to learn at a rate deter-footsteps of its dynamic research pro-ling (6), for example, traces much of mined by the best. This can only meangram and undertakes to perform heartthe despair, the irrationality, and the inthat all but the best feel themselves totransplants, at great expense, largely be-creasing devotion to the absurd of much be dying of a surfeit rather than enjoy-cause it has found out how to do them.modern literature to Dostoevski's Letters ing a marvelous meal. I am also comingIn the same way, we devote several bil-from the Underworld, in which, you will sadly to the conclusion that, no matterlions of dollars each year in going toremember, the protagonist, in his violent how the subject is presented, a substan-the moon, becauseitisthere(and,diatribes against the existing order, con- tial number of college-levelstudentsagain, because we know how to do it).centrates his hatred on those "gent*- 63 57 men" who believe that 2 and 2 make 4.ever more subtle areas, It failed, for a tions...the action of the good God What is even more frightening for ournumber of reasons, but primarily, per- ... has ended at last always and every- own time is the way the same anti-herohaps, because neither the logic-choppingwhere in founding the prosperous materialism of the few over the fanatical reassures himself C his own individualof the medieval philosophers nor theand constantly famishing idealism of the freedom by affirming his ability to choosetemporal power of the papacy which itmasses. the more evil of two options (7). was designed to support appeared to be The liberty of man consists only in We, who have grown up rejoicing insufficiently related to the longings ofthis: that he obeys natural laws because he has Hmself recognized them as such, science, were confident in our acceptanceindividual human beings. The Reforma-and not bt.zause they have been external- of Sir Francis Bacon's aphorism that wetion, for all the complexity of its theol-ly imposed upon him by any extrinsic will cannot command nature except by obey-ogy and, often, thebrutality ofits whatever, human or divine, collective or ing her (8). We really did not mindmethods, was primarily an effort to as-individual. obeying as long as we knew that wesert the rights of the individual con- The New Left certainly agrees with would ultimately command. But now thescience over the medieval power struc-Bakunin about the need to destroy the empirical evidence may be turning toture. existing order, but it tends to see God support those who feel that science is in in a different light. In the United States, some sense in the grip of natural forcesA Watershed? religion has been conscientiously sepa- which it does not command. Too often rated from the State for so long that it we conjure up genies who produce short- I am not really sure that we stand onis no longer regarded as part of the ap- term benefits at the risk of much largerthe kind of watershed Luther stood onparatusof repression.Indeed, many long-term losses. We develop marvelouswhen he nailed his theses to the doordraft-card burners and other protestors individual transport systems which poi-of the cathedral, but we may make aagainst the immorality of the existing son the air we breathe; learn how toserious mistake if we do not at least en-order are primarilyreligiously moti- make paper very cheaply at the cost oftertain that possibility.If we failtovated. On the other hand, science as the ruining our rivers; and fabricate weaponsrecognize the average man's need to be-interpreter of the laws of nature, which that determine our defense strategy andlieve that he has some reasonable com-Bakunin setagainst the laws of the foreign policy rather than being deter-mand over his own life, he is simplyState, has lostits revolutionary char- mined by them. Above all, the applica-going to give up supporting those syste-acter and is viewed as a dangerous col- tions of science have produced an unre-matic elements in society which he seeslaborator of the industrial-military com- stricted increase in the human popula-as depriving him of this ability, plex. One of the difficulties may be that tion which we recognize as fatal to our As I noted above, so perceptive ascience has become so complicated that welfare but have only the vaguest idea critic as Lionel Trilling traces much ofthe ordinary man no longer believes that how to control. In a short time we will modern literature and art to a long-"he,himself has rccognized them [natural b^ able design the genetic structure of standing revolt of sensitive and creativelaws] as such" but feels that "they have a good man. There is some uncertaintymen against the systematic constraintsbeen externally imposed upon him." about the exact date, but no doubt thatof society. The New Left can be re- it will come before we have defined whatgarded asapolitization of the same a good man is. trend. Actually, of course, anarchy hadEducating the Public In the foregoing analysis, in an efforta political as well as a purely intellectual to obtain intellectual respectability I haveexistence when Dostoevski was writing, What, then, can we do to improve the painstakingly tried to break our problembut the 19th-century political anarchistsimage of science as something of human down into a series of numbered sub-were effectively liquidated by the Marx-scale, understandable and controllable headings. Actually, they all add up toists, who felt that they had a better idea.by ordinary men? In the first place, we the same thing: Although the generalNow that Marxist communism has de-will have to continue our efforts toward public is grateful to science for some ofveloped most of the ills of bourgeois in-educating the public, both in school and its more tangible benefits, it is increas-dustrial society plus its own especiallyoutsideit,through reportingin our ingly skeptical and even frightened aboutrepressive form of bureaucracy, anarch-newspapers and magazines. Although I its long-term results. The anxiety cen-ism is again put forward as an attractivehave given some reasons for believing ters on the concept of science as thealternative to organized, corrupt societies.that there are limitations to the capacity prototypethe most magnificent and There is a difference, however, in theof much of our population to understand most frightening example of the rationalway 19- and 20th-century anarchists re-and take pleasure in the way science systems which men make to control theirgard science. On the whole, the 19th-understands the natural world, I still be- environment and which finally end bycentury ones were atheists and saw re-lieve that much more can be done to im- controlling them. It may be well to re-ligion as the co-conspirator with gov-prove matters than has been done so far. callthatthemedievalstructureofernment and business. Science tendedAs for the formal part of education, I natural law was even more rational thanto be favored, partly because of itspropose that we rather deliberately re- science, in the sense that it depended oncontributions to man's material welfare,duce the rate at which students must the mind alone without submitting itsbut perhaps even more because of itshandle the material set before them, so conclusions to empirical checks. It man-aid in debunking religion. that they can master it without feeling aged for a time to obtain even greater Two paragraphs from Mikhail Baku-frustrated and overwhelmed. If we begin control than science has over both thenin are worth quoting, partly because ofthe process, as isn..,w fashionable, in bodies and (especially) the spirits of thethe flavor of the rhetoric (9). the early elementary years, continue it people of the Western world.It,too, through college, and carefully design developed an interesting life of its own[The churches] have never neglected tothings so as to avoid redundancy, stu- as it foNowed the paths of rcason intoorganize themselves into great corpora-dents might end up with a much more 58 complete understanding than they do Second, we must make a major effortunduction of the cotton picker and of now. This effort is worth even moreto bring the course of science, and es-modern methods of weed and insect money and time than have been put intop ±.11y its technological results, undercontrol, not to mention the enormous it so far. better and more obvious control by in-subsidies provided by the American tax- As for less formal methods for pre-dividual human beings and their repre-payer, have made the culture of cotton mining science to adults, we should de-sentatives. We are, itistrue, skwiyina few counties in the South and vise some analogy that would do forgearing ourselves to do something aboutSouthwest extremely profitable, so that the general public what agricultural ex-pollution of the environment, but thelarge landholders have become extremely tension courses have done for the farm-overall guidance and control of this ef-wealthy. Presumably, the public a'. large er and his wife. The average successfulfort is largely in the hands of part-timehas benefited by a slight reduc, ion in farmer, although he is far from being aexperts who fly in and out of Washing-the cost of cotton cloth. On the ether pure scientist, has an appreciation forton toattend meetings which issuehand, the social costs of this industrial the way science works. Certainly he un-prophesies of doom or unsupported re-revolution in agriculture have been in- derstands it well eneugh to use it inassurances, as the composition of thecalculable; they have been borne pri- his own business and to support agri-particular panel may dictate. Somehow,marily by the large number of Ne;'ro cultural colleges and the great state uni-thinking about the long-term results oflaborers who have been uprooted and versities that grew out of them. technology, formulating the options intransported into the cities, where they As one who has spent a considerablesuch a way that the public can under-found themselves ill-prepared to benefit period of his life worrying about medi-stand them, and guiding the course offrom the urban amenities enjoyed by cine and public health, I am much lessevents along the chosen path must be-their more prosperous fellow citizens. happy about our efforts to instruct thecome as exciting and rewarding for theThe economic costs of supporting them average man in a rational or scientificbest minds as is the present pursuit ofin an alien environment have been borne, attitude toward the conduct of his ownbasic scientific knowledge. Above all,not by the wealthy southern landowners life. It has proved ever so much easierthe options must be made clearly under-and certainly not by the individt'als who to persuade the average farmer to plantstandable to the people, and the peoplepaid a bit less for the cotton cloth, but hybrid corn than to persuade theaver-must feel that they are doing the choos-almost entirely by the displaced people age man to give up smoking cigarettes.ing. The present method of announcingthemselves and by the people who pay We have been almost too successful inthat such-and-sucha corporationisreal estate taxes in a handful of our persuading farmers to put nitrogen onabout to erect a large atomic powerlarger cities. their fields, while we continue to fail in plant on a certain body of water and All these problems are, however, sub- trying to persuade the average man tothen engaging in a debate, based on in-ject to some kind of scientific analysis, put minute amounts of fluorine in hisadequate information, about the effectsand the options can be placed scienti- water supply. Few individual doctorsof the heat on the lake or river, thefically before the public. In preparation seize the opportunity to explain to their degree of radioactive contamination,for this kind of decision making, we patients, in even quasi-scientific terms,and so on, is totally unsatisfactory. lould probably overhaul our teaching what their illnesses are, and I am ap- The process of educating the publicof science, and especially of mathe- palled by the bizarre notions of humanshould begin much earlier, with discus-matics, so as to give the average man physiology which are entertained bysion of the need for additional powergreater ability to evaluate evidence pre- some of my best friends. plants and of the probable cost of put-sented in modern scientific form. High Granted that doctors do not haveting them here or there, in terms ofschool courses in statistics, probability, enough time to talk to their patients andincreased power rates on the one handand systems analysis are clearly more that many doctors really are not veryand increased contamination of the en-relevant tc modern living than Euclidean scientificallyoriented themselves, wevironment on the other. The public mustgeometry, and might well replace this might think seriously of setting up slowly be brought to see that every suchand other time-honoredintroductory in every city a kind of paramedi- occasion involves a real -hoice betweencourses in mathematics. cal service designed to teach peoplereal alternatives, and that the alternatives about their own illnesses. A doctor withmust be balanced against one another. a patient who is developing coronary in-Similar considerations apply to the useRole of Science in Military Affairs sufficiency, for example, could refer hisof insecticides. Nobody, as far as I patient not only for an electrocardio-know, has seen fit to make any even Third, an effort should be made to gram, a blood-cholesterol, and clotting- approximate estimates of what our foodclarify the role of science in military time determinations but for instruction,might cost if we were to abandon theaffairs. Although most of us who are in a class of cardiacs, on just how theuse of these agents. Similarly, nobodyacquainted with the facts know that heart and circulation work. Such an en-has told what it would cost to producemuch of the research supported by funds terprise might help individual patientshigh - octane gasoline by means of somefrom the military services actually con- adjust to their illness more suitably, butmethod otherthantheadditionoftributes as much to civilian life as to this is not the real point. Tne aim would tetraethyl lead. military matters, this fact is not known be to take advantage of an unhappy ac- We have been very negligent in de-to the general public or to the student cident in order to increase the individ-vising ways and means of ensuring thatbody. Cornell students, for example, are ual'smotivation to learn somethingthe cost of introducing new technologiesdisturbed to learn that the largest single about science. Therefore, such clinicsis borne by the people who immediatelydonor to research at their university is should be paid for not only by thebenefit from their use. If anything, thethe Department of Defense, even though Public Health Service but by the Office trend may be away from emphasis onone of the university's two largest re- of Education. this rehtionship. For example, the in-search enterprises is the observatory at

115 59 Arecibo, whose contributions to pureAmerican Army during World War II,various kindsas a fully understandable science are of far more consequenceresearch on malaria was often carried onprocess, "justifiable to man," and con- than anything it has ever contributed toby military personnel. trollable by him. Scientists should also the Air Force, If the military uses of Furthermore, itis clearly importanttake more responsibility for foreseeing science occurred as fallout from scienti-that we have, as consultantstotheand explaining the long-term effects of fic investigations undertaken for peace-military, civilian scientists who learn thenew applications of scientific knowledge. ful purposes, this would be far better fordetails of proposed weapons systems soA promising procedure for planning the morale than continuation of our presentthat they can make an appropriate casecontrol of such effects is presentation of course, in which pure science appearsagainst, as well as for, deployment ofthe probable outcomes of various avail- as the crumbs that fall from the richthese systems. able options so that choices can be made Pentagon's table. The obvious and ac- Finally, as long as we feel ourselvesby the public and their representatives. tually very easy way to accomplish thisthreatened by the scientific and militaryCosts and benefits must be estimated not would be to reduce military appropria-establishments of other nations,itisonly in quantitative, dollar terms but, tions by what, to the military, would bewith some difficulty thatinost of us whoincreasingly, in terms of qualitative ,ind a tiny amount and substantially increasehave special skills, gained largely throughesthetic judgments. Thus ends the com- appropriations for the National Sciencecontributions from the American public,fortable isolation of science from the Foundation and the National Institutescan refuse to use those skills for theordinary concerns of men as a "valueof Health. Certain civilianagencies,defense of that same public. This lastfree" activity. such as the Department of Commerceissue is becoming a rather knotty one, and the Department of the Interior,however, since we may have reached a References and Note: should also be supporting far morepoint at which war is so disastrous for 1. R. J. Dubos, The Dreams of Reason (Co !urn- bia Univ. Press, New York, 1961), p. 167. basic and applied research than theyboth sides that there is simply no point2. C. E. Sawn, personal communications. are now. in undertaking the exercise at all. 3. J. K. Galbraith,The Affluent Society(Hough- tonMifflin, Boston, 1958), chap.3. Whether the civilian establishment for 4. R. N. Goodwin, NewYorker00, 38 (4 Jan.1969). science should engage in any research 5. C. E. Schorske, "Professional ethos and public of military consequence is a matter for Conclusion crisis:ahistorian's reflections," Mod.Low gua,ze Ass. Amer. Publ. 83,979 (1968). debate, but such debate should be en- 6. L.Trilling,Beyond Culture(Viking, New couraged. Many universities of good The most important lesson for the York, 1965). 7. F. Dostoevsky, Letters fromthe Underworld, will long ago decided that secret researchscientific community would appear to be C. J.Hogartb, Trans.(Dutton, New York, has no ph x on a university campus,one that can be stated as follows. Sci- 1913). All of part 1is relevant to this discussion, especially page 37: "Moreover, even it but this does not prevent them fromence can no longer be content to present man were the keyboard of a piano, and could doing unclassified work which has aitself as an activity independent of the be convinced that the laws of nature and of mathematics had made him so, he would still clear military bearing, nor does the uni-rest of society, governed by its own decline to change. On the contrary, he would once more, out of sheer ingratitude, attempt the versity ordinarily discourage its facultyrules and directed by the inner dyna- perpetration of something which would enable from serving as consultants on classifiedmics of its own processes. Too many of him w insist upon himself; and if he could not effect this, he would then proceed to introduce projects carried out elsewhere. theseprocesscshaveeffectswhich, chaos and disruption into everything, and to There are obvioustheoretical andthough beneficial in many respects, often devise enormities of all kinds, for the sole purpose, as before, of asserting his personality.... practicaldifficultiesconfronting anystrike the average man as a threat to But if you were to tell me that all this could other policy. Until now, for example,his individual autonomy. Too often sci- be set down in tablesI mean the chaos, and the confusion, and the curses, and all the rest most scientists have felt that the im-ence seems to be thrusting society as a of nso thatthepossibilityof computing portance of advancing knowledge over-whole in directions which it does not everything might remain, and reason continue w rule the roostwell, in that case, I believe, shadowed questions regarding the sourcefullyunderstandandwhichithas man would purposely become a lunatic. in order certainly not chosen. to become devoid of reason, and therefore able of support. The control we now have of w insist upon hirmelf." malaria is a net gain, regardless of the The scientific community must re- 8. F. Bacon,Novum Organum(1620), aphorism 129. factthat,from the discovery of thedouble its efforts to present sciencein 9. M. Bakunin (Bakounine),God and the State malarial parasite in North Africa to thethe classroom, in the public press, and (1893). development of control methods by thethrough education-extension activities of 613

Lastly, the problem of humanity in science can mean the relationship between scientificandhumanisticmodes of thought and their impact on one another. This touches on the central core of creativity which lies at the heart of both humanistic and scientific work. I shall raise all these questions and answer some of them.I shall also suggest that our attempts to mirror the human life in and around science have been somewhat defective, to put it mildly. Our fai!ure to do this has both deprived our artists of the possibility of portraying this great area of human activity, and contributed to the It is an honor and a pleasure to beand then returning to sneer at us once myths abaut the scientist and scientific asked to give the Phi Beta Kappa lecturemore. This problem is the theme of my activities which are highly dangerous, to the American Association for the Ad- article and it is the problem of humanity especially in the present time. I shall also vancement of Science. and after nearly a in science. argue that the schisms and the problems century and a half of a remarkable tradi- Now this phrase can have several we now see on the contemporary scene tion in both America and England. it is ameanings. Marie Curie once said. "Sci- arose in an historical setting and had sig- good opportunity to take stock. Here inence deals with things not people." The nificant historical ramifications. The fail- Denver. representatives of the scientificproblem arises if. and when. scientists ure to cone to grips with the problem of profession, the media. and the enlight-and technologists are tempteu to deal humanity in science in the 19th century ened citizenry of the town meet in an at- with people as things. One of the prob- has had important consequences for the mosphere if not of complacency. at least lemsinandaroundsciencearises relationship between science and society one that shows a tendency towars, mu-through the inevitable stance of detached in the 20th century. This problem origi- tual admiration. We are the heirs of aobjectivity whereby a scientist must ap- nated deep in the social matrix of this very worthy 'radition, which in England proach the natural world. It can be no profession. and its solution lies equally goes back some 146 years to 1831. when problem hut as recent work in the bio- deep in our social matrix. the British Association for the Advance- medical sciences or genetic engineering ment of Science held its first meeting in demonstrates. it can he a serious prob- York, and thus started these annual cele- lem. And at a time when the social con- brations of worthy endeavor and hightract between this profession and societyThe British Association for the purpose. is in the process of being renegotiated. as Advancement of Science Now if we look around. both at this is 's now, humanity in science considered present gathering and retrospectively atin ,hese terms becomes deeply signifi- By nowthe origin of the British Asso- history. we are tempted to deduce thatcant. ciation for the Advancement of Science all is indeed well .pith the relationship of fhesecondinterpretationofthis is well known. Its founding was stimulat- science and society. and that 146 yearsphrase means a consideration of the hu-ed by a book by Babbage, Reflections on earlier all. indeed. was well: that fromman beings who do science: those re-the Decline of Science in England (I), the beginning the public and the scientif- markable people who Lome to us in anwritten in 1830, at a time when the word ic profession together have enjoyed aassemblage infinitely %ailed.Itis diffi-scientist was not even coined. After trav- persistently happy partnership. Both de- cult to reach out and touch the humanity.eling extensively on the Continent, Bab- ductions are quite wrong. All is not well or the himaneness, in the people who dobage came to the conclusion that mea- with the present relationship betweenscience, because science is essentially asured I,y almost any criteria you could science and s.ociety. and in the earlycommunal activity whose results must mentionstatus, honorary distinction, years too, when the scientific professionbe expressed in the passive voice, to be or government postscience did not en- was born in Europe. all was not well understood by anyone throughout geo-joy a status comparable to that of any The golden days for the mutualin- graphical space and historical time. The other profession in England. Not cnly volvement of science and society cameexpressions of science come in forms was it in a very inferior position, it was much later. At Lie beginning there were, from which all the human content has not a profession at all. As a result, the in fact, great tensions as the professionnecessarily been drained So the ques-British Association for the Advancement emerged. and equally there are sometions, Who are the people who do sci- of Science was 1:.rmed. Their motives now. And I wan' to argue that at leastence as individual human beings? What were "To give a stronger impulse and a one problem which lies at the root ofis the relationship between them and the more systematic direction to scientific some of our present troubles was a spec- scientific ideas they create? How and in enquiry and to obtain a greater degree of ter at these feasts from the very start andwhat form are individuality and creativ- national interest in the objects and prose- has haunted the profession ever since. Ifity brought to bear and e: pressed in sci-cution of science" (2). Then alms were I may change my metaphor; it has beenence?thesearepressingquestions not entirely altruistic, of course. The like the Cheshire cat. taking on firm out- which have not received the attentionmembers of the Association did. ind ed, lines at one period, fading at another.they deserve. I want to ask one otherwant to remedy the situation that Bab- question as well: Why, with very few ex- bage had portrayed. but they also felt The author is Adjunct Professor at Rockefeller University. Ne* York 10021. This article was origi- cepticrc, have these themes or these that by showing society the practical jus- nally presented as the Phi Beta Kappa lecture at the people never stimulated great works of AAAS airn i meeting in Denver. Colorado. on 24 tification for the existence of science. by February 1977. literature or art? demonstrating science's capacity to re- F7 61 spond to social problems, they wouldwith thescientificpapers. After theintervals, and then quarter-hourly inter- strengthen the ties between the practi-Newcastle meeting in 1838,The Londonvals. The climax comes wImn Augustus, tioners of science and the public. In oth- Literary Gazetteprinted a report fromsomebody's pet pug-dog, ;tolen on the er words, they had Rousseau's originalThe Newcastle Journalwhich listed theeve of the meeting ar J is dissected by social contract in mind, defined as a situ- amount of game donated to the feast bytwo professorsintheirdisinterested ation of mutual support, where each par- the aristocratic lords of Newcastle, "tosearch for truth. The scientists who per- ty relinquishes a measure of freedom for prove that gastronomy beats astrono-petrate this dastardly crime are thereby the wider social good. my.- TheTimes.reporting on the samecorrespondingly assaulted by the owner They described themselves as themeeting, spoke of the grand promenadeof the aforesaid Augustus, an unmarried "cultivators of science." This was true,in the ballroom of Newcastle's finest ho-lady of otherwise impeccable virtue. for that is exactly what they were. But tel, where some 4000 people werenter- Dickens selected his items for parody they were also realistic and practical tained, at which the amusements and re-from the agendas of all the sections. and and, with their new pragmatic attitude,freshments were of the 'lost recherchéfew of them escaped his scalpel. For in- appealed not to the disinterested search description. One longs for more details. stance, he describes one section whose for truth but to the benefits that could Yet, sadly, the British Association didmembers were to take a cauliflower and come by a close association between the have a record of offending British Victo- redesign it as a parachute. to be guaran- profession and society. What happened? rian susceptibilities. They held one meet- teed to come down from a height of no While alltheir initial efforts were noting at Castle Howard, the home of Lady less than 11/2 miles. In this he merges two quite disastrous, it is absolutely true toMary Howard, who was a kind of Victo-episodes that had recently occurred: say. as with Wellington after Waterloo.rian Carrie Nation. She was so offended somebody had described a giant water that "it was a damned close run ti;3" by the junketings of the scientists and thelily at Kew. and also a parachutist had (3).For 10 years that profession and the Iktngers-on that she caused the family's fallen to his death the week oefore. Hav- British Association were subject to a de-wine cellar to be drowned in the lake, ing constructed a parachute on what he gree of indifference or derision and paro- and supervised the massacre hersi,f by described as impeccable sc;entific nrir- dy, and at times were treated with such knocking off the top of every bottle be-ciplesthat is.in the shape of an in- humiliation by the newspapers thatI fore it went under. Now, as Chaudhryverted umbrellathe aviator had gone sometimes wonder that the profession showsinhisinterestingarticleon up to one of London's highest points and got off the ground at all. The fact that af- Charles Dickens (6). in spite of the Asso-had come down to an untimely death. ter 20 years they were inclined to hole up ciation's very genuine attempts to im-The Times reported this as "an unfortu- and become more and more introvertedprove public understanding of science,nate aeronautical catastrophe.- surprises me not a little bit when one re-what in fact came out was an indiscrimi- Among other things. Dickens also de- members what was written. For ex-nate mixture of science.technology, scribes Mr.T'ickle's spectacles, which ample.The John Bull Examiner,report- pomposity, and vanity. "Far from popu-are designed to enable the wearer to dis- ing on the Association's meeting of 1835.larising science." he wrote, "the British cern. in very bright colors, objects at a described it as "a whole lot of glaring Association had only succeeded in vul-very g:eat distance, but which render humbug." The distinguished divine J.garising it." It appears that its very rea- him wnolly blind to those immediately Keble, who founded Keble College atsonable aims had been given up in favor before him He parodies recent govern- Oxford University, described the British of activities which were far from scientif-ment report.. he talks shout whether we Association as "a heap of quack philoso-ic (7). could, in factsit line the industrial fleas phers." Even after 10 years. the London in the zoos. He thinks we ought to li- Timeswas being mightily rude in the glo- cense the fleas to do work for us. for they rious way that the LondonTimescan be Charles Dickens could labor tinder the direction and con- from time to time. A convention of Non- trol of the state, and their widows and conformist ministers set themselves up My purpose here is to concentrate on orphans could he put ininsect alms- as a clerical organization modeled on theone gadfly. Charles Dickens, He became houses Iron) the study of these insects British Association, and the paper re-editor ofBentley's Miscellany.;aid in the at work we would derive valu..ble hints porting this described the latest Britishautumn of 1837 had intended to publish for "the improvern..nt of our .-tetropoli- Association meeting in Devonport. 1841.Ohl er Tii;.,tin the magazine. But he was tan universitiesour national;alleries as a "sort of philosophical race-week"diverted from this, for on 9 Septemberand other public edifices." Thr core of and commented that the "new sy nod ofthe B-ush Association held its annual Dicken's parody t. rut difficrit to fath- tabernacle Savans" might "e'en surpassmeeting in Liverpool. In October of thatom The first thing he hated w h.an- the freaks and fooleries of their model' year. Dickens wrote in the magazine hug. the second thing he hated wa', the (4) "The full report of the first meeting ofdenial of humanity. and all his parody Now w hy English society took this at-The Mudfrog Associationft. the Ad-has a striking social intent. Humbug is titude is something that I have dealt with vancement of Every thing" (8). He hadeasily disposed ofall you have to do is at length elsewhele (5). But it has to he already iakPn one laugh at the expense of prick it with .t pin. Brit denial of humani- admitted that, to a cei tam extent. thethe British Association in Pr( lot u tyis not, and it is this humanit; which membeis of the British Association wereper% tnd he now pioceeded to take sev-was encapstilafri in Marie Cut ie's aph- sitting ducks foi paiodyfor as inembei eral more basing his paiodies on t, an- oi ism v. hick I mcntioned before. ship increased so did the publicity both nual i eports. To build up an exaggeiated Isale.hat the piohiem really, begins berme and afterthe meetingsAs themock exctment of the tension and dra- when we are tempted to regard people as publicity got mole flowery and full ofma of science. Dicisens employ s the sim- things. this especially was the root of puff, the hospitality became mole hi v ish ple satire of the Listle of the newspa- Dickens' hearty dislike of statistics. For andthe dinner menus became more s. which are putting out communi- he sew a situation when science would lengthy.1 hese were published alongques at hourly intervals. then half-hourly cease to tegard its objects of study as hu

F; 8 62

man beings and regard them solely as selves as a profession, or isit to so-terms of the cultures, life-styles. and as- numbers in a statistical equation, and heciety? pirations of these other countries. Noth- would have none of it. In the 19th century it came to be taken ing would do more political good to this In passing, we may note that Dickens for grantedand almost by defaultthat nation and few single acts, I think, would himself was greatly influenced by earlythe profession's allegiance was solely tobring more decency into the world. Carlisle, who attacked the whole of the the first (5). But in the last quarter of this Now I must emphasize that there is utilitarianmovementandnumerical century it is surely patently clear that itnothing God-given or immutable in the quantification. Like Carlisle, too, he hadmust become very much wider. So myscientificprofession'sapoliticaldis- a great distrust of institutions designedfirst plea is for some practical recogni-interested search for truth. Even in the apparently only for talk. Ile did not like tion of the new ethical imperatives oper- 17th century, more than one-third of the politics; he did not like Parliament, and ating both on science and on society. At papers of the Royal Society were about he certainly did not like people who, like this stage let me give only one example. social problems and the relationship of Mra. Jellibee, organized charity for theThe United States has the most sophisti- science to them. In addition, in the early Africans with a general whip-round in or- cated and remarkable biomedicalre- years of the 19th century the initial aims der to provide underwear for the peoplesearch establishment in the world. It alsoof the British Association were to bring of Senegal. He was very suspicious ofhas a remaikable scientific profession, the problems of society and the skills of such attempts, for he believed that orga-which is highly privileged. 1 agree with science together. That the profession nized charity was merely an institutional the distinguished immunologist, Barry was driven into itself was not. I would device for channeling our sympathies, Bloom; it is both morally right and scien- argue. Its fault. Moreover we have seen a making them impersonal and unavailabletifically possible to concentrate some ofsimilar emphasis in the late 20th century in human terms. It is sad that Dickens.out intellectual and technological effort When Sir John Kendrew was president with his comic irony and his vivid sym- on the pressing medical problems of theof the British Assouation in1972, he pathy, has no real solution to all this ex-ThirdWorldleprosy,malaria,and pleaded for a change in attitude and cept that of a good heart. In Oliver Twist,schistosomiasis for a start. asked for the profession to look at some along comes that nice man and gets Oli- There is something distasteful at theof the pressing social problems and diver out of the problem. But by the timesight of a highly developed society beingrect their knowledge toward their solu- we get to the later novels, Our Mutualforced to divert great resources, both fi- tion. More recently. in the press confer- Friend and Great Expectations, Dickensnancial and intellectual, to the cure of its ence that attended the publication of his is sadly pessimistic. He implies that hu-own self-inflicted diseases. We can char- book on 0. T. Avery, Dubos (9) remind- man relationships are so riddled with ma- acterize these as the diseases of choiceed us that Avery's discovery arose not terial ambition, selfishness. and snob-those which arise from excesses in its from his interest in the gene. but from his oery that the po >ibilities of 'aumanizingilfe-style, or the pollution of its environ- interestin pneumococcal pneum.nia. our society recede more and more. ment. In 1975 t' e United States spent Dubos consistently argues that many sci- $22 billion on alcohol and $12 billion on entific problems which have their origins tobacco, and in the preceding year it in a deep social context may turn out to Allegianceof theScientist spent 5400 million on cancer research. he more fruitful. in all kinds of ways Yet the World Health Organization esti- o that was one critique: science is Now asIhave indicated, the de-mates thatto do an effectiveinter- cold and inhuman and also does not con- tached,objectivestancewhichhas disciplinary remedial job on the 1.;-oblem cern itself with the needs of society The served, and will continue to serve, sci-of the Third World diseases, those that second critique, which is my next theme. ence so admirably as a methodology arise not by choice but by causes exter- also has historical origins. somehow sci- finds no cause for concern when we are nal to the people themselves, would cost ence manages to extract the warmth and investigatingthe passage ofgases only $15 million per annum. I do not beauty from the world, md this is also through the pores of a leaf. But it reallywish this point to be misunderstood. drained m the personalities of the begins to be a source of concern whenThis is nut a plea for less basic research. proseco.ois of science. Moreover. in- we look at the implications of recent bio- I continue to be greatly impressed with sofar as they are scientific solutions, our medical research or many of the implica-the importance of such work and how, solutions to humanity's problems inevi- tions of recombinant DNA research, asfor example, work supported forre- tably become humanely cold, too Dick- they relate to human 2,enetic engineer-search in cancer can have an impact inens took tip this theme. so did Blake and ing Whenever science begins to impingeother areas of medicinehow, forex- Keats, and in our time so did F. R. Lea- on the autonomy of human beings suchample. basic immunological sti.dies bear vis. problems always arise and these forceimmediately on autoimmune disease. us to reexamine, in our new setting, a1 his plea is both fur a change in life-sty le HumanizingSociety very old questionnamely, that of theand a iestaich program directed to the allegiance of the scientist. This was first problems Imention. Tn support such So. itis argued. the job of Improving raised in the middle of the 19th century work would.!believe, he one of the and humaniiing out society can find nei- by a number of people, including Lyonmost farsighted acts this new Adminis- ther took not methods in science, foi Playfair, who was to be president of thenation could undertake !There is an un- ''en the remedy becomes wut than the British Association in 1885. But the mid-tapped source of idealism. energy. and disease. We must take note of one coun- century was a time when science and so-intellectual skills in the young scientists terclaim that was as oiled in the past and ciety were moving to delineate the forms of this nation. and I would like to see the is often offered rum In the efioi I tohu of their sock) contract. The question is development of a scientific Peace Corps mantic ourselves, to enhance our ethital this: Where is the allegiance of a scien-devoted to tackling some of the prob- and moral sensibilities, people have ot- tist properly due? Is it to an abstract eth-lems. to gaining mt.,:h more knowledgeten appealed to the humanities to do it ic? Is it tomethodology? Is it to them- and helping to implement the solutions in for us. almost as to an ideology I he ie-

(-19 63 demptive ',owe' of the humanities tolength'I he three teasons. First.I against the deadening effect of the ration- produce an enlarged consciousness. tothink it unfair and unwise to regard the al style make us aware of the reality of ow hu- humanities in this theiapeutics light. They Tht.was. on the one hand. the vision man predicament. to enlarge our sy mp.t- are good in themselves and should not he of the detached onlooker. who mood thies has been an important theme. regarded as remedies for our own fail- aside from the world. But this seemed to whether in Wordsworth. in Shelley . ut in ings. Second. we must not delude our- be at variance with the desire of the poet many 20th-century %, s.I am slightly %els es about how easy i; h. We must not to enter with his feelings into the world skeptical about this. I am not at all con- pretendthat\voidsawlunisersity and to respond and resonate with it. As vinced that somehow. from a study ofcourses are a substi to for human hearts Keats wrote. natural philosophy appar- the great thinkers of the past alone. weand human action. Third. we ntust he ently undermines this vision; it certainly tutomatically get .tccess to ,coral s aloe. very careful of hypocrisy. For if we In- makes the world much less accessible. It is disturbing but nevertheless true that sist that the scientific profession and theThen William Blake came, to speak of a people can he extraordinarily sensitise medical profession have a case and a hu- science that darkens the imagination and to music and poetry and not necessarily man concern which we ourselves asmurders the soul. So therift began. apply this to their daily lives. Steiner (I0 members of society are not prepared to Among the poets and the artists there has reminded us how people returned have or to at on. we shall he raging hyp- was the cultivation of that inner realm of from a day's work in the concentration ocrites. feeling which poetry. but not science. camps and then put Mozart on their would reflect. Moreover. it was a place gramophones.Iremember. too. a de- where. as Charles Davy reminds :is. the lightful occasion at a conference on sci- Absence of Science in Literature truths of poetry did not have to meet site ence and the humanities when the philos challenges of the truths asserted by sci- opher Max Black reminded us of the ex- Nov. let me go to my second task andence. This difference was not an issue quisite capacity of philosophers to argue raise the question. Why is there the my th about the nature of the world and who questions of ethics and morality in thethat humanity and warmth are drained made it. for that topic was left to the most rigorous and convincing style. but from the world by science. and how is it classical conflict between the theeao- he went on to say . "If I wanted to know that scientists have not been the objects gians and the scientist_ it wa; the ques- whether an action I proposed to take v. as of great works of art or literature? There tion of the place "where three dreams right or wrong. I wouldn't ask my profes- are.of course. famous exceptions cross -nut it was a place which a scien- sional colleagues. Id ask my wife." GeorgeEliot's Aliddlemarch. Sinclairtist nc.er inhabited and probably could Stoppard (I/ ) equally reminds us how Lewis's Artowstnith. and to a certain ex- no', understand. Lenin. when he felt himself being moved tent the novels of C. P. Snow. although Nov. one consequence of this rift came by the App,tssion,tt,t Sonata of Beetho- he has mostly described scientists acting to he reflected in education. a second. in ven. ngidly turned away. say ing. "We've as politicians or administrators. as any- he ignoring of science and its ideas as just got to hit people. thing other than workers in a laboratory. ,hemes for artists. Such issues as the Did the Shakespearean play s.sv ith If there is a shortfall here. we must se.:relationship between a sensitive artist their almost God-like insight into the this in terms of the social streams in th! and boorpois socivy . which has been a w ay that people behave. make people early 19th century . around the time w hen tremendous theme of literature. never understand more. make people act bet-the British Association w is beginning. foundtheir counterpartsinliterature ter. make people feel mere humane'? It Here. I believe. we find another and per-about science. This was partly becarsc was with considerable surprise th.ttI haps more serious division between sci-people could not decide on what side of !earned from David Daiches that theence and the artsIn the early years ofthe issue scientists lay . but equally be- same people who went to the Globethe French Revolution. the romantics cause. hitting the Industrial Resolution Theatre or to any Elizabethan or Jaco- heralded the new age of freedom and rea- andthephilistinismofthewhole bean play. and saw these marvelous dra-sona time when poetry and science bourgeo,, mentality. and equating the mas with their rich poetry and their hu-would lie down like the lion and the scientists with the technologists. people man understanding, would at the same Iamb. and inspire and celebrate together. somehow pushed them onto the side of place inthe same afternoon watch a Indeed. from the time of Copernicus to the enemy Thus scientists became. and monkey tied to the back of a horse.that of Newton. scientists could write hale remained. suspect in the eyes of chased by dogs % ho slowly hititto and assume that what they wrote all in- ar tists. death. This was their favorite occupationtelligent men would read So we hose had a long tradition of between the acts For is a large gap But Wordsworth. Coleridge. Shelley. writing and investigating how artists and between appreciating the wonders of ar-and Tennyson not withstanding. by thewriters work (Joyce Cary 's marvelous tistic imagination and going out andmiddle of the 19th century this assump- hook 71u, Horse's tfouth comes immedi- doing likewise.asthereisbetween tion began to fade. It was partly the real- ately to mind). but w here is its scientific knowing ethical norms and going out and ity of the French Revolution followed by equivalent'' The psy Otology of artistic doing likewise. which no amount of dis- Bonapartism which smashed that vision. creation has been with us for 200 years. cussion of andought" w ill alter. partly the effect of the Industrial Revolu- and even though Poincare raised similar rhis is my main quarrel with R Lea-tion and the shape of the new world to questions about scientists. no one has k isthe myth of the icdemptisc power come. w hen scientists were equated with ever gone really deeply into the psychol- of gicat works of art. the belief that by the engineering dolls who had black- ogy of scientific discovery. There is so teaching a small group 1)f elite to appi et ened the face of England. The new world much that remains unexploredthe hu- site Low rentc and (woige ou will that was now fashioned seemed totally man themes around science ate s kid and Lhangc :Rill/anon You wonat allalien to thz world of poetry and art. So fascinating. But writers 'Jo not know not by this alone. the romantic movement then revi' cd how scientists work. They see sconce as WI\ haveIgone into this at such againina different form.to protest power. or as politics. but there are precious few accounts of the way the scien- have seen little of this kind attempted in (20). We must become more sophisti- tific imagination is expressed. It may be the history of science. and in any case cated and come to grips with this prob- that novelists are afraid of revealing their we would be much better adv ised to turn lem. and reformulate our discipline. ignorance, but I think the reason goes not to Watson but to Sayre (15), who History is not a totally unknown coun- much deeper. I think it is because, some- attempted to match a person try_ It is a study of the human past as a how, we have not made science acces- and a personality with the progress ofform of collective self-under landing of sible. Yet. I cot tend, if you want as your thought. There are a few notable excep- human beings and their world. It alway s sympathetic t.zro a man of imagination. tions: Holton (on Einstein) (16) and Ro- has been that and it should be always like of intellectual interests. of deep morn) di- senberg (17). both of whom are con-that. Itis a story of human activities. lemmas, a scientist will fit your picture vincedthatthescientists'subjective what men did. what they thought. what especially. perhaps. a .ecombinant DNA state of mind has a marked influence on they suffered. what they strove for. what scientistnot only as well as butin the progress of science: Koestler (18) they aimed at. what they accepted, what many ways. perhaps even better than an v. hose vivid account of Kepler in The they rejected or conceived. or imagined. artist. Sleepwalkersisanother. superb. ex- It tells us about their motives, their pur- Yet one can say that. after all. we hate ample: and Frank Manuel on Newton. poses. their ambitions, their ways of act- had a long tradition of looking at science. To be fair to the members of my pro-ing and their ways of creating. These. We have indeed had the professional fession. whom I by no means disavow. Vico insisted, are the activities we know. scrutineers of the enterprise. the philoso- science makes it very difficult for us to and we know because we are all involved phers and the historians of science. But cc-nprehend its history. There are two in them as actors. not as spectators. His- if. as Neff (12) argued. the measure of reasons for this. First, the pieces of thetorians and philosophers of science have our success here is the measure of themosaic are often just not there. Second. been too much spectators and hate not means by which we have chosen t'vuo as Sir Peter Medawar reminded us (19). a been sufficiently involved with science. humanity to recognize its own likeness scientific paper not only conceals but inThe kind of knowledge we seek is not and understand itself. how hate we in fact actually misrepresents the reasoningjust the knowledge of facts or the knowl- professional philosophy and history ofand the imagination and the creation that edge of logicz,. truths or the logic of science. measured up'' Hate we suc-has gone into it. for the stern eyes of method. The kind of knowledge we seek ceeded in getting science to recognize its John Stuart Mill are staring out at the ed- is more like the knowledge of a friend. own likeness? No. Judged by scientists itor of et ery journal. As Medawar also his character. his ways of thought or ac- and others, much philosophy of science emphasized. the past of science does not tion, an intuitive sense of the nuances of has been just irrelet antat best a series hate a dignified independent existence of his creative personality. We must use of brilliant axiomatic games, but often its own. for a scientist's present work is imaginatit e power of a high degree to en- pretentiousnonsense.likethepre- of necessity shaped by what others have ter into the other's mind and world. and tentious nonsense you an easily fin.: in done and thought before him. science this means appreciating them as people all academic disciplines. But worse.I is a wave front of a continuous secular as well as scientists. think. k what it has omitted to do for us process which carries its on history Without entering into history in this H. Reichenhach said, philosophers ofwithit.But et en admitting the diffi- sense. the past remains dead. a collec- science are "not interested ;n the con- culties that are placed in our way as we tion of objects. Similarly, without enter- text of discover} so much as in the con-try to relate the indiv id ral work to the ing into science in this sense. scientific text of justification" ( /3). But this is only march of scientific history. Istill believe history will remain a dead collection of a ten small part of the science enter- that we could. and should. he very much objects or ideas which apparent!) has prise. more imaginative and comprehensive in been created by stuffed figures in a muse- mirroring this activity. um. The only way of achieving any self- Now why am I so confident? It is be understanding issyste.natically to re- History of Science cause dui ine the last 21/2 years. I have trace our steps. historically, psychologi- been following Sir Peter Medawar's rec- cally. and above all anthropologically in- What of histort of sere ice? It is a pro- ommendations. and Gerald Holton's too. to science. We can begin now to study fessiont have practiced for a great part and hate been listening in at the key hole science as itis done and try to under- of my academic life. and I look aroundof daily science. I have. in fact, been liv- stand those private moments of creativ- and ask. Where in history of science is ing w ith one group of scientists. day after ityto enter with the scientist into "the our Macaulay. our Namier' ome today, as they do science. not as they af- place where the three dreams cross.' that. where is Tolstoy? Who has dealt ter ards .saythey do science.Ihave We have to enter with empathy into oth- adequately with the relationship of the been seeing the smudges. the thumb- er people's minds and into their modes of individual in science to the march of sci- prints and bloodstains. of a personal being. Then and only then can we go entific progress? History as we know it is struggle with one's ideas. Now after 20 back and re lo the history of science. a tapestry. the parts of which are made !, ears in orthodox history of science, I I have argued that at this time the sci- up of the mosaic of the small. everyday. am appalled that I could hate so igno r I entific life and the scientifiL imagination individual events And we dense thethe very human core ofitshistory. are not really accessible. for allthat pieces of the mosaic from a whole vari- Where are the people that. as an histo- more is probably being writter, about SO ety of sources over and abot e formal '.c- rian of ideas, I wrote about? Did I paint ence than at any tin., in its history .If it ademic articles: from new %rarerjour- them so that I could recognize them and were accessible. we ;ould demytholo- nals, diaries. cabiaet documents. and so their unique personalities. and how they gizeit. When we have done this. we on. The real historian is the one who can bore on their science? No. I did not. So could incorporate it into public under- piece the mosaic imaginatively to form my last plea is that it is time to apply to standing. When itis incorporated into the tapestry and so present the past to US the history of science the lessons of Vico public understanding. then.find only in its full. vivid color. No apart from and Herder which have been so beau- then, will science he truly integrated into the waspish memoirs of Watson (14). we tift,!iy expounded by Sir Isaiah Berlin bur culture. 71 65

Science and Society rarysociety, andwhere scientific others. sta.1 higher in authonty called it vain and humbag solutions are called for, to give them first 4.The limes. 21 August 1841 5 Goodfield. Plating God Genetic Engineering FinallyI want to say so'nething notpriority. It would be magnificent if, in- and the Mampulatton of Life (Random House. very original, but I do not think that mat- stead of being on the defensive vis-a-vis New York. and Hutchinson. London. 1977) 6G A Chaudhry. "The Mudfrog Papers." ma- ters. Science and society can no longer society as we have seen in recent years, ensu. t. 1974. p 104 scientists actively extended their notion 7There were also some senous internal troubles afford to entertain myths acid misunder- and the Times undertook a little investigative standings about each other, as the recent of accountability in this way. With their journalismFor example. on 20 August 1840. example before us. we might then go on "We wrote earlier of a spirit of persecution and public debates about recombinant DNA favountism lin the Bntish Association/ and reveal. Public understanding of science and tack/.: the problem of accountability there are certain doomed victims whose very ments expose them to the relentless spite of its is as vital as it was in the early days. But in othe, groupsin industry and in the Council and cotenes This we have confirmed media,for exampleand thushelp and it is worse than we anticipated. We shall ex- there is the other side to this coin. and pose the transgressions of the Council who en- that is the scientist's understanding ofcreate a climate where all such profes- courage favountism and persecution Their con- sional groups recognize their debt and duct should be regulated by honesty and hon. the public. Science and society must be our closer to one another. When the one isresponsibility to society at large. Now is 8C Dickens. Bentley sMiscellany. October very much :he right timea delightful 1837 truly incorporated into the other, we will 9R. Dubos. The Institute. The Professor and appreciate the humanity that has in fact time in our liveswhen it is splendid, is DNA (Rockefeller thusPress. New York. itnot. to he able to use old-fashioned 1976) always been present in science. and in 10G. Steiner, in In Bluebeard's Castle (Faber & essential respects will always be found words such as "morality and " honor- .'aber. London. 1971) without a fear of being sneered at. 1 T Stoppard. Tratesties (Faber & Faber. Lon- there. But if I argue that scientists should don. 1974) Ialso wonder what Charles Ch.:kens 12E Neff. The Poetry of History (Columbia Univ. now consider pew ways of expressing Press. New York. 1947) this humanity in response to the new eth- would say if he came hack now. He lived 13Quoted in P. Schlapp, Ed Albert Einstein Phi- his life in a deep pe ,,imism. But looking losopher and Scientist (Cambndge Univ Press. ical imperatives in our societyi also ar- London. 1969). p. 292. The full quotation is as gue that society should think of new backI think he would has e possibly follows. "The philosopher of science is not more grounds for optimism. much interested in the thought processes which ways both of helping them to do this and lead to discoveries. He look- for a logical analysis of the completed theo-ncluding the rela- of understanding them. tionships establishing its That is. he is The profession's allegiance can no References and Notes not interested in the context of discovery so much as in the context of justification." longer be to a rrNhodological ethic I C Babbage. Reflections on 'e Decline of Sri - 141 Watson. The Double Hells (Atheneum. New alone. But this does not mean giving up eme in England (Londonat30) York. 1968) 2 Report of the Bntish Association for the Ad- 15A Sayre. Rosalind Franklin and DNA (Norton. the truth_ and we will still look to scien- ancement of Science (l ondon. 1831-1832). p New York. 1975). tists for significant contributions to ob- 41 16.G Holton. an The Interaction Bebseen Science Er en rears later. Babbage w:rs still gloomy and Philosophy. Y Elkana. Ed (Van Leer jective truth as well -is to the practical about the prospects of science in general and the Foundation. Jerusalem. 1974) expressions of science. I am not arguing Association in particularReporti:.g his sreech 17C Rosenberg. No Other Gods (Johns Hopkins to the annual general meeting in 1838. the Times Press. Baltimore. 1977) for a return to stages of irrationality or quoi.:c1 him thus 12' August, Science !Bab- 18A. Koestler. The Sleepwalkers (Hutchinson. bage said) stood in the most degraded rank The London. 1960). wic'nful thinking. but for the application lowest honours are gin to intellectual powers 19P B. Medawar. in The Neu York Reise of of knowledge of factsin new com- We should endear our to unite classes in country Books. 28 March 1968. p 3 with one interest and that unity should be that of 20I. Berlin. Vico and Herder (Oxford Um Press. passionate waysi think we are reason- the intellecti, nhappils mans of the aristocracy Oxford. 1970). see also his Tykocaner Memonal ably entitled t, ask the scientific profes- looked with contempt on science He had heard Lecture. The Diiorce Beturen the Sciences and the assertion made by men in authonty that they the Humanities (Urns, of Illinois Press, Urbana. slot: io assess the problems of contempo- knew littie of science and cared for it less and 1974!

politics d sing in the house of si fence? There is no way. in a dynamic society, that o strict line can be drawn bctween sta- ence and the tides of social change. They overlap, and if it is argued that science is value-free the same cannot be said ^f scientists.If scientific freedom is half the operative equation, responsibility is the idler half. Where trouble comes is in divining the issues on which scientist' should take a stand. and in attesting the legitimacy their interventions. There are no glib rules, no In the kinetic behavior of NAAS 0. -r the At the recent AAAS Annual Meeting the magisterial fiats, to go by Conscience und past decade. not exclud.ae the present. so-principal eruption was one of information conviction are among the valuables rescued cial controversy has troubled the waters and and communication. with nearly 140 sym- from the debris of the recent American expe- provoked questions about what is science's posia and almost 1000 speakers shoehorned rience, and they will have to do. proper business and what is n While the into five days and nights. But there were The scientific community has seldom prevailing wisdom is that the fires of Amer-other eruptions too. more impassioned and complained when pi hues has used science ican discontent are burnt out, the evidence is divisiv^, whose echoes still resound. The for its various purposes. and it is lunow ',at that it does not take much to rekindle questions will not be yinett.J. `meat pt.,,hes so much anguish is expressed when it is the Science may yearn to be seen as impartial, ascienosts. 6:0ever Leer fhid, and Lreden- scientists' turn to make use of politics The sanctuary of reconciliation whose members tials, to plunge into social and political con glorious Apollo program, for all its benefitb, hear no evil, see none, and above all speak troversi:s which are not cer,tral to the search was mr,re the child of ly..;:itics than of the craving for exploration The war on cancer Par:. If scientists were saints, it might be so. for and apr!..anon of knowiedge?rj 9 What I., 66

has similar origins. The sweepstake staged hesitation in taking up the fight. If these re-finally lose patience is at the appearance of for siting the solar energy laboratories was sponses are legitimate, it is not clear whyarrogance, no matter what aay be the moral more of the same. Like it or not, political scientists should not also go to the mat forstrength of the scientists' position. It is here motives have been largely responsible forthe physically handicapped in science, forthat a line surely can be drawn. driving American science and technology for the rights of other minority groups, or on Science and social controversy will touch three decades, and under the banner of ener-behalf of an equal chance for women in sci-each other more often than not, and usually gy they are likely to do so for the next three. ence. The advancement of science will notwith good reason. AAAS will get its share. It is outright myth to imagine that sciencebe measured entirely by the growth of re-But when the sparks fly again, as they are and politics exist in separate spheres. search budgets or the per capita share Jfbound to, there is a lot to be said for theview It is not a matter of indifference that in Nobel Prizes. of our colleagues in London. that science is police states the human rights of fellow sci- If there is a hitch in the argument, it con- "a very human business"(/). entists are violated. Nor is it beneath scien-cems the public's grasp of what the scientists tists to borrow textbook political methods inare up to. Will a public which listens when REFERENCES AND NOTES the defense of basic research against statu- scientists speak on saccharin or laetrile care 1 "The vulnerable side of science." Nature. 15 Decem- tory regulation. When state governmentsto hear their views on social morality? The ber 1977. page 549 (editonall dictate what is to be taught in the schools reaction is likely to be that the scientists have about the origins of life, we have littleleft their domain. Where the public will

If Einstein the scientist was completely absorbed in seeking a unifying theory of the forces at work in the universe, Einstein the citizen served the cause of justice with the same zeal and courage. From 1914 untilhis death he fought against militarism, the abuse of power. andracialdiscrimination,andhe staunchly defended peace.

Einstein's Early Years

Born in Jim on 14 March 1879, Ein- stein lived in Munich until he was fifteen. On 10 November 1979, a meeting of the terialistic and opportunistic civilization,In Munich he began his study of mathe- Pontifical Academy of Sciences was held in where existence destroys essence andmatics. the geometry of Euclid became Rome in honor of the centenary of the birth possessions take the place of love. his bedside breviary. He also immersed of Albert Einstein. The Einstein Session nas Albert Einstein's work is in the realmhimself in Kant. During this period his historical in three ways. It was the first time of pure research.It contemplates themother made him study music and the vi- the Pope presided over a session of the laws of nature at the level where the su-olina genuineIngres violinwhich Pontifical Academy. It was the first sprh ses- preme harmony of the Divine Creationwould serve as his refuge in moments of sion to be attended by the cardinals, man} ofreigns. For the importance of his works,relaxation, distress, or trial. The family whom were in Rome at the time. Finally. the Einsteinis compared to the greatestenvironment helped to form hisvat's: content of the Pope's talk was remarkable. minds in the field of universal thought. Iat home he learned :nodesty and sim- particularly his emphasis on the autonomy ofmight ment,on among his predecessorsplicity, so well exemplified in his manner scientific truth and its independence ofonly Galileo Galilei, who applied theof dress and his indifference to material religious truth. keen edge of his genius to the develop-wealth -Men's lowly objectivcs posy ment of science and, like Einstein. be-sessions,apparentsuccess,luxury In the course of this century science.came the symbol of an era. have always seemed to me despicable. working in two direct:ons, has complete- In studying the existing information re- After his elementary studies. Einstein ly changed human life. One of these di-garding Einstein, we find, together dithmatriculated atthe Luitr 3Id Gymna- rections is basic research; the other isthe great scientist, an exceptional :iumansium. His stay at the Gymnasium was for technologicalapplications.Itmattersbeing, whose chief concern was with jus-him decisive. He could not tolerate the little that basic research is often regardedtice. And yet no one is more outstandingPrussian discipline there and what he with mistrust in many circles, or thatfor his constant modesty and unceasingcalled the methods of fear, force, and technological applications have not al-faithfulness to his moral principles. If heartificial authority. At the Gymnasium ways been pursued with prudence andis sontimes accused of occas,,a1 self- were born his lifelong rebellion against wisdom. Man's irrationality cannot takecontradiction, this is only superficial andaut.toritarianism and classical school dis- away from science and technology theirrather the resLlt of a firm attachment to role as powerful levers to serve our so-his convictions. One thing certain is that Carlos Chagas is pre,ident of the Pontifical Acad- emy of Sciences. Vatican City, Rome. and director ciety, guided by spiritual, moral, and eth-he radiated an extraordinary intellectual of the Institute of Biophysics at the Federal Univer- ical values, to help overcome the obsta-force and a charisma that age only in- sity, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil This article is based on his address at the Einstein session of the Pontifical cles to man's progress produced by a ma-creased. Academy on 10 November 1979. 67 cipline andtherootsofhisanti- scorned him, but finally in 1914 he coulddown his arms. He immediately joined a militarism. Also, he began to feel thenot resist .a.eintellectual attraction ofmovement started by Ernst Reuter, who need to reconsider the importance of evi-Berlin, where Planck and Nernst, amongwas to become mayor of Berlin. The aim dence that had been considered irrefut-others, lived. He abandoned Zurich andof the movement was to obtain an early able. went to become part of the heart of Ger-peace and create an international organi- Einstein did not complete his course in man physics, on terms that bear witnesszation for the preservation of peace, an Munich. Interrupting his studies there,to the prestige he had achieved. He wasideal to which Einstein was devoted for he joined his parents in Milan for a year named director of the Kaiser Wilhelm In-the rest of his life. before going to Switzerland, where he stitute of Physics, professor without spe- The years that followed World War I completed his secondary schooling in cific teaching obligation at the Universitywere not easy ones for Einstein. Scien- Aarau. He became enthusiastic over the of Berlin, and member of the Pru siantifically, he achieved great fame. The democratic climate which had been es- Academy of Science on exceptionaltheory of general relativity was estab- tablished for centuries in the Swiss Con- terms. The period when he lived in Ber-lished by the direct observation of one of federation, as well as the absence of alin permitted him to complete his theoryits principles. In 1919, during a total professional army. Making a decision of general relativity and establish his the-eclipse of the sun, the deflection of the that was s-cprising in a young man ofory regarding the structure of the uni-light of the stars by the gravitational field sixteen, he gave up his German citizen- verse. of the sun, as Einstein had foreseer,, was ship to become a Swiss citizen. He en- verified.However, Einstein was un- tered the Ecole Polytechnique Ramie, Influence of Political Developments happy with the turn of international where in 1900 he received his diploma. events. He refused to attend the 4th Sol- The years he lived in Zurich were of In Berlin, Einstein was no longer thevay Congress in 1924 because the Ger- great importance because they laid thescientist limited to science, but becamemai. scientists were not invited. Reaf- foundations for the scientist. involved in the political life of his period.firming his internationalism, he wrote to His faithful companionsMichelan- Soon his sense of ji.qice was sharpenedMarie Curie: "I understand that the Bel- gelo Besso, Konrad Ha. icht, and Mau-and he played an active role as pacifistgians and the French are not psychologi- rice Solovine among otherstell of theand began his battle against anti-Semi-cally prepared to meet the Germans. But astonishment and admiration of every- tism. when I learned that the German scien- one in the presence of his great in- During his youth in Zurich Einsteintists were excluded as a matter of prin- telligence and his mastery of physics.had been interested briefly in Judaism,ciple, because of their nationality, I real- Those were the years when he studiedbut it was in Prague, when by chance heized that by going to Brussels I wou!cl be the works of Maxwell, and learned fromLarne upon a Jewish cemetery of the 5thlending my support to such a decision." a lecture by Henri Poincare that it maycentury, .' -tt he came face to face withAt the time of the capture of the Ruhr not be possible to maintain the concepts the centuries-old history of his peopleValley by the French army, Einstein, of absolute space and absolute time andand found himself integrated with them.notwithstanding the anti-German feeling even the geometry of Euclid to be validIn Berlin he was surprised by the anti-that he so often expressed, vigorously in mechanics. Besso brought him Mach's Semitic positions taken by the universitycondemned the Allies. book The Scien Mechanics, which andthegovernment,whichfore- The development of geopolitics and even more deep', .,,:nbed the (IA-shadowed a movement that was to reachthe recourse to armaments at that time of the interpretation of the twoits full force with the Nazi regime. Heso increased Einstein's preoccupation concepts of Newton. He thus began to saw that the war of 1914 to 1918 was inthat he often joined pacifist movements, prepare himself for relativity. the making and that it was awaited, if notwhich used his name. His desire to con- The pupil was not popular with hishoped for, in certain military, political,tribute to world peace reached its height teachers. A very serious student, he wasand economiccircles.He wasas-in the 1930's. In New York in 1930 he nonetheless irregular in class attend-tounded. made a speech in which he said that "if 2 ance. Also he was critical sometimes ar- When war was declared, he was sur-percent of the citizens refused to be rogant, always impulsi ve in his com-prised to see his scientific friends offerdrafted" governments would lose their ments, oftenhurtingfeelings.Con-their services as experts and take an ac-ability to wage war. Thi speechfor sequently. he was unable to realize his tive partin the war effort. He waswhich he was insultingly nicknamed dream of joining the teaching staff of the thrown into the struggle, however, by the 2 percent man" was used against Ecole Polytechnique, or even that of oth- the "Manifesto zo the Civilized World,"him by the followers of McCarthy even er faculties. A stroke of good fortune ledwhich was published in October 1914after he had obtained his American citi- to his entry into the Patent Office inand signed by 83 German scientists,zenship. His disillusionment with the ef- Bern, where he found calm and leisureamong them several of the most out-forts of the League of Nations and the and could so develop his unusual scien- standing. The Manifesto relieved Germa-slowness with which the Disarmament tific theories. In 1905 he published fourny of all blame, justified the invasion ofConference held in Geneva in 1932 car- basic papers. in which he treated the 3elgium and, in terms that were to failried on its work led him to a new tirade. theory of special relativity. explainedlater, spoke of the annihilation of theIn a presc interview before 60 foreign Brownian motion, introduced the idea ofwhite race by the Slavic hordes. Einsteinco ,,:-n-dents he appealed to the work- quanta, and established the relationship readilysignedan"Anti-Manifesto,"ers of the world to abandon their work in between mass and energy. which he helped to write. One of its sen-the armar ;ent factories and cease all ac- After 1911 Einstein was sought by nu-t: aces was prophetic:No one will wintivity related to the transport of arma- merous universities. Following a bnefthe battle that rages today; all the nationsments. Again he urged them to oppose period atthe ,rman University ofthat are engaged in it will pay a very highthe draft. Prague, he returned to Zurich as a pro-price." This antiwar declaration had on- However, with the events in Germany fessor atthe very schoolthathad ly fou: signers, but Einstein did not layafter Hitler's rise to power, which led to

r'," A 68

an increase in militarism and armamentsPhilosopher of Nature terested in the actions and the destiny of and a reappearance of anti-Semitism, each individual." Einstein was obliged to reexamine his Little by little, Einstein became a wise Although he was certainly a rational- pacifist positit.ii and change his ideas.man, a sage, whose advice was soughtist, Einstein was not an atheist. Respect Only force could win over the power ofand whose life was cited as an example.for the thought and the history of his evil. He wrote to King Albert: "In thein a country where communication waspeople produced in him an underlying re- heart of Europe there is a power, Germa-rapid, the newspapers, radio, and televi-ligious nature. He stated: "Science with- ny, which is preparing for war by all pos-sinn brought to the public the innumer-out religion is lame, and reli on without sible means. This has created such dan- events of his tinily life, although hescience is blind." The id'a of a God was ger for the Latin countries, Belgium, and IAto protect his privacy. Each weekalways with him and he ::filmed: "I especially France, that they ar's neces-he received hundreds of letters, and hewould like to know how God created the sarily forced to use their armi :s." tried to answer them, especially when heworld. I am not interested in this or that During World War II, he served thesensed a correspondentindistress.phenomenon, nor in the spectrum of a American war effort and played a role,People lined the streets to see him passchemical element. I want to know His whichis sometimes exaggerated andand buses full of tourists stopped, asthoughts, the rest is a detail." sometimes belittled, in the organizationthey still do today, in front of 110 Mercer But in his search for universal harmo- of the Manhattan Project and the devel-Street, where the man lived who com-ny and the esthetics of natural laws, opment of the atom bomb. Since the Hit-pletely revised science in our lifetime. Einstein never lost sight of the human ler regime had made it impossible for Einstein became, through his inter-condition and 'le importance of realities Einstein to return to Germany in 1938,national positions, a sort of consciencewhich are above science. He said: "Our he established himself at the Institute forof a world in anguish. For many he wastimes are characterized by extraordinary Advanced Study in Princeton, where heone of the greatest philosophers of na-discoveries in science and its technical worked until his death on 25 April 1955.ture, if not the most important of ourappiications. Who of us is not impressed In Princeton he continued his work ontime. His views of nature embodied aby it? However, let us not forget that unified field theory and tried in vain tonew Pythagorean approach. The harmo-knowledge and technical aptitudes do remove the uncertainties which the theo-ny of the universe sealed by beauty wasnot lead humanity to a happy and digni- ry of quantum mechanics (for which heat the center of his thinking. To achievefied life... ." To Queen Elizabeth of had paved the way) had intr educed intoits highest realization, Einstein had to Belgium, stricken by a dual grief, he sent atomic and subatomic physic... He dedi-postulate the existence of a superiora message of consolation, from which I cated great efforts to the cause of Zion-being or system as the creator of a uni-quote: "After all,there is something ismto which he had been driven by thefied field of force and organizer of theeternal which remains, beyond tomor- Prague incident and German anti-Semi-mathematical harmony of the world.row, beyond destiny and human disap- tismand after the war resumed his ef-This concept has a pantheistic tinge andpointments." forts on behalf of peace and internationalis very close to the thinking of Spinoza. Einstein was a sower and, as Saint understanding, which were now threat-Einstein himself, in reply to some ques-Paul said, because he sowed generously ened by the horror of a nuclear war, totions, stated: "I believe in Spinoza'sthe fruits of his activity are found abun- which he had in a way unwillingly con-God, who reveals himself in the harmonydantly in our thoughts and our activities. tributed. of all things, and not in a God who is in-

staff of the Commission on international Relations (2) The committee received financial support from the academy's endowment funds. Our activity focuses on the plight of individual scientists. engineers, and medical personnelr Aering severe repression. Such cases may onginate in the files of Amnesty International, with the initiative of a member of the academy, in a letter from a victim's friend or family, or in the informal reviews that we have To be active in defense of human The Academy Committee undertaken of the fate of scientific work- rights is to confront human issues both ers in different areas. disturbing and difficult. For almost 2 The Committee on Human Rights was When a case of severe repression has years a committee of the National Acad-chartered by the council of the academybeen identified, we begin a further pro- emy of Sciences (NAS) has s ught to de- and is compocA of seven members of velop a sustained program of human the academy and thiee liaison members The author is University Professor and Professor of Geography at Clark University, Worcester, Mas- rights activity appropriate to its member-front the National Academy of Engineer- sachusetts 01610. This article is adapted from a pa- ship and its tradition of concern for the ing and the Institute of Medicine (I). Ex- per presented on 17 February 1978 at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for the Ad. rights of scientific workers. ceptional suppert is given to it by the vancement of Science in Washington, D.C. 69 cess of inquiry that always involves con-donesian scientists have each been held Our information concerning these In- sultations with a responsible spokes- incommunicado from immediate familiesdonesian colleagues is thinner than for person of the country where our col-and relatives for long periods of time.most of our cases. Three of them have league resides or isimprisoned and,They are representative of a much larger been in detention for upwards of 12 years where possible, with members of humannumber of Indonesians (3) who also are and their very isolation makes it difficult rights organ:Lations and scientific institu-being held, often without trial, withoutto obtaincurrentinformationabout tions, with a representative of the U.S.access to legal counsel, and without oth-them. Thus we have quietly and private- embassy in th'country involved, ander opportunity to have their arrest and ly soughtso far without successto with the victim's family and friends. Adetention clarified or adjudicated. obtain clarification as to their status from great deal of care goes into these in- T. W. Iamil, about 50 years old, isthe gove...ment of Indonesia. quiries as we try to maintain the sameone of Indonesia's leadinglinguistic We know somewhat more about Ibra- standardsof evidence, balance, andscholars from the University of Jakarta;hima Ly, a Ph.D. in mathematics from open-mindedness that characterize aci.d-he studied at the University of Michigan.Moscow State University and, until his emy assessments on scientific matters.He was arrested on 30 October 1%5 andarrest and imprisonment, a mathematics When a clear-cut ,ase has been devel-has been detained since that time. He isteacher at the Ecole Normale Superieure opedclear-cut in the sense that there isreported to be held at Nusakembanganin Bamako, Mali. He was arrested in a strong basis to assume that an individ-prison. June 1976 along with 14 other persons ual is, indeed, undergoing severe repres- I.Made Sutayasa, believed to bewho were accused of writing a political sionwe formulate a series of requestsabout 36 years old, was an archeologisttract that urged Malians to vote "no" in appropriate to the case and prepare aemployed at the National Research Cen-a referendum called by the Malian gov- public statement. The statement and theter of Archeology until 1975 when he wasernment to approve a new constitution. i iuests are reviewed by the academy'sarrested in Jakarta upon his return fromHe was subsequently brought to trial in 12 elected councillors; when approved,a conference of archeologists in Austra-April 1975 under charges of subversion sometimes aftc revision, they are made lia. He has not been formally charged oragainst the government, found guilty, public. Once this is done, our committee tried; it is believed he is being held on theand sentenced to 4 years of imprison- tries to undertake a sustained effort inisland of Bali. He is married and has fourment. behalf of the aggrieved individual, com- children and may have been a member of Our list of concerns does not always bining public remcistrance with appeals the Indonesian Communist Party beforeget longer. The scientific community can to the concerned government, their na-it was banned. share in the satisfaction that Jaan Carlos tional academy if such exists, or other Bursono Wiwoho, abort 55 years old,Gallardo of Argentina has been released scientificinstitutions,andprovidingwas professor of educational psychology and is again working in physics in the moral support to the individual and his o' at Gadjah Mada University in Jogja-United States and that Elena Sevilla her family. karta, Java. Professor Wiwoho had beenshould follow shortly. And among those A major feature of the committee's ef-a member of the NationalPlanningcases that were resolved during the fortis our correspondent network ofBoard under the Sukarno governmentcourse of our inquiries, we note that: some 350 members of the academy whoand at the time of his arrest in late 1965 Ismail Mohammed, who spoke out have volunteered to receive communica-was chairman of the Indonesian Associa- against segregationist policies in South tions from the committee and to act upontion of Scientists. He is reported to beAfrica and was detained there in Septem- them. Thus, the efforts of the committeeeither in Jogjakarta pri %en or detained on ber 1976 and fired from his university are amplified as correspondents write orBuru Island, the location of a permanentpost,isnow practicing mathematics cable governmental representatives, of-resettlement camp for untried politicalagain at another university. fer support to families, and call attentionprisoners. He participated in the nation- GrigoriyChudnovskiy,agifted to the plight of individuals within theiralist movement to gain independenceyoung Soviet mathematician, was per- professionalsocieties.attheir work-from the Dutch, after which he studied inmitted to leave the U.S.S.R. with his place, or through their international con-Prague from 1951 to1954 where hebrother, David, who is also a mathemati- tacts. earned a degree in psychology. He latercian, and his elderly parents; he is cur- Currently; inquiries and ober effortsheaded the psychology department ofrently in the United States receiving are being directed in behalf of individualsGadjah Mada University in Jogjakartatreatment for myasthenia gravis. in1 1countries, and public statementsand was a founder of the Indonesian Taysir al Arouri, a Palestinian phys- have been issued in behalf of 18 individ-Scholars A'sociation. He is reported toicist, who was detained for 2 years with- uals: Federico Alvarez-Rojas, Claudiobe in poor health. out charge or trial by the Israeli govern- Santiago Bermann. Gabriela Carabelli, Kamaluddin Singgih, age 47 years, ment, has been released; it is hoped that Juan Carlos Gallardo, Antonio Misetich,was teaching in the department of me-he will return to his position at Bir Zeit Eduardo Pasquini; and Elena Sevilla ofchanicalengineeringattheTech- University, teaching physics and mathe- Argentina; Vladimir Lastuvka and Alesnological Institute in Bandung when de- matics. Machacek of k:zechoslovakia; Jose Luistained January 1966. Later that same Professor "X:' an African mathe- Massera of Uruguay; Sergei A. Kovalev,year he was released to assistn flood matician, fearful of his life if he returns Yuriy F. Orlov, and Antoliy B. Shcha-control projectsonly to be taken into to his country, has had his visa extended ranskiy of the U.S.S.R.; T. W. Kamil, I.custody again in January 1967. Original', t, remain in the United States. Made Sutayasa, Bu-sono Wiwoho, andimE *soned in Salmba prison in Jakart, -r. of these cases, our inquiries were Kamaluddin Singgih of Indonesia; andhe is now on Buru Island. Singgih stud-some o: .aany such efforts and remon- Ibrahima Ly of Mali. ied physics and engineering at Stuttgart strarc- , from scientific societies and in- The last five cases, which we have justbetween 1960 and 196:, and was reputed dividual scientists. We can all share in formally adopted, can demonstrate someto be sympathetic to the Communist Far-the satisfaction of their resolution. of the committee's process. The In-ty. But these are still the exceptions. Four

Pi 6 70 Argentinian physicists (Alvarez-Rojas,is simply: they are our own. We hopeWhich human rights?1 urge a reading Carabelli, Misetich, and Pasquini) arethat other groupstrade unions, bar as-of the Ziman report (4).It makes one simply reported as "not registered" bysociations, women's groups, and shoe-basic point and makes it well. Beginning the Argentinian government. Massera makers everywhere are equally or more in 1945 and up to the present, a major enters his third year in prison in Uruguayactive. But we will surely be more ef-international shift took place in human despite his willingness to leave the coun-fective in identifying victims, in docu-rights activity. Human rights today are try and take up an offer of a post in Italy. menting their cases, and in supporting not,erely moral rights, they are inte' Kovalev enters his fourth year in prisonthem, if we can appeal to that specialnational legal rights. An internationu despite offers from Stanford and Cornell quality of collegiality that we share and ifaccepted code of human rights ecu- for visiting posts. .. Czechoslovakia, thewe can use for such appeals the estab-nomics, social, political, and religious appeal by Machacek has been rejectedlished avenues of scientific communica-has been developed. Most nations have and Lastuvka's sentence has been re- tion. In so doing, however, we know that not ratified that code, fewer nations im- Juced by 1 year by the Czechoslovakian in many, if not most cases, the namelessplement those rights, and in only one Supreme Court. They sti:' remain as the victims of repression have few if any sci-case, the Council of Europe, does an ef- first imprisoned victims of the Charter 77entists among them, and in some cases, fec.e international appeals court exist movement, a Czechoslovakian effort toscientists serve with the repressors. (6). But almost all nations give lip service monitor human rights. Orlov and Shcha- Having chosen to limit our efforts totoit, and many nations have signed ranskiy have been summarily tried and our own" we were still left with sometreaties that accept at least a portion of found guilty in the U.S.S.R. issues of definition: how far do we ex-the evolved code. There is an inter- As we sought to develop our program tend the concept of scientist and at whatnational standard for human rights. in our initial year of activity, we faced point ir. a career does an individual be- Using this standard is extremely help- three major i.sues: come a scientific colleague? Our answer,ful to us in our selection process. We do Whose human rights? in Leeping with the universality of sci-not have to sit in judgment of our col- Which human rights? eace, was to seek a similar universalityleagues now more than 12 years in In- How do we act for human rights? of outreach: not merely to thevell- donesian prison camps or 13 month. in known and well-connected, not only toLefertovo prison. When the Israeli gov- Whose Human Rights? ti.° ideologically similar, but to all vic-ernment says that Taysir al Aroun "in- tims in science, engineering, and medi-cited terrorist activities" or Uruluayan The issue of whose human rights wecine whc. ever they may be. officials say that Massera was found :ere concerned with touches on the es- It is understandable that our academyguilty of "subversive association" (7) we sence of a basic qt estion that we had toofficers have taken the strongest possibledo not need to make judgments that are consider: "Are sci,mtists special?" Afterposition in defense of Sakharov, a for-clearly beyond our knowledge. It is sun some months of di xussion and reading.eign associate of the =demi ; that as ac-ficient to know that Al Arouri has been the consensus of oi ,r committee was neg-ademicians who are well known anddetained without being tried or charged ative. well connected we know and thus re-under so-called Jordanian Administra- Scientists are not special, neither as spond to the victims from our own ranks;tive Law (which is really the relic of the victims nor as torturers do we deserve to or even that some of us more readily re- Bntish Mandate Law and which ironical- be singled out. It is true, as the Ziman spond to v:atims of our own personally was used to imprison many pre- report (4) states, that science as an activ- ideological persuasion. But it cannot be, independence Israeli patriots). P.J to ity has certain characteristicsa rever- and it is not, the position of our com-know that Massera probably has been ence for truth that leads its practitioners mitteetolimitour effortstosuch tortured and has certainly suffered phys- to query and dissent, a process of veri- cases. ical impairment, even though Uruguay fication that requires open dissemination Thus we have spent a considerablehas an established tradition of allowing and communication. a universality of portion of our collective energy on tryingopponents exile and there is a post in discourse and goals whose common lan- to extend our knowledge of the plight ofItaly for him and his wife (who is also guage and pursuits go beyond national individuals in the less-known areas of theimprisoned). bordersthat may be readily seen as world and to examine the situation in our Thus we draft our requestsan end to threatening to authoritarian regimes or own and other countries of similar ideo-torture, rights to tnal, to representation, even inconflictwithnation-building logical persuasion. We have done soto visitation, to courtroom observers, to goals. But the Sierra Chica pnson in Ar- even at the cost of limiting our efforts inreceive and send scientific literature, to gentina is filled not with scientists but behalf of better-known cases, often toexile (as opposed to continued deten- with young workers and students. As the pique and annoyance of our owntion), to humanitarian release tin case of Philip Handler put it in an interview in members and colleagues. hardship), and to extension of existing BioScience (5): We are of course, limited in just howamnesty.dl of these are rights implicit well we extend ourselves. In many partsin the international code. . tortured shoemakers hurt quite as hard as tortured scientists. Protesting only tor scien- of the world. science is poorly developed In requesting compliance with the in- tists doesn't quite fit with my own beliefs and so are our contacts wait those areas.ternational code, we need not under- about all of thisScientists happen to be a And we surely miss or rationalize awayestimate the threats that nations perceive little bit more visible. The world knows about some of the travesties of human rights infrom dissidents: we live in a world where them. The shoemakers are taken off behind our own midst. But it is not for want of the barn and shot. terrorism is a reality and not limited to trying. national liberation or the overthrow of If we scientistsarenotspecial, tyranny where subversion and dissent though, why limit our human rights ac- Which Human Rights? may threaten all but the strongest and tivities to our ownto scientists, engi- oldest of societies.Nonetheless, the neers, and health personnel? Our answer Inconsidering thesecond issuepnsons of the world would empty of pris- 71 oners of conscience if countries would Without question [these are) an essential ele- comes from us not as scientists but as citi- ment of democracy. zens: if we wish to join in some corporate pro- adhere to the minimal rights of the Uni- test, it should be through one whose prime versal Declaration of Human Rights and All these are not enough, however. in,ur concern is with scienceIf a scientific body its successor documents. view. We believe that society must also guar- publicly takes a step whose justification is po- antee the individual the right to education, to It we tak, internatiomrights serious- litical and not scientific. it will lose the right to work. nd to material security, . .. There are ly and try to use them effectively to re- claim that it is acting purely in the defense of now 17 million unemployed in the indus- science on some future occasion when it wish- fute the charge of intervention in the in- tralized capitalist countries ... we have no es to speak out against. say. a repetition of the ternal affairs of other countries, we can- unemployment [in the USSR) since the begin- Lysenko affair (I/ ). not choose them selectively. We Ameri ning of the thirties (10). cans have anideologicalbentthat I have the impression that many hu- choosi.g the clear-cut case of Ly- selectively equates human rights with man rights activists respond to these senko and the role of some political dis- certain civil and political rights, ignoringconcerns as if they were red herrings to sidents, Sir Andrew has the advantage of many other rights embodied in those be ignored or a rationalization for repres- posing the extreme cases to support his covenants. Those who would dispute oursion and not to be credited with serious opinion. Unfortunately. we find it more right to speak out raise this issue repeat- attention. In my opinir, 1, this would be difficult to grapple with the continuum of edly with us. Here are three examples. A in error. To justify a sentence for Kova- repression, to determine just what is sci- member of an American scientific so- lev or Orlov by the fact that we telz.rate aentific and what is political. To cite just ciety who was born in Argentina, writeshigh unemployment rate in the United two examples: an open letter to the society's president States or to excuse the thousands of kid- Some Argentine scientists appear to condemning his action to protest the re- nappings in Argentina on the basis of the have been denounced, killed, or impris- pression of Argentinian colleagues: muggings that occur in the United States oned because they differed on scientific would clearly be nonsense. But to ignore policy with the military or were actively You [the President) have called attention to the substance of these challenges would reformist in the governance of their insti- nefarious practices in Argentina. Well. I must be a serious mistake. tute or university. tell you that the average citizen there has Many Sovietscientists who are more freedom in some aspects than we have The international codification of ht.- clearly political dissidents are punished here. Have you heard ... thathundreds of man rights provides for economic and thousan,'of elderly people, and some not so social rights as well as political rights. To by manipulating the institutions and even elderly. it certain areas of the United States use one of the examples cited: it is in- the literature of sciice: they are denied are locking themselves up and starving be- work. advancement. and i'..grees, and cause of the fear of street violence. Ourdeed shameful that in the richest nation Amencan cities are filled with men and wom- on earth 6 to 7 percent of the work force their works are even excised from the lit- en like the elderly couple in New York whois almost always out of work, and 30 to erature. Pressure is brought on their col- committed double suicide recently for fear of40 perc,:nt of black youth seem per- leagues to acquiesce to or carry out these going out and being mugged again. Have you manently unemployed. Our most ratio- acts. ... written letters to PresidentCarter about awing lines in science and human this shameful problem ... [a] problem un- nal goals for unemployment range from 4 known in Argentina? (8). to 6 percent; in contrast, not only in so- rights,is difficult. We presume little righteousness in the way we have drawn The Iranianrepresentativetothe cialist countries, but in many Western ours, but we fail to see the incongruity of World Bank writes: Europeal, countries, aIpercent rate is considered a national calamity. a scientific society concerning itself with In spite of some 30 years of debate over this Let us welcome a genuine dialogue. the human condition of fellow scientists complex issue in the United Nations. Ameri- as well as with their scientific doctrin- can and Western libertanan philosophy stiltAs we point ow to our Soviet colleagues regards "human rights" iri a very narrow con- that their remarkable employment rec- text: as essentially Inimical. universal and ord is not cnhanced by denying dis-How Do We Act for Human Rights? timeless. sidents the right to work, let us also con- But as far as the third world is concerned, sider ways in which we in science and Having chosen to speak to the Intel- they are largely one-sided, passive and ab- technology may work to enhance thenationally agreed -upon human lights of stract. They reflect political nghts for the redress of gnevances. personal immunity for nght of all to work. to have security in individual scientists. the issue of method unlawful or unnecessary searLh and seizure. our cities, and to meet basic human still r emams. How do we act in behalf of habeas corpus privileges, due process of law needs. those rights? for incarceration or imposition of fines, the There is another view as to which hu- Out major efloit h..s been to develop absence of cruel and inhuman punishment. ri rights can be asserted. It is the view and a host of other individual freedoms of ac- an approach that matches patience with tion. Sir Andrew Huxley and other British persistence. Our committee began work scientists within the Royal Society. He But they are silent about the society's obliga- a year prior to President Cartei's mination toward the individual, they say littledistinguishes between defense of the po- tivcs. and the academy 's human rights about the right to employment, the right t d ob- litical rights of dissident scientists and at.tiv Ines date hack to 1956. But we are tain a meaningful education, the right to enjoy the defense of scientific rights in the face sufficiently wise. meal. to note how a minimum of life's amenities. These "ac-of intrusion of the state He notes: tive" and "positive" sides (that is. society's cyclic and fluctuating public and govein- ment ;mei est in cull ern issues seem to obligations) are either ignored or considered The persecutions of the present day are not he. Ours is a nation given to hyperbole. as secondary in the roster of Western "humandirected against scientific doctrines or against rights" (9). scientific enquiry as such. they are directed we fear that the crusade for human rights A Soviet legal expert echoes theseagainst individual citize who hive had the may go the way of the eat society" of courage to speak up against oppressive fea- sentiments: the "wartgamst poverty Itis uic- tures of the regimes under which they live sponsible fur members of human lights Among these brave individuals there ale, for When they discuss human rights, many West- groups to raise the hopes of victims for ern ideologists emptasize not socioeconomicexample. writers and medical men as well as problems but the freedom of the individual scientist., The appropriate reaction therefore redress and then Win to some other

1;,, 72

seemingly more current or pressing k-_much we do. Increasingly, more andstandards of the doctors who patch up sue. Thus we have tried to develop a ca- more scientists may withhold their par- the victims in silence or of the psychia- pability for patient, sustained, and per-ticipation in exchanges with indiv 'duals trists who prescribe "treatment" foi the sistent inquiry and support. or groups they feel are um esponsive or dissid,:nts they label insane. But surely At the same time we have had to faceeven complicit in repressing colleagues. they demonstrate that our scientific ethic (and continue to face) various tactical is-This has clearly been the response in the is not universal and that it fails us now, sues. From time to time we have beenwake of the Orlov convictioninthe as it did when horrors were petpetrat- pressedbyacademymembersand U.S.S.R.Hisheavy sentence. closed tri- edinscientificallyrun concentration friends toward quite differing views. Oneal, and the apparent a eatment of his fam- camps. member stated his dilemma as follows: ily and friends dismayed much of the For scientists to be lictive in defense of 1 applaud Carter's statements on human right, scientific communityIndividuals and human right' is to learn and relearn what as an aspect of national policy. Will a lettergroups, many with deep personal com- Rabel us knew in 1532: "Science without from a lowly academic and civil servant, even mitmenttoscientificexchangewithconscience spells but destruction of the though a member of NAS. really add anything the Soviet Union, canceled or delayed to Carter's forceful statements and the NAS spirit" (12) Committee declaration? Whatever itdoe,. their planned trips. seminars, and meet- will it also be at the cost of the cordial workings. ing relations. indeed friendships, that I have References and Notes managed to open up over the last decade with a number of Soviet scientists not to mention 1 ChristianAnfinsen.LipmanFier,.Clifford the matter of field acce,,? Or worse, will it get Geen7. Franklin Long. John Ro,,. and Rena V The Distortions of Humanity, Nations, Scharrer serve with me from the academy. Dan- my Soviet friends in trouble') It is easy to he iel Drucker and William Slichter are the liaison for human rights Oen you're not personally and Science members of the National Academy of Engineer- threatened by their loss (8). ing. and Adam Yarmolinsky is the liaison mem her for the Institute of Medicine. After much thought, this member did How we allow the pain of th ictim 2 Murray T serves as Executive Secretary, assisted by 1,1y Davenport, Sandra Erb, and Ger. write one of the most moving letters 1 and the cacophony of protest to enter the on Sher have encountered, expressing to Soviet quiet and generally well-mannered house IEstimated by the Indonesian government to number 29,000. of whom 10.000 were to he re. authorities that it was the very respectof international science is a question that I tied in December 1977 and the remainder by the end of 1978 These estimates are contested and affection he had for their countrywill persist and recur. But lurking in the by Amnesty International and some Indonesian and for his scientific colleagues that im- nether darkness of questions asked but human nghls releases and purported leader, who place the number in excess of 50.000 pelled him to appeal in behalf of an im-not answered ate the most troubling of 4 Our most valuable reading was the report of a prisoned colleague. all issues, those raised by the profound comb nee chaired by J "Liman The Council for Science and Society in collaboration with the A very different view is expressed by a distortions of humanness, nationhood, BritishInstitute of Human Rights. Si &di:Hi participant in the exchange program or- and science that follow in the wake of re- reedum and Human Rights (Rose, London, 19771 ganized by the academy: pression 5 F. M Leerier. interview with Philip Handler. lorture t, widespiead. According to "Academy shifts emphases to keep up with the Our expenence at,.:meeting in the USSR nurse (ern e 27. 244 (April 1977) Amnesty International it occurs in some h1 or a less optimistic view and excellent review show, that generalized protest is almost use- 01 the status of implementing these nghts. see less, but %pudic threats and promhes can ac- 60 nationsIt h not limited to the Ida William Korey. "U N human right,. Illusion complish a lot Amens or to the secret police of the and reality," t re/Worn at /sane 42. 27 (Septern- her-October 1977) world. 7 Communications to the Committee on Human My protest against the Academy', decision i own country was a,used by re- Rights (1977) id exert no actual pressure on the Soviet, 8 Communication to the Committee on Human sponsible observers of countenancing Right,. paraphrased slightly to preserve ano- Therefore since the Academy 1, useless on the use of torture and serious violations nymity 119771 this i,,tie, individual, and group, of Ameri- 9 Jahangir Amuzegar. "Right, and wrongs. can ,cienti,ts Live to protest ain,t the of human rights in South Vietnam and of or 7 one% 129 January 1978),section IV. Academy a, well a, against Soviet behavior p 17 permitting the teaching of highly ques- 10Interview with Vladimir Kudryavtsev. "Humar. 18). tionable.nterrogationtechniquesin light% How theyareunder:oodinthe USSR 2' Sailer Life (Jul) 1';(7) In response to this and similar con- countriesreceiving assistanceintie 11 Excerpt from an address ht Andrew Huxley to cerns, our position continues to he to training of domestic police. Because of the British Association fay the Advancement of Science. August 1977Reprinted in Cherru«d hold to the unix et sality principle, to not theEuropean Covenant on Human and higinverineN(.11(26 September 1071. p restrict :he channels of scientific commu- Rights, Britain has compensated victims 12 1 rancoi% ,rgarirtra and Parirrerue/, nication in the name of try ing to maintain of inhuman and degrading techniques hook II, chapter N i 1512i iHt.ntage Pre... Nev. and extend them. this is ow institutional used in Not thern Ireland. York. 1942) 11 Igratefulk owledge the .1,..i.aanee of M position and it h my own. But it is not It is not clear how much technical skill Berberian. C ./imam 1- tirohinan, and the ..tafl and menibei. of the ( ommittee on Homan necessarily the position of all moo. idual is needed to employ the electric shock Right, in 1;n: preps iation of this artn.le scientists. Scientific communication I, inapparatus used in basement cells. And the last analysis a voltintai y act, like soone cainotimaginetheprofessional esponding to calls for greater political Involvement on the part that threaten important social values These authors urge science of scientists in addressing contemporary social issues, several policymakers to monitor public attitudes and beliefs to ensure that the Rwriters explored hov, scientists might become more active in public's confidence in science and technology is not eroded by a public affairs. Several fundamental questions were identified. How growing uneasiness about the consequences of scientific research .7.*, can scientists ensure that politicians have acc.,., to the latest research its technical applications. findings and interpretations in controversial areas at the moment Edward Wenk, Jr., suggests in a 1979 editorial that while in- when important public policy decisions must be made? What re the dividual scientists have important contributions to make in educating professional risks to scientists who seek to combine their expert skills the public about the relationship between science and poli`ics, proof measurement and observation with the political world of influence fessional organizations should provide direct assistance to public- and coalition building? And, at what point does a scientist cease to be interest activities and informa ion to citizens as part of their regular a "disinterested observer" and oecome an advocate in public debate? information dissemination functions. Attempts to answer these questions stimulated debate and discussion The premature release of research findings to the public can be throughout the scientific community. counterproductive, however, as C.B. Raleigh's example of earth- J.R. Schenken developed a set of basic principles of responsible quake prediction science illustrates. Acknowledging that seismolog- individualism that he offers as a guide for scientists entering the world ists have important contributions to mak. in fostering public aware- of politics and public affairs. In the wake of the Oppenheimer security ness of potential earthquake pattems, Raleigh maintains that the hearing, Schenken conclude% that scientists could no longer afford the predictive uncertainties associated with this research require that the luxury of political celibacy. He believes that their privileged status information be viewed as tentative. He suggests that scientists who created a social obligation to speak out clearly on basit. concept~ of publicize erroneous or uncertain information may be vulnerable to freedom. litigation, even though they acknowledge the likelihood of error in Responding to the themes of technological alienation widely publi- their work. The public's right to know, he concludes, is tempered by cized in the late 1960s, ,IL -% D. Carroll suggests a way to make the need to protect scientists from restraints that would inevitably technology more responsive to individual and social needs. His result from improper public warnings. "participatory technology" is one means of reintegrating individual In a classic defense of the separation of the roles of scientist and and group needs in the development, use, and regulation of technolo- citizen, Philip Handler describes distortions produced by the image of gy. scientists engaged in adversarial positions in public n.dicy debates. Frank von Hippel and Joel Primack explore how indiv idual scien- Scientists who advocate selected environmental or consumer causes, tists can restore the constitutional balance of poser between the he argues, are doing so more as citizens than as scientists, and their public, the Congress, and the executive branch of government in professional y..,Igments may thus become clouded by ideological regulating the effects of science and technology. Asserting that the beliefs. He Loncludes that scientists best serve public policy and executive branch often exploited its access to reservoirs of scientific public causes by living within the ethic of science, not that of politics expertise, they describe a series of incidents in which scientific Institutional actions to encourage greater political involvement on advisers were used as a source of political advantage. They urge their the part of scientists arc blunted by contradictory position, un the colleagues to apply their talents in the public interest by acting on appropriate role of scientists in public affairs All agree that scientists behalf of disadvantaged group:, seeking to clarify important issues of must provide factual information through traditiGnal research and public health or safety involving the uses of science and technology. publication activities, but there is dis greement about the lengths to Reporting on public ambivalence about the benefits and con- which individual scientists and their scientific organizations should sequences of technological development, Todd R. La Porte and go in supporting social reform effortsUltimately, these become Daniel Metlay conclude that "technological dissent" is not the prod- matters of individual choice, guided both by general principles of uct of a fundamental antitechnology or anti-intelleLtual bias Rather, social and professional responsibility in science and by various politi- it reveals a sophisticated awareness on the part of the general public cal ideologies. RC that the social consequences of technology can produce conditions

60 74

In picturesque Leipzig, University German Pro- fessors, in an Armistice Day meeting, appealed to the intelligentsia of the world today for a better understanding of Germany. It was their way of urging popular support for the Nazi eoverment in tomorrow's elections.

:t is impossible to believe that these professors fully understood the objectives of the National Socialist Party of Germany, or if they did, they were already the political victims of demagoguery. Also, in 1933, a blillant scientist, a young Scientific meetings in general, and panic- vantes puts it, where he can sit with self- man 25 years of age, who had received his medical meetings, are rightfullysatisfaction because he has no goalnodoctorate at the University of Leipzig, "left dominated by the philosophy of Rene Des- place to go. Germany on the rise of Hitler." He probably cartes, who provided a guiding spirit in the Ortega was proud but somewhat alarmed made no public statement at that time, and if 17th century when he wrote: at his Spanish countryman who, instead ofhe Lad, no one would have been impressed, merely pointing the way, readily escorted the but any statement he makes today is consid- I am sure that there is no one, even among those inquiring foreign visitor to the point of in- who make its (medicine's) study a profession who ered impressive news throughout the world. does not confess that all that men know is almost quiry, and thereby left a favorable impres- His name is Edward U. Teller, "the man nothing in comparison with what remains to be sion of extreme courtesy. Ortega wonders ifwho, by many, is considered the chief known. I judge there was no better provision this act was a sign of national pride, or was it architect of the hydrogen bomb." against a short life or lack of experience than faith- in reality a sign that his countryman had no fully to communicate to the public the little which Thes- incidents constituted th,t backdrop I should myself have discovered, and to beg all mission in life, and therefore welcomed thefor a modern tragedy in which the leading well inclined persons lo proceed further and then opportunity to have one, to travel on the character was a world-renowned scientist, J. to communicate to the public all the things which road, and not sit in the Inn. H- uspects the Robert Oppenheimer, an important member they might discove in order that the last should latter has gripped the minds many of hisof an international team whose contribution commence where the preceding had left off, and fellow men in all countries. thus by joining together the lives and labors of to the world was the technologic interpreta- many, we should collectively proceed much fur- That is the brief story of the artisan whotion of Einstein's equation. No human being ther than anyone in particular could succeed in became a specialist in labor and some of his can accurately evaluate the impact of this doing. relationships with society. How did the sci- technologic interpretation upon the future of entist fare as the result of the 18th century mankind, but the best available opinion is But the present complicated problems of marriage with wealth? A new type of scien- probably that of Einstein himself. When he our worlda world in which conflicting tist was eventually created He too was en- was asked what weapons would be used in ideologies threaten the very existence ofgulfed in the surge of technicism because his World War III, his answer was that he did what we call Western Civilization, and aeffectiveness in this union with wealth de- not know, but that he did know what would world in which scientific specialists are for- pended upon the degree of his specialization. be used in World War IVsticks and stones. tunate to be able to meet in an atmosphereand hence his interests b7came "gradually Oppenheimer was judged by a jury of his free from government restrictions, military restricted and confined into narrower fields peersall men of note and distinctiona censorship, or the security surveillance ofof occupation." By the late 19th century he chemist, a man of business, and an educator. secret policecall for more than a dedica- found that he could not survive on the broad The majority opinion judged him a loyal 'ion of our intellects and our labors to man-philosophic concepts as Goethe hadcitizen of the United States, but unable to kind. biologist, physicist, chemist, botanist, play- measure up to the requirements of thc securi- In order that we may continac as a free wright. poet, producer, and for 60 years the ty system. With no intention to judge. but society, every person must I now and followchief political adviser to Karl August. Duke with only the hope to explain, it is my belief the basic principles of responsible in-of Weimar. that their judgment was correct but their dividualism that have made our present The new scientist is a specialist in science. premise was wrong. He should have been ichievements possible. The present tech- Physics and chemistry have become a multi- found guilty only of a defection, one which nologic era began sometime in the 18th cen- tude of subspecialties. The scientist's learn- he acquired inadvertently as a result of his tury, when wealth and science were united ing continues; his technical skill becomes scientific provincialism. Oppenheimer paid amid the clamor of men and women whohigh; but his liberal education diminishes. the supreme penalty of dishonor, awful since the Renaissance had regained their will He becomes entrenched so deeply in the in- price to pay, for his subconscious vow of to be free from political and spiritual tricacies of his specialty that the social prob- political celibacy. enslavement. lems of daily life seem unimportant; b.- the Who knows how many brilliant and poten- A new man was created and mr.ss produc- people hold him in high regard, and there-tially productive minds will he stunted for tion became the order of the day. The artisan fore he feels compelled to express opinions f;:ar of similar reprisal becai,se they do not became a specialist in labor and virtually be- on subjects beyond his experience. The force understand the true meaning of this indict- came part of a machine In the process of this of his words upo society is in direct propor- ment? What must be done to prevent another metamorphosis he lost much of his imagination to the name he has made in his special- such catastrophe? Is the advice offered by tion and creativeness. Such a man is restless ized fielda power so great that it is fright- Teller an adequate solution? because he has nc impelling objectives in ening. In some countries he has already paid Referring to the Oppenheimer judgment, life. He fears the future because his talents a heavy price for his high position of special- Teller told William L Laurence of the New are limited; he looks to society for his rizhts, ized learning. Of the many examples. I shall York Times that "scientists as a group should and in so doing, he is in danger of losing hisrecall only a few. stay out of politics except in areas touching obligations. He avoids "travel along the An Associated Press dispatch from Leip- The authorIS 41the University of Nebraska. College of road, and is attracted to the Inn," as Cer-zig, Germany, dated II Nov. 1933, said Medicine, Omaha 81 =Mi3Ii

75 on science." Today his statement makes im- total of 14 clinical pathology societies in 12into the false security of political and pressive news. Has he, too, become a politi- countriesmute testimony to the growth ofscientific provincialism? cal hermit? Should he not have warned his this important specialty. In order to answer these questions it may fellow scientists that such a course is fatal to In the United States clinical pathologybe well to review the educational back- the free lift? Our founding fathers who wrote occupies a position of such magnitude that, ground of the average medical man in the the Constitution of the United States and the although it has not yet attained independentUnited States. A tabulation of the premedical Bill of Rights certainly did not sanction status in all schools of ^ no hospital educational requirements for admission to 78 political hermitage. in the United States ca.. oe accredited by the schools of medicine in this country shows an Scientists seem to have foreotten that as Joint Commission on Accreditation and noalarming degree of concentrated training in Ortega said, "politics is much more of a real- hospital approved for intern or resident train- the sciences. Approximately four times as ity than science, because itis made up of ing without an adequate clinical pathologic many semester hours are required in science unique situations in which man suddenly service. subjects as are required in the humanities. It fin:a3 himself submerged, whether he will or Medicine and its broadest subspecialty, is of more than passing significance, and I no." clincial pathology, are truly the products ofbelieve planned forcsigh:, that only one In a republic the politician s thewill the free minds of many lands, who "by join-school in the United States requires more of the peoplethe majority, but the majority ing together the lives and labors of many,"hours of study in the humanities than in the may accept such things as penicillin and have made this meeting possible and thesciences. That school is Mcharrry Univer- television as commonplace, and yet become world a much better place in which to live. sity, whose student body is composed entire- indifferent to the cause of their existence. It We are indeed fortunate that whateverly of Negroes. is the minority, and not the majority. who may be revealed in the field of medicine will Add to the premedical schooling 4 more challenge truth and create new concepts. be free for the use of all mankind. regardless years of medical education, I year of intern- Freedom in a republic exists only as long as of political affiliations, religious con- ship, and 3 to 4 year, of resident training in a the majority recognizes that the minority victions, or national boundaries. Medicine medical specialty, and 2 years in the mili- must be free to pursue thought. wherever it does not hoard its achievements. No true tary, also in medicine, and you have a super- may lead. physician has ever patented a medical dis- saturated, !cameo young man, 31 to 33 years Is it not incumbent upon every one of the covery. No one has ever denied its use byof age, with almost pure scientific instruc- 750,000 scientists of this country, and those friend or enemy, only armed conflict be-tion throughout 14 c.;the most fobmative in every other nation, to be able and willing tween nations with differing political beliefsyears of his intellectual growth. One saving to speak out clearly on the basic concepts of has ever imposed restraints upon the results factor is that he is intimately exposed to peo- freedom? By virtue of the natural process of of medical investigation. Fven then, the in- ple and their problemsmore closely than the years of rigorous academic selection, dividuals who waged war, who were ene-any other man, wth the possible exception those who finally emerge as true scientists mies only by accider t, ministered to theick of the clergyman admittedly must have superior minds. If they and wounded, whether they were friend or Pathologists have a solemn role in medical will not speak out, who will') foe. education, whether it is for nurs:s, medical Medicine was also an outgrowth of this But what assurance do we have that medi- technologists, medical students, interns, technologic eraa coalition of the physical cine will continue to remain outside the do- residents. or the medical staffIn this role and biological sciences. Again, we look with main of security regulations. secret police. lies the opportunity to broaden the educa- gratitude to Europeto France for the politic:A restraints. and the like? t mal base of medicine, in order to preserve stethoscope and internal medium. immunol- In countries outside the iron curtain. even the right of every physician to continue his ogy and radium. to Getman) for the x-ray , where varying degrees of government con- scientific pursuits unhampered lest we be- medical microbiology and p.,,iologic .mat- trol hover over medical practice. there arecome so engrossed in our 0 Nn special field omy, to Austria for obstetrics. to England for * testi.; ints upon the individual physician that we forget to look after the common general surgery and the antibiotics, just to who seeks truth wherever he may find it. and good. mention a few nations. All of Europe surging gives freely of his labors to mankind. The We must reject the philosophy of self- forwardfree to study, to learn, to think, toonly assurance w;. can have that this privi- content, expressed by Hegel in 1831. but imagine, to have ideas, an i be rewarded. lege to serve will continue is an enlightened which is still heard in our day as. in the words of Bacon. "The ancients citizenry who understands the princilles of Let us content ourselves with what we have individual liberty and creativeness. assigned divine honors to the authors of in- been ancwed to achieve under the pressure of the ventions." Because of the intimate contact with the circumstances s J with the d ht whether We in America developed slowly. making ills of men, physicians have gained an en' amid the lot.d clam ,ur of tit, day. ,here is left any most of our contributions after the beginning able position of respect and confidence room for sympathy, with the mut nles+ 0,11nes., of the science of pure thought of the 20th century. among men. This trust obligates them to be- We take particular pride in having har-come disciples of the phi. ,ophy of in- We can and must meet the chalhine,c of the nessed, through clinical pathology, the many dividual freedom in order that patients do not janiceps of modern liv ingthe scien',e of uncoordinated outgrowths of laboratory become apathetic to the cause of the miracles the daily life as well as the science of pure medicine into a cohesive unit that has be- of modern medicine thought come invaluable to the sick During the last Are physicians capable of accepting this 30 years the number of clinical pathologists responsibility? Or will they become political in this country has increased tenfold. from eunuchs? To what degree has so:mil/anon 200 to 2000. Members of the International forced the physician to abandon a continuing Congress of Clinical Pathology represent a pursuit of a liberal education and led him 76

and benefits in society. In its most sig- nificantformspoliticsculminatesin the determination and expression of social norms and values inhe form of public law, public order, and governmental action. To an indeterminate extent, technological processes in contemporary society have becomethe equivalent of a form of lawthat is, an authoritative or binding expression of social norms and values from which the individual or a group may have no In recent decades the idea of theone limited aspect of a more generalimmediate recourse. What isat issue alienation and estrangement of mansearch for ways of making technologyin the case of the computer and privacy, from society has emerged as one of themore responsive to the felt needs of thesupersonictransportandnoise dominant ideas of contemporary social"he individual and of society. The termlevels, highway development and the thought. While interpretations of theparticipatory technology refers to thecity, theantiballistic missile and na- concept of social alienation vary, Etzi-inclusion of people in the social andtional security, and the car and poilu- oni (1) has expressed the core of thetechnical processes of developing, im- tionisthe authoritative allocation of idea as "the unresponsiveness of theplementing, and regulating a technol-social values and benefits in technologi- world to the actor, which subjects himogy, directly and through agents undercal form. to forces he neither comprehends norrieir control, when the people included The second realization is a correla- guides.... Alienation ...is not onlyassert that their interests will be sub-tive of the first. Technological processes a feeling of resentment and disaffec-stantiallyaffected by the technologyfrequently are the de facto locus of tion but also an expression of the ob-and when they advance a claim to apolitical choice. They are often political jective conditiom which subject a per-legitimate and substantial participatoryprocesses in which issues are posed and son to forces beyond his understandingrole in its development or redevelop-resolved in technical terms. In the ab- and control." ment and implementation. The basicsence of apprnoriMeiy structured po- There is considerable speculative andnotion underlying the concept is thatlitical processes for identifying and de- observational testimony and some em-participation in the public development, batingthe alit,choicesimplicitin pirical evidence (2) that the scope anduse, and regulation of technology is onewhat appear to be technical alternatives, complexiti ,s of science and technologyway in which individuals ana groupstechnical processes become, by default, are contributing to the development ofcanincreasetheir understanding cfthe loolle of pniitica: valuc social alienation in contemporary so-technological processes and develop op-In the context of a concern for theen- ciety. Keniston M for example, sug-portunities to influence such processesvironment, technical questions of waste geststhat tech,'_ey anditseffectsin appropriate cases. Participatory tech- disposal systems involve value choices. have been a factor in the alienation ofnology is not an entirely new socialIn the context of a concern for urban many young people. At the same timephenomenon, but the evidence revieweddevelopment,technicalquestionsof he notes that theattitude of manybelow suggests that its scope and im-highway location and development in young people towardtechnologyis pact may be increasing in contempo-volve value choices. In 0 e context of ambivalent becauserevolt against therary society. a concern for privacy, technical ques- effects of technolo, must inevitably I first analyze several facts of whichtions of data collection and retrieval exploit the technology it opposes. In apeople are becoming increasingly involvevaluechoices.Technological differentvein, De Jouvenel (4) hasaware that suggest why participatory processesoftenembodysignificant testified to the adverse psychological im-technology is emerging as a trend, andvaluequestionsthataredifficultto pact of scientific and technological com-I then analyze different forms of thisidentify and resolve in public forums plexities on sustaining general confi-trend. Finally, I evaluate some of itsbecause the processesare technically dence in one's judgment. "Because sci-implications. complex and occur inadministrative ence saps such individual confidence, organizations to which citizens donot we have a problem, which I feel we can have easy access. Third, thereis the realization that meet but which it would be imprudent Underlying Realizations to deny." In a more general observa- the public order of inoustrial society is not particularly well structured for tion Mesthene (5) recently has referred One primary reason for the emer- to "the antitechnology identifying,publicizi-fg, and resolving spiritthatis gence of participato-y technology is the abroad in the land." inpublicforumspoliticalquestions realization that technology often em-implicit in technological processes. The bodiesand ex ,ressespoliticalvalue public order ofindustrialsocietyis choices that,in their operations and Participatory Technology founded on, and perpetuates, values, effects, are binding on individuals andcompromises, and perceptions that are groups, whether such choices have been In this article I analyze the incipient being rendel...d obsolete by transforma- made in political forums or elsewhere.tion of the social and political condi- emergence of part lipatory technologyIn the language of contemporary po- as a countervailing force to technologi- liticalscience,by"politicalvalue cal alienation in contemporary society.choices" I mean choices that result in The author Isan attorney and professor of public administration and political science at The I interpret participatory technologyas the authoritative allocation of values Ohio State University, Columbus. 83 77 tions from which they were derived.or be well equipped, to learn of and tonclogies probably aie accepted because The public order of industrial societyinfluence such decisions. This is oneof the specific results they produce for preeminently expresses perceptions ofaspect of the more general phenomenonthe individual, such as the mobility that, material need and the values of eco-of the devolution of authority fromunder some conditions, is made possible nomic growthperceptions and valuespublic representatives and administra-by the automobile. But there seems to rooted in the experienceF materialtors to "private" groups and individualsbe an additional social, psychological, want and economic insect, of pastin contemporary society. 4 and economic element at workwhat generations. Because of tn.:develon- Fourth, there is the realization that,Ellul calls "technological anaesthesia" ment of powerful technologies of pro-in contemporary society, politicalac-that generates acceptance of technolog- duction, and because of other factors,tion directed toward the achievement ofical innovation irrespective of the par- these perceptions mid values, as em-political value objectives, such as theticular effe Is that may result. Many bedded and expressed in public institu-production of 2.6 million housing unitspeople seem willing to use cars in irban tions and processes, do not encompassa year, often depends on the ability toareas even though such use may con- t/ total area of con: --n, which is ex-translatethedesiredobjectiveintotribute little to mobility and may ad- ng to include the quality of thetechnicaltasks. Marcuse (6) observesverselyaffecttheenvironmentand environment, race, urban development,that"thehistoricalachievementofhealth. It seems paradoxical but true population growth, educational oppor-science and technology has renderedthat, while some changes in institutions tunity, the Direction of technology, andpossible the translation of values intoand behavior are strongly resisted, other other matters.Established means oftechnical tasksthe materialization ofchanges often are readily accepted when structuring and expressing political con-values, Consequently, what is at stakea technological element in the situation cern themselves often border on ob-is the redefinition of values in techni-is the agent of change. solescence,becausetheyareoftencal terms, as elements in the technolog- Participatorytechnology is one based on geographical and functionalical process, The new ends, as technicallimited way of raising questions about jurisdicti ns that are unrelated to theends, would then operate in the projectthespecifictechnologicalformsin issues on which the public must takeand intheconstruction of the ma-terms of which social change is brought action. If these jurisdictions were other-chinery, and not only in its utilizationabout.Itisdirected toward the de- wise definedfor example, were de-[emphasis in the original]." velopment of processes and forums that fined to include an entire metropolitan To a considerable extent, the achieve-areconsistentwiththeexpectations area they might provide the structurement of more effectiveprocesses ofand values of the participatory individ- for more effective representation of di-education, housing, delivery of healthuals, who may resort to them in the verse views and might facilitate publiccare, postal service, public safety, andabsence ofother means of making action through bargaining and trade-urban development depens:, on the po-theirviews known.Inparticipatory offs. liticalandtechnologicalcapacityoftechn logy, however, as in other parti- Today,inthefaceof populationcontemporary society to agree on, andcipatory processes, the opportunity to growth and technological complexity,to translate, value objectives into tt..h-be heard is not synonornous with the legislativebodies,exceptinunusualno!ogicalacts.Traditionallegislative right to be obeyed. cases such as 'hat of the antiballisticdeclarations of intent are not sufficient. I here analyze three kinds of activi- missile, delegate toadministrativeThe establishment of a right to a decentties to illustrate some of the empirical agencies the responsibility for regulat-home in a suitableenvironmentre- referents of the concept of participa- ing. developing, and controlling tech-quires more than a legislative act de-tory technology. nology. The general objectives of theseclaring that such a right exists. It also administrative agencies involve mixeddepends on the development of techni- questions of value and technique, andcal capability to translate the right intoLitigation the agencies resolve such questions inreality. terms of their bearing on realization This does not mean that, in the form- The firstisthe citizen lawsuit, di- ofthe generalob'ectives.Often thes ration of political objectives. a tech-rect:A toward the control and guidance general objectives further the interestsnological,problem-oriented modeofof technology. As Sax (9)indicates, of individuals and groups allied with athought must replace humanistic, intui-"The citizen-initiated lawsuitis . . . particular agency. To the Departmenttive, moral, and other modes of thought.principally an effort to open the de- of Defense the question of the desir-It means that other modes of thoughtcision-making process to a wider con - ability of developing, maintaining, andoften depend for realization in public .itueicy and to force decision-making transportingchemicalandbiologicallife and action on their expression ininto a more open and responsive forum. agents is primarily a matter of nationaltechnical form, and that the develop-,..[The] ^ourts are sought out as an defense policy.Itis not primarily ament and control of that form is itselfinstrumentalitywherebycomplaining questionof the humaneness of sucha political value-oriented act. citizens can obtain access to a more agents, or of their ultimate effects on Fifth, there is the realization that theappropriate forumfordecision-mak- the environment, or of their value orstatusenjf;yedby technologyas aning." threat to man in contexts other thanagent for both bringing about and legiti- The courts, of course, rely heavily on that of national defense. matizing social change contributes toadversary proceedings, various forms By default,theresponsibilityforthe growth of participatory technology.of which have been suggested (10) as scrutinizing mixed questions of tech-There is a tendency, stressed by Ellulappropriate for handling scientific and nology and value from the perspective(7), Rickover (8), and others, for con-technological issues involving the public of societal well-being often passes totemporary man to accept change ininterest. Not only can litigation restrict special-interest groups and to indb gals technological form as inevitable andthe use of technology, it can also lead who may or may not be in a position,irresistible. In some cases, new tech-to the modification and redevelopment R4 78

c.1 existing technology and stimulate theas proposed by Consolidated Edison, matically occur inthe constitutional, development of new technology to satis-would have required the placement ofstatutory, and common law doctrines fy social values expressed in the formoverhead transmission lines on towersthat regulate rights and duties pertain- of legal norms, such as a right to100 to 150 feet (30 to 45 meters) high.ing tothe development and use of privacy The towers would have required a path science and technology. The work of The legal response to cases involvingsome 125feetwide through West-analysts in the areas of law, science, technology has taken two forms. Thechesterand Putnamcountiesfrom and technologyanalysts such as Pat- first is an extension of those aspects ofCoinwall to the Consolidated Edison's terson (15), Frampton (16), Cowan (17), the legal doctrine of standing whichfacilities in New York Citya distanceMiller (18), Cavers (19), Mayo and determine who has a right to be heahlof 25,iles (40 kilometers). The peti-Jones (20), Korn (21), Green(22), in court on particular issues involvingtioners were conservation and otherFerry (23), Wheeler (24), and others activities undertaken or regulated bygroups and municipalities who claimed(25)indicates thedifficultiesof de- public agencies. The second is a searchthat the project, as designed by Con-veloping systems of conceptual cor by legal sc holars, practicing lawyers,solidated Edison and as approved by respondence between scientific and tech- and i..41ges for systems of conceptualthe Federal Power Commission, would nological developments and legal 'xn- correspondence in the terms of whichdestroy the character of the land andcepts and doctrines.Seicntic,tech- scientificandtechnologicaldevelop- the beauty of the area. nological,andlegalsystemsoften ments and activities can be conceptual- TheFederalPowerCommission further different values and serve differ- ized and evaluated as changes in socialargued, among other things, that theent purposes, and the rec.nciliation of values and norms that may warrantapetitioners did not have standingtoConflicts in these values and purposes legal response. The appropriate role ofobtain judicial review of the legality ofis only in part a juridical task. The law in the regulation of genetic experi-the license because they "make no claim "privateattorneygeneral"concept, mentation is an example. of any personal economic injuryre- however, does invite more active judi- An extensionof thedoctrine ofsulting from the Commission's action."cial scrutiny of such conflicts and may standing has occurred in several recent The Court of Appeals held that thecontributetosubstantivechangesin cases involving technology, although thepetitioners were entitled to raise the doctrine in the future (26) in areas extension is not limited to such cases.issue of the legality of the license andsuch as the computer and privacy; air In the words of the United States Su-t'elicensine proeprItire even though andwater and pollution, noise preme Court (11), "The question ofthey might not have a personaleco-control; n.edical, genetic, and psycho- standing is related only to whether thenomic interestinthe question. The logicalexperimentation; drugtesting dispute sought to be adjudicated willcourt reasoned that a citizen has anand use; nuclear energy and radiation; be presented in an adversary contextinterest in actions that affect the nature food purity and pesticides; and thecon- and in a form historically viewed asof the environment, and that this intei-trol and handling ui uheroicai nd bio- capable ofjudicialresolution." Theestisarguablywithi'the zone oflogical weapons. basic question is "whether the interestinterests that are or should be protected While the legal form of citizenpar- sought to be protected by the com-by law. On the merits of thecase, theticipation in the control and develop- plainant is arguably within the zone ofcourtheldthattheFederal Powerment of technology has severe limita- interests to be protected or regulatedCommission was required to give fulltions because it tends to be (i) itactive by the statute or constitutionalguaran-consideration to alternative plans forrat' er than anticipatory, (ii) controlled tee in question" (12). The question ofthe generation of peak-load electricity, I);re trictiverules of evidence, and standing is a question not of whethera including a plan proposed byone of(iii) subject to dilatory tactics,litiga- party s could win or lose but of whether tilepetitioners for the use ofgas tur-tion has proven, over time,to 'yea he should be heard. Lines. significant element in the efforts of in- The current extension of the doc- The Scenic Hudson case is significantdividuals and groups to influence the trine is sometimes called the "privatebecause it set a precedent for theen- processes and institutionsthat affect attorney general" concept. Undel thislargement of the opportunity of citizens, them. concept a private citizen is allowed toacting as citizens and notas private present a case as an advocate of theparties, to secure judicial review of the public interest. A leading case is Scenicactionsofpublicagencies,andofTechnology Assessment HudsonPreservationConference v. actions of the interests these agencies Federal Power Commission (13),de- often regulate, in cases iro,olving tech- A second form of participatory tech- cided by the Second Circuit of thenology as well as other matters. Thenology comes within the scope of exist- United Si-' s Court of Appeals on 25decision supports the proposition that,ing and proposed processes of "tech- December 1965. On 9 March 1965 thein certain ...ases, citizens will berecog- nology assessment." While the concept Federal Power Commission granteda nized in court as cc::,ocaes ofa publicof technology assessment can be inter- license to Consolidated Edison Com-interest. on the grounds that, as mem-preted to include the kinds of legal pany to construct a pumped storagebers of the public, they have been oraction I have discussed (27). the term hydroelectric project on the west sidemay be injuredt theactions com-usually Is used to refer to activities thlt of the Hudson River at Storm Kingplained of. They need not clail., thatare somewhat more anticipatory in na- Mountain in Cornwall, flew York. Athey have been or will be injured eco-ture and broader in scope. pumped storage plant generates electricnomically or otherwise as privateper- To some extent "te( nnology assess- energyforuseduringpeakload sons (14). ment" is a new Izi',e1 for an old activity periods by means of hydroelectric units The development of the "private at-the attempt to comprehend, and to driven by water from a headwater pooltorney general" concept does not meanmake informed decisic.is about, the im- or reservoir. The Storm King Project,thatsubstantivechangeswillauto-plications of technological development. 5 79 The movement to formalize and im-mission's attention to various incidentsspokesmen for diverse needs have ac- prove this activity in a public contextand problems.Coatesobservesthatcess to the appropriate decision-mak- was initiated in ;967 by Senator Ed-citizens participated inthisparticularing processes. rriltud Muskie (28) in the Senate andassessment because the experience of In the judgment of the panel, exten- by Representative Emilio Q. Daddariomembers of thepublic with varioussive citizen participation and representa- (29) in the House of Representatives.products was itself part of the subjecttion in the assessment process is nec- This movement has successfully directedmatter of the inquiry. There was noessary i-oth for practical reasons and attention to some limitations in the waydirect citizen participation in the otherfor reasons of democratic theory. There technologicalquestionsarecurrentlyassessments examined by Coates, butare two practical reasons. First, citizen considered in the American system ofthe subject mater of several of the as-participation in the early stages of the politics and government. sessment presses _uggests that somedevelopment of a technology may help "Technology assessment" was definedform of citizer. contribution, either di-to avoid belated citizen opposition to a in the bill introduced by Daddario inrector throughrepresentativeinter-technological development after heavy the House ofRepresentatives on 7mediaries, would have been appropri-costs have been incurred. Second, "ob- March 1967 as a "method for identify-ate. This is true, for example, of thejective eva'uation" is impossible unless ing, assessing, publicizing, and dealingassessments of environmental noise, andthe diverse views of interested parties with the implications and effects of ap-of future public transportation systemshave been considered. On the level of pliedresearch and technology." Theof advanced type. political theory, the panel suggests that, bill asserted that there is a need for im- In his written testirmay submitted toin a democratic framework, itis nec- proved methods of "identifying the po-the Daddario subcommittee, Mayo (37)essary to consider the views of those tentials of applied research and tech-stresses the impo' tance, in assessmentwho will be affected by a particular nology and promoting ways and meansprocesses,ofdirectparticipationorcourse of action. to accomplish their transfer into practi-representation of persons affected by a The National Academy of Sciences cal use, and identifying the undesirabletechnology. He emphasizes the fact thatpanel explicitly acknowledges that tech- by-products and sideeffects of suchtechnology assessment has a dimensionnologyassessmentinsomeofits applied research and technology in ad-beyond the identification and analysisaspects is a political process because it vance of their crystallization, and in-of the impacts of technology. This isinvolves questions of value (72, p R1). forming the public of their potentialthe dimension of evaluation of the so-"We can hope to raise the level of po- danger in order that appropriate stepscialdesirabilityorundesirabilityoflitical discourse; we must not seek to may be taken to eliminate or minimizesuch impacts. Since different segmentseliminate it." The panel concludes (32, them." of the public may view the impacts .npp. 84 and 87) that there is a "need to The s;rengths and weaknesses of vari-various ways.:isbenefit-jai nr tier;2rrnmnanv any flew accocemant me,h ous form; of existing and proposedm:ntal,comprehensiveevaluationisanism with surrogate representatives or technology assessment areextensivelydifficult without direct inputs from suchombudsmen to speak on behalf of in- analyzed in the hearings conducted bysegments. While special-intei-est groupsterests too weak or diffuse to gent..-ate the Muskie (30) and Daddario (31) sub-can be relied on to express their views,effective spokesmen of their own.... committees; in the studies undertakenthey cannot safety be regarded as rep-Means must also be devised for alert- for the Daddario subcommittee by theresentative of thL views o: all majoring suitable representatives of interested National Academy of Sciences (32). the segments of the that. may be con-groups to the fact that a decision po- National Academy of Engineering (33),cerned. tentially affecting them is about to be and the Science Policy Research Di- Of the various hearings and reportsmade.... Whateter structure is chosen, visionoftheLegislativeReferencegenerated by the Daddario su'ommit-it .ould prot ide well-defined channels Service (34); and in related analyses,tee, the report of the technology assesi-thro.igh which citizens' groups, private such as those made by the Program of,nent panel of the National Academy ofassociations,or surrogaterepresenta- Policy Studiesin Science and Tech-Sciences places the greatest emphasisontives can make their views ,1-flown.... nology of George Washington Univer-citizen participation and representation.It is particularly important to couple sity (35). This panel asserts that legislativeau-improvedassessmentwithimproved In these hearings and reports, citizenthorization and appropriationprocessesmethod,ofrepretentingweakand participation in technology assessmentare inadequateastechnology assess-poorly organizedaerest groups" [emis both described and advocated. Thement processes because legislative pro-phasis in the original]. analysis by Coates (36) of 15 case his-cesses frequently consider only the con- As the National Academy of Sciences tories of technology assessments identi-tending views of wJl- organized inter-report states, and as Folk (38) stresses, fies one case that involved direct citizenest groups and often do .sot direct at-to be effective technology assessment participationthe examination of con-tentiontolong-rangeconsequences.must function as part of the political sumer products undertaken by the Na-The panel further argues that, whileprocess. What is at issueis the distri- tional Commission on Product Safety,technology assessmentoccurs in indus-bution and exercise of a fonn of de- which was established by Congress ontry and in government agencies, withcision-making power over technology. 20 November 1967. In 1968 and 1969,few exceptions the basic questionscon-Nev.technology assessment processes the commission investigated the safetysidered concern the probable economicand structures probably would open de- of such products as toys and children'sand institutional effects of a technologycision-making processes towider con- furniture,architecturalglass,poweron those who are decide g whether tos'Attiency than now exists, and might mowers, power tools, glass bottles, andexploit it. Existing processes fail to givechange the distribution of pc,wer over aerosol cans. Citizenstestifiedbeforeadequate weight to "the full spectrumsome decisionsinvolvingtechnology. the commission and directed the com-of human needs" because not enoughAt the very least, new processest.-.nd 6 80

structures might make itdifficultforin processes of citizen participation inagreed that the residents of the area those accustomed to making technologi- urban development. In other ways theshould be granted funds to lure pro- caldecisions to do so withoutthe case is distinctive because the primaryfessionals to participate with and for knowledge of many other concerned purpose of the Fort Lincoln pro;ect wasthem in the technical planning and de- people. It is doubtful that new assess- to demonstrate ofa national basis thevelopment processes. At one point the ment processes would oe regarded aspotentials of technological and admin-Department of Housing and Urban De- neutral either by those who now dom- istrative innovation for urban develop-velopment offered to grant money for inate technological decision-making ment. this purpose to the council that repre- processes or by those who might dis- On 30 August 1967, President John-sentedthecitizens,butforvarious agree withtheresults. Even thoughson publicly requested several membersreasons the council rejected the offer. everyeffort were madetoanalyze of his administration and of the gov- The Nixon Administration suspended questions of value as dispassionately asernment of the Districtof Columbiade,clopment of Fort Lincoln in Sep- possible, or to exclude such questions to beginat once to develop a newtember 1969, pending further study. entirely from assessment processes, dis- comtr.:;;,:ty on the site of Fort Lincoln,One analyst (48) has argued that the satisfied parties almost certainly would which consists of 345 acres of nearlyproject was suspended because neither attack theresults and seek tooffset vacant land in the northeast section offederal nor local officials believed that them by other forms of political action. Washington, D.C. The Presidentex-the development plan was either tech- Persuasion, bargai and trade-offsplained the purpose of the project asnologically or politically feasible. Other in values are at the heart of politicalthe development of a community thatanalysts (49) have suggested thatthe processes. Whether effective assessment would demonstrate the potentials of ad-protect was suspended because mem- can or should attempt to avoid theseministrative and technological innova-bers of the Nixon Ae,ninistration re- processes is questionable. Because tech-tion in urban development. The Fortgarded it as a personal undertaking of nology assessment is to some extent aLincoln project was conceptualized asPresident Johnson's and as an example political process, the participation orthe leading project in a national plo-of the overly ambitious social engineer- representation of citizens may be notgram to develop "new towns intown"ina activities ofthe Great Society." only desirable from the perspective of onfederally owned landinvarious The struggle over citizenparticipa- democratic theory but also necessary in cities throughout the country. tion diminished support for he Project political practice. Even such participa- On 25 January1968, Edward J.in the neighborhood and among its po- tion may not assure the effectivenessLogue, who hadachievednationaltential supporters in other areas of the of the process in a larger political con-recognition as an urban developmentcity. No strong politicalconstituency text. administrator in New Haven and Bos-favored the project. The Nixon Admin- ton. was ret:t principal istration could ;Ind did cncrend it with ment consultan for Fort Linc'jln. Inout antagonizing any strong or vocal Ad Hoe Activity the following 10 months. Logue and hisinterest group. assoCates developed an ambitious and Fort Lincoln is one example of the A third form of participatory tech- innovative plan (45) that was based on,extent to which technical planning and nology encompasses avariety of adamong other things, a thorough analy-development processes can become the ho: activities of individuals and groups sis(46) of the potentials for techno-locus of politicalconflict when these beyond the scope of structuredpro- logical innovation in the developmentprocesses arc perceived as the de facto cesses of litigation and asst. sment. This of Fort Lincoln and on a proposal (47)locus of political choice. Itis also an form includes activist intellectualism of for, a innovative educational systemexample of some of the difficulties that the sort undertaken by Carson (39).for the new community. can arise in the course of efforts to Nader (40), and Commoner (41); quasi- Fort Lincoln was a federal urban re-reconcile the dictates of administrative official action of the kind undertakennewal poject. Some form of citizenand technological reasoning with the by Congressman R. D. McCarthy con-particip ition in urban renewal projectsdictates of the political thinking of par- cerning chemical and biological war- isrequaed by law. Logue and the gov-ticipating individuals in particular situ- fare (42); political and informationalernment officials involved in the Fortations. activitie, -1 of the sort undertaken by Lincoln project had had extensiveex- such go ps as the Citizens' Leagueperience with citizenparticipationin Against the Sonic Boom, the Scientists'other urban development projects,in-Problems InstituteforPublic Information, thecluding a model cities project in Wash- Sierra Club, Friends of the Earth. and ington, D.C. In developing the plans Like many other participatory pro- Zero Population Growth: and sporad;c for Fort Lincoln, they made extensive cesses.participatory technology raises activities of loose coalitions of individ-efforts to fashion a participatory struc,que,'ions about the adequacy of the uals and groups energized by particularture that would be acceptable to thetheory and practice of representative situations and issues. citizensofthenortheastsectionofgov,.nment. Rather than attempt to survey such Washington. Potthe most part they According to traditional theories of dd hoc activities, Ihere brieflyde- tailed.Politicalactivistsinthearea American public life, citizens should ex- scribe and analyze an example of abor- perceived tf technical planning pro pre,s their demands for public action tive participation that occurred in 1967cess as the locus ofpoliticaloppor-to tacit- political and governmental rep- and 1968 in le initial efforts to de-tunity and choice concerning such que- resentatives. Conflicting demands velop a new town on the site of Fort tionsasthenumber of low-income should be reconciled by persons elected Lincoln in Washington, D.C. (44). In fatrulies to be housed on the site. Al-or appointed to policy- making positions some ways the Fort Lincoln :xamplethoughtheseactivistsdisagreed over in which they are publicly accountable is typical of nroblems that often arisewho could speak for the citizens, they fortheir actions. Administrative and R7 81 technical processes are not, in theory,to another or merely enlarge the coreand to present these conceptions to de- the appropl..te locus for the exercisegroup that exercises control. Finally, itcision-making bodies. of political influence and the reconcilia-can lead tothe dominance of tech- tion of political conflicts, because thesenological know-nothing over the judg- processes are not usually structured asments of qualified individuals who areSummary open political forums, and because mostlegally responsible for, are dedicated to, administrators and technical people areand understand processes of public ac- The hunger to participate that exists not directly accountable to electorates.tion. todayin varioussegmentsofthe This theory of government is a pre- At the same time, asSpiegel andAmerican blic is in part a response sci iptive rather than a descriptive oneMittenthal (52) obsem-:, "Citizen par-to what soi_.e people perceive as an un- Itdoes not correspond well with theticipation can occur in partnerships withresponsiveness of institutions and pro- realitiesof theexerciseofpoliticala governmental unit as well as againstcesses to the felt needs of the individ- power in and through administrativeit.Its nature can be cooperative andual and of society. It isalso, in part, and technical activities. Among otherintegrative or conflicting and opposi-an expression of a desire for a redistii- things, increases in population, the ex-tional. . .." Participatory technology,hution of power in American public pansion of the public sector, and theifappropriately structured, can con-life. increaseintechnologicalcomplexity tributetodecision-makingprocesses Technology is one of the major de- have changed the number anti, to somethat take into account alternative pointstermi:iants of the nature of public ac extent,thenatureof demands andof view, and can help an agency per-well as privatelifeincontemporary possibilities for governmental action inform its functions in a more effectivesociety. Participatory technology is an recent decades. Whil( legislative bodiesand open manner.It can provideaattempt on the part of diverse individ- and individual elected officials continuemeans by which the individual whouals and groups to influence technologi- to respond to some of these demands,feels powerless inthe face of tech-cal processes through participationin many other demands are considerednological complexity can 'Ind a forumexisting or new publicprocesses by andresolvedinadministrativepro-for the expression of his views. which technology is or can be devel- cesses of limited visibility. The very act The basicquestionsarethese:Inoped,controlled,andimplemented. oftranslatingmostlegislationintowhat casesiscitizen participationinLike other processes of direct citizen vizi-irk.IJI u.cssca usuallyilivuivcsall technological procc:scs .varrantcd. aridparticipation govel lllll coal decision exercise ofpoliticalchoice.Further-accordingtowhatrationale?Howmaking, it raises many questions about more, agenciesofteninvite demandsshould participation be structured andthe adequacy of existing theories and upon themselves as a way of expandingconducted? How much weight shouldpractices of representative government. the scope of their support and powers.participation be given in decision-mak-These questions cannot be answered on 1 he politicalization of administrationing processes? an a priori basis. Members of the edu- inthis century, especially in response To provide a priori answers to thesecational, scientific, technical, and gov- to the activities of interest groups, is questions is impossible because of theernmental communities should analyze widely recognized phenomenon (50). variety of situations to which they ap-these questions in an effort to develop Participatorytechnologyisanat-ply For this reason itis recommendedanswers that are appropriate to the par- tempt to influence public agencies di-thatpublicagencies,scientificandticular situationsfor which they are rectly, and, through them, the quasi-technicalassociations, and individualresponsible and with which they are pub'ic and private interests they oftenmembers of the scientific, technological,concerned. influence and regulate. Like other par-andpoliticalcommunitiesundertake ticipatory processes, participatory tech-analyses of these questions in the vari- References and Notes nology in some of its forms circumventsous situations for which they have re- 1. A. Et7ioni, The Active Society (Free T iess, sponsibilityortowhichtheyhave New York. 1968). pp. 617-622, traditional processes of expressing de- 2. The best review is E. Chaszer. Science and mands through elected representativesaccess. No single activity by a particu- Technology in the Theories of Socia' mid Po- and of relying on representativestolar organization such as the National litical Alienation (George Washingt"n Univ Washington. D.C..1969).See also V. C take appropriate action. Academy ofScir es can meetthe Ferloss, Technological Man: The Myth and the Reality (Braziller. New York. 1959). and The hazards of participatory technol-need. The analysis must be as broad- H. M Sapolsky, Science 162. 427 (1968). ogy are many. On the one hand it canbased as the activities to which these 3. K.Keniston.The iincommitted:Alienated questions apply. Youth in Amer:i Society (Harcourt. Brace be used by administrative and technical & World. Ncw rk.1' 5g1: Young Ra-iicals people in a manipulative way to gener- At the same time, the men responsi- (Harcou. , Bract & World, New York. 1958). See also T. Ros7ak, The Making of a Conn- ate the illusion of citizen support of a'le for policy making infoundations ter Culture (Doubleday. New York. 1969) particular course of action. On the othershould consider the establishment of an 4. Bde Jouvenel, in Science and Society. E Vavoulis and A. Colver. Eds. (Holden-Day. hand it can degenerate into forums forexperimental center for responsive tech- San Francisco.1966).p. 85. theexerciseofobstructionist,veto-nology. Such a center would analyze, 5. EMesthene, Technology Assessment (hearings beforetheSubcommittc onScience, power techniques and paralyze publicon a continuing basis, the question of Research,andDevelopmentofthe House action. It can generate an overload ofthe ways in which public participation Committee on Science and Astronautics. 91st Congress. 1stSessi,n)(GovernmentPrint- demands that agencils are not equippedin technological decisions involvinga ing Me. Washingti.n, D.C.. 19591. p. 746. 6. H. Marcuse, One Dimensional Man (Beacon, to handle. It can be used as an instru-public interest can be structured, and "ls6sn. 1954). p. 232. ment by an aggressive minority to cap-would support such participation in ap- 7. J. Elul, The Technological Society (Knopf. New York, 1964). ture decision-making processes and toP-..priate cases. The center might also 8. H.Rickover, Amer. Behar.Scientis,8. 3 impose minority views on a larger com.support the education of proponents of (1965). 9 1 Sax. AnnAmer. Acad. Polit.Soc.Set. munity. It can simply shift the loci.;technology, who would be qualified to 389. 72 (1970). for theexerciseof "the tyranny ofrecognize alternative conceptions of the 10. J. Conant. Science and Common Sense (Yale Univ. Press, Ncw Haven, 1951)1J. Killian. small decisions" (51) from one grouppublic interest in technological matters in Science as a Cultural Force. H. Woolf, R8 82

Ed. (Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1964): gas company from ending pipelines across 39. R. Carson, Silent Spring (Houghton Mifflin, A. Kantrowitz, Science 156, 763 (1967); H. a wooded tract. Several of these and similar Boston, 1962). Wheeler. Center Mag. 2, 59 (1969); H. Green, suits are discussed in J. W. Moorman, "Out- 40. R. Nader, Unsafe at Any Speed (Grossman, inTechnology Assessment; The Proceedings line for the Practicing Environmental Lawyer" New York, 1965). of a Seminar Series, R. C. Kasper, Ed. (Center for the Study of Responsive Law, 41. B. Commoner, Science and Survival (Viking, (George Washington Univ.. Washington. Washington, D.C., 1969); L. J. Carter, Sei New York. 1966). D.C.,1969). Seealso H. W. Jones. Ed., once 166,1487 (1969); ibid ,p.1601. 42. See R. D. McCarthy. TheUltimateFolly Law and the Social Role of Science (Rocke- 27. See,for example, B. M. Portnoy,Cornell (Vintage, New York, 1969). fellerUniv.Press.New York,1966);L. Law Rev. 55, 861 (1970). 43. See G. DeBell. Ed., The Environmental Hand- Mayo, ScientificMethod,AdversarialSys- 28. "Creation of a Select Committee on Tech. book (Ballantine, New York,1970);J.G. ter,andTechnology Assessment(George n "logy and the Human Environment," Senate Mitchell and C. L. Stallings, Eds., Ecotactics Washington Univ., Washington, D.C., 1970). Resolution68,90thCongress.IstSession, (Pocket Books, Simon & Schuster. New York, 11. Flast v. Cohen, United States Supreme Court 25 January 1967. 1970); R. Rienow and L. T. Rienow, Moment Rep, No. 392 (1968), p. 83. 29 "Technology Assessment Board," House of in'he Sun( Ballantine, New York.1967); 12. Association of Data Processing Service Or- Representatives Bill 6698, 90th Congress. 1st W. A. Shurcliff. SST and Sonic Boom Hand- ganizationsv.Camp.UnitedStates Law Session, 7 March 1967. See also "Technology book (Ballantine, New York, 1970). Week 38, 4194 (1970). Assessment" (statement of Emilio Q. Dad- 44. The account given here is derived from a 13. Fe,eral Reporter No. 354. U.S. Court of Ap- dario, chairman, Subcommittee onScience, longer study: J. D. Carroll and J. Zuccotti, peals, Second Circuit (1965). p. 608; certiorari Research,and Development oftheHouse "The Siege of Fort Lincoln, circa1969: A denied. United States Supreme Court Rep. Committee on Science and Astronautics. 91th Study in Nonparticipatory Technology." paper No. 384 (1966), p. 941. Congress,1st Session) (Government Printing presented at the Eastern Regi-nal Conference -14. Inseveralrecent cases the Scenic Hudson Office. Washington, D C.,1968). on Science, Technology, and Public Programs, doctrine has been applied to matters such as 30. Establish a Select Committee on Technology Boston,1970.Seealso M Derthick, New highway location, the displacement of people and tie Human Env:ronment (hearings before Towns In -Town (Urban In. itute. Washing- by urban renewal projects, the protection of the Subcommittee on Intergovernmental Rela- ton. D.C.,1970), and "Fort Lincoln," The navigable waters, and the protection of lum- tions of the Senate Committee on Govern- Public Interest, No. 20 (1970), p. 3. ber preserves. See Cornell Law Rev. 55, 761 ment Operations, 90th Congress, 1st Session) 45. Fort Lincoln New Town Final Planning Re- (970). The proposed EnvironmentProtec- (GovernmentPrinting Office,Washington, port(Districtof ColumbiaRedevelopment tion Act of 1970, introduced in the U.S. Sen- D C., 1967). Land Agency, National Capital Planning Com- ateinearly1970by SenatorsHart and 31. Technology Assessment Seminar (proceedings mission, and Government of the District of McGovern, wol.'d clarify and extend the right before the Subcommittee on Scierce, Research, Columbia, Washington, D.C.,1969). of private citizens to bring antipollution suits and Development of the House Committee on 46. D. A. Crane, A. H. Keyes, F. D. Lethbridge, against government agencies,industries, and Science and Astronautics, 90th Congress, 1st D. H. Condon, Technologies Study: The Ap- private citizens. Session) (Government Printing Office, Wash- Ocation of Technological Innovation in the 15. Patterson. Law in a Scientific Age (Colum- ington, D.C.,1967); Technology Assessment Development of A New Community (District oia Univ. Press, New York, 1963). (hearings beforethe Subcommittee on Sci- of Columbia Redevelopment Land Agency, National Capital Planning Commission, and 16. G. Frampton, Mich. Lau Rev. 63. 1423 (1963). ence.Research,and Dc elopmentofthe 17. T. Cowan, George Washington Law Rev. 33, House Committee on Science and Astronau- Government of theDistrictof Columbia, 3 (1964). tics. 91st Congress, 1st Session) (Government Washington, D.0 ,1968). 18. A. Miller, Ibid., p. a. Printing Office. Washington, D.C.. 1969). 47. M. Fantail and M. A. Young, "A Design for 19. D. Covers. Mich. Law Rev. 63, 1325 (1965). 32. National Academy of Sciences, Technology: a New and Relevant System of Education for 20 1Mavn 2nd :rwisitsgsuts iiticrsse3 of Assessment ana Cnoice (Govern- Fort 5 is-slit Nen. T....._" fn= Law Rev. 33. 318 ;1964). ment Printing Office, Washington, D C.. 1969). 48. M. Derthick, New Towns In-Town (Urban 21. H. Kom, Law and theDetermination of 33. National Academy of Engineering, A Study Institute, Washington, D.C. 1970). Facts Involving Science and Technology (Co- of Technology Assessment (Government Print- 49. J D. Carroll and J. Zuccotti, "The Siege of lumbia Univ. Law School, New York, 1965). ing Office, Washington. D C., 1969). Fort Lincoln, circa 1969: A Study in Non- participatory Technology," paper presented at 22. H.Green,Bull.Atom.Scientists23,12 34. Science Policy Research Division. Legislative (1967). Reference Service. Technical Information for the Eastem Regional Conference on Science, Technology, and Public Programs,Boston, 23. W. Ferry, Saturday Rev. 51. 50 (1968). Cons, ,ss (fInv...rnmert Printing flffige, Wiish- 24. H. W11 Center Mag. 2, 59 (Mar. 1969). ington, D.C.. 1969). See also National Acad- 1970. 25. See Va:..k Law Rev. 17, 1 (1963); Report emy of Public Administration. A Technology 50. See T. Lowi, The End of Liberalism (Norton, of a Confe,ence on Law and Science (David Assessment System for the Executive Branch New York,1969);see alsoJ.C. Charles- Davies MemorialInstirute,London,1964); (Government PrMtingOffice,Washington, worth, Ed ,Theory and Practice of Public Administration (American Academy of Poli- George Washington Law Rev. 33, 1 (1954); D.0 ,1970). Mich. Law Rev. 63. 1325 (1965); Case West- 35. These analyses are descrijed .n Report: 1967- tical and Social Science, Philadelphia1968). 19, ern Reserve Law Rev. 19, 1 (1967); George 1968 and Report: 1968-1969 (George Wash- 51. A E Kahn, Kyklos-Int, Re Soc. Washington Law Rev. 36, 1033 (1968), Univ. ington Univ.. Washington, D.C., 1970). 23 (1966). ofCalifornia Los Angeles Law Rev.15, 36. V, Coates, "Examples of Technology Assess- 52. H. Spiegel and S. Mittenthal, in Citizen i ar- 267 (1968); Cornell Law Rev. 55, 663 (1970). ments for ti e Federal Government," (George umpation in Urban Development, H Spiegel, 26. Suitsinitiatedin recent years toaffect the Washington Univ., Washington, D.C.. 1970). Ed (National Training Laboratories Institute control of technology through new applica- 37. LMa o,Technology Assessment (hearings for Applied Behavioral Science, Washington. tionsof,orsubstantivechangesin,legal before the Subcommittee on Science, Research. D C 1968), vol.1, pp.12,13 See also P doctrines include actions to ban the use of and Development of the House Committee on Davidoff.I.Amer.Inst.Planners 31.331 pesticides: to prevent airlines from using jets Science and Astronautics. 91st Congress, 1st (1965); E. M Burke, ibid. 34, 287 (1968). S that pollute the air at the Newark. New Jer- Session) (Government Printing Office. Wash- R. Arnstein, ibid. 35. 216 (1969), A, Altshu- sey.airport;to enjoin offshore dolling;to ington. D C., :969), pp 83-102. ler, Community Control (Pegasus, New York, order a paper company to provide air pollu 38. 11Folk, parer presented at the Boston meet- 1970). turn controls at a pulp mill; and to prevent a ing of the AAAS, De. ember 1969.

relatively uninformed Congress and public, a corresponding shift in power occurs. Indeed, itis not unheard of for the executive branch to abuse its near monopoly of politically relevant technicalinformation and expertise. We cite below several case studies exempli- fying the sorts of abuses that occur; politicization of advisory committees;

Dr. von Hippelisanassociatephysicistat Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois. Although scientists as technical ex- recipient e: technical advice on matters Dr. Primack is a junior fellow of the Society perts make i,nportant contributions to of public policy is the executive branch of Fellows and a member of the physics department at Harvard University, Cambridge, Massa- the federal policy-making process for of the federal government. To the extent chusetts. This article is adapted from an invited technology, that process remains basi- talk that was given by Dr. von Hippel at the that this arrangement results in an in. annual meeting.f the American Physical Society. cally political. At present, the primary formed executive branch dealing win a January 1972. 9 83 suppression and misrepresentation ofpeared before a congressional com-decided to du X. The spokesman ne- information, and analyses. mittee to allay fears about the SSTglects to mention, however, that the This leads us to the question of sonic boom, airport noise, and strataexperts have given mostly reasons why whether individual scientists can con- srlieric pollution. Magruder summarizedX might be a dangerous policy. The tribute significantly to a restoration the Administration'sviews on thesepublic cannot check what the experts a balance of power between th, issues as follows (1): actt ally said, because the reports are Congress, and the executive branch of kept secret. Of course Congress can the government. We find, again on the According to existing data and avail-ask severalwell-know.. scientiststo basis of case studies, that a few sci- able evidence.here is no evidence of likelihood that SST operations will causeappear before it and offer their views entists can be surprisingly effective insignificant adverse effects on our atmo- on the matters at issue in congressional influencing federal policiesfor tech-sphere or our environment. That is thehearings, but this is no substitute for nology if they are sufficiently persistent considered opinionofthe scientific requiring an executive branch agency and skillful and if various other cir-authorities who have counseled the gov-to make available for public review ernment on these matters ,,,ver the past cumstances are favorable. These suc- five years. and criticismthedetailedtechnical cess stories and the present high level basis for its decisions. of concern about the adverse side ef-Compare the above with the follow- fects of technology among both sci-ing quotations from the report of a entists and the public suggest that thepanel of President Nixon's SST adExamples of Abuses time ispropitious for a much morehoc review committee (2, 3) which serious commitment within the scien-included in its distinguished member- There is a whole spectrum of ,:evices tific community to "public interest sci- ship the President's science adviser. [The by which the federal executive's advis- ence." reporwas released 8 months afterory establishment has been used to This article is divided into two mainits completion, as a result of strenuousmislead Congress and the public. Per- sections. The first deals with devices by effort by Representative Henry Reusshaps a few additional examples will which the executive branch exploits its(DWis.)]. Regarding the effect of the indicate the possibilities: scientificadvisers for political advan-SST on theupper atmosphere,the 1) In the final throes of the SST de- tage while concealing much of the in-panel noted that a fleet of SST's "will bate, an advisory committee report was formation they have provich..4; the sec-introducelargequantitiesof waterreleased which stated that, with noise ond discusses ways in which scientistsvapor into the stratosphere," and con-suppressors,theSSTairportnoise can help bring into being counterbal-cluded that much more research wascould be reduced to tolerable levels ancing political forces by providing theneeded before serious deleterious effects(6, 7) No report was issued on what public and egress with the informa-could be excluded. With reeard to thethese chanties would do to the SST tion they need. impact of the SST sonic boom on theperformance, however. Every indication For brevity we refer below to scien-human environment,the panel con- isthat the noise suppressors, whose tists advising officials in the executivecluded weight was of the same order of mag- branch of the government as insiders nitudeasthetotalpayload of the and scientists taking issues to the public ...all available information indicates that the effects of the sonic boom areaircraft, would seriously threaten the and Congress as outsiders. Of coursesuch as to be considered intolerable by a already questionable economic viability the same scientist can and sometimesvery high percentage of people affected. of the aircraft (7). Thus, government does find himself in both these roles Finally, as to the impact of the SST officialscansc.;ectively make public at different times. advisory mamittee reports that present er 'ne noise, they stat -1 only some of the positive terms in a

Abuses of the .. .over large areas surrounding SSTcost-benefit calculation. Executive Advisory System airports... a very high percentage of 2) A report on sonic boom effects by the exposed population would find thean advisory panel organized by the Many thousands of scientists serve noise intolerable and the apparent causeNationalAcademy of SciencesNa- of a wide variety of adverse effects. part-time on committees advising offi- tional Research Council (s), was so cials in the executive branch. It appears, Initsadverse statements on thewrittcn that, when it was released, it however,that,ifsubstantialpoliticalSST's environmental impact, the ad hocstimulated a New York Times headline and bureaucratic interests are at stake,committee report echoed mary other(9),"Sonic Boom Damage Called the dangers these insiders point out arereports available to the Nixon admin-`Very Small.' " In fact, simple calcu- often ignored. This is not surprising;is ration (4). Thus Magruder's state-lations based on extensive government itis one reason why our governmentment is extremely misleading. S'inilartests results lead to the estimate that, was designed with checks and balances. misrepresentations of scientific advicewith 400 SST'sflying supersonically These checks and balances are under-have been made by spokesmen for theover the United -ta. :s, the sonic boom mined, however, when executive spokes-federal executive branch in virtuallydamage each year would be of the men can use the authority of insideall the other cases .hat we have stud- order of a billion dollars (10). What advisersto mislead the public andied (5). the ad'isory committee had meant to Congress about the technical facts or Perhaps the most fre pent mears bysay was that the probability is small uncertainties that must be taken h,towhich the public is misled in through tI.'t a single sonic boom would damage account in the policy-making process. theincompletestatement.Typically, a particular building, and therefore hat Thus,for example, William Ma-an executive branch spokesman tellsexperiments on sonic boom damage gruder, director of the supersonic trans-Congress that agency A,after con- c'hould be carried out in a laboratory port (SST) development project, ap-sultingthegreatestauthorities,haswith a sonic boom simulator. When a C0 84

clarifyingstatementwaseventually drugs forthetreatment of diabe:es 'hereare so few people familiar with issued, after a petition from Academyand obesity (15, 16). After announcing these programs, it is important for me to members, it appeared only in the Acad- hisdecision,hecalled give to Congress, as well as t'.r, admin- togetheranistration, the benefit of my experience. emy newsletter and received no press advisorycommitteewhichreported coverage. back that, indeed, Secretary Finch was Kenneth Pitzer was chairman of a Thus advisory comtn't.ee reports may rightin overruling the FDA medical President'sScienceAdvisory Com- be so written that they are seriously people. The committee concluded (15, mittee panel charged with looking into misleading, at least to the press. Polit-p. 86): the safety of underground testing of ical and institutionalpressures may largenuclear weapons in November . the medical benefits in these instances 1968. The panel concluded that there prevent the iss ance of a proper clari- [treatment of diabetes and obesity] out- fication, or the press may ignore it. weigh the possibility of harm. was a significant danger of earthquakes 3) In 1966 a report by an independent and resultingtidal waves being rig- laboratory under contract to the De- After the publication of a Nadergered by bomb tt ting in the Aleutians. partment of Health, Educatimi, and studyreport on the background of They also commented (19): Finch's decision (17), its legality was Welfare indicated that 2,4,5-T (2,4,5- .. .the panel believes that the public trichlorophenoxyacetic acid), a popularexamined in a rather devastating con-should not be asked to accept risks re- weed and brush killer,causes birthgressional investigation. The advisorysulting from purely internal government defects. This report was repeatedly sentcommittee was then called together decisions if, without endangering national again, and, although it had receivedes- security, the information can be made back for "further study" for 31/2 years public and decisions can be reached after (//) until it finally became public assentially no new evidence, it issued a public discussions. an h:direct result of a Nader investi- new report on the safety and effective- gation (12, p. 21). In the meantime,ness of cyclamates. This time the com- The report expressing the panel'scon- cerns was kept secret. Pitzer, however, enormous quantities of this chemicalmittee contradicateditsearlierstate- ment by saying (16, p. 13): helped make theseconcernspublic were used in the defoliation of about (20). one-eighth of the area of South Viet- The literature provided to the group does Sidney Drell and Marvin Goldbe-ger nam (12, p. 85; 13). notcontainacceptableevidencethat cyclamates have beer demonstrated to beserved on a committee advising John It may give an idea of the amour! Fncter, of bureaucratic toot-dragging involvea cffizacicu3 in the. tmatcaelit andwiltroi nirect^r of r':fcasc I: ...,..ih of diabetes or obesity. [Italics ours] and Engineering, on the effectiveness in this case to note that, when one of of the Safeguard ABM system. When Cyclamateswerethereupontotally the chemical manufacturers suggested Foster misrepresented their committee's that an impurity, not 2,4,5-T itself,banned. In this example it appears that an advisory comr-4.tee became so polit- report as supporting the Administration might have caused the birth defects, position, they spat; up tosot the the experiments that had taken 31/2ical that it adapted its advice to the political needs of the official whom itrecord straight (21). Goldbergerex- yearstc, complete were repeatedin was advising. pressedtheiropinion ofSafeguard about 6 weeks. Both 2,4,5-T and tne rather pungently. He said contaminant were found to produce birth defects (II). When these resultsCorrecting the Record ...I assert that the original Safeguard became public, the use of 2,4,5-T in deployment and the proposed expanded ' deploymentissphericallysenseless.It Vietnam was banned. its domestic use It is natural to ask whether insiders makes no sense no matter how you look was partiallyrestricted,and furthercannot do sometEng tocurb theseat it. abuses. In fact, advisers have tried to restrictions are now being debated (11). Unfortunately, these examples appear set the record straight in a number of The studies relating to the question .o be theexceptions.It seems that rece.cases: of whether pesticides cause birth de- advisers usually watch in silence when Richard Garwin, a member of the fects were undertaken partly in response they know that the publicisbeing to the public furor caused by Carson'sPresident'sScienceAdvisory Com-misled. The authors of the National mittee, was chairman of a committee Silent Sprint (14). Nevertheless, even Academy of Sciences sonic boom study while the public was being assured thatof scientists reviewing the SST projectmentioned above, and also academy thegol -tnment forPresident Nixonatthebegin- had undertakento officials,actuallyresistedthe issuing protect it from such possible dangers,ning of his presidency. Although his of a clarifying statement. committee's report was kept secret its the government was concealing relevant Two main reasons are given for this new information. Thus, when the gov-existence was not, and Garwin was silence:(i) invited to testify at Congressional hear- Most advisers have very ernment hus exclusive access to cei,ain little faith in the effectiveness of speak- ings (4). In his testimony he expressed informationaboutapublichealth ing out, and they fear that by going hazard, it can simply ignore it. hispersonalcriticisms of the SST, pul+;icthey would lose their 4) In October 1969, Secretary ofdocumenting them from publicly avail- ins:de able sources. i:,fluence. (ii) There is also theargu- Health, Education, and Welfare Finch ment that, since the President is elected was forced by law to ban foods con- Carwin explained his action. in the by all the people, he has the ultimate following words (18): taining cyclamates because cyclamates resprasibility for making national pol- had been shown to causecancer in I'm not n, full-time member of the ad-icy. In its extreme f "rm, this "elected animals. At the same time, he decided ministration, and I feel like a lawyer who dictatorship"theoryofgovernment to overruleprotests fromtly. Foodhas many clients. The fact that he deals with one doesn't prevent him from deal- leaves the adviser with only the respon- and Drug Administration and allow sibility to see that the President and i.ianufacturers ing with another so long as he doesn't oftheseproductstouse the information he obtains from the the officials in his administration are continue to sell them as nonprescriptionfirst in dealing with the second. Since won informed. 91 85 The loss of effectiveness argumentbureaucratic filter. Indeed, in our opin-fined the effectiveness of outsiders in emphasizestheserious dilemmain ion it has been a serious v Akness ofinforming the public about the negative which afrustratedinsideadviserthe most recent administrations thataspects of the SST, the decision to may beplacedasaresultof thethey have failed to exploit adequatelydeploy the Sentinel and Safeguard anti- executive branch'sinsistenceupon these potential strengths of the advisoryballistic missile systems, the program loyalty and confidentiality. However,system. of crop destruction and defoliation in insiders should beware of exaggerating South Vietnam, and the regulation of their supposedeffectiveness, and ofPublic Interest Science pesticides. We have also studied the confusing prestige with influence. effectiveness of a local group of scien- The electeddictatorship argument The executive branch of our govern-tists, the Colorado Committee for En- obviously denies the whole system ofment has not been acting in an unbiasedvironmental Information, in bringing checks and balances by which our de-manner inmaking availableto theto public attentionin1968 through mocracy has been safeguarded. It alsocitizenthe technical information he1970 the dangerous practices of two ignores th^ fact that the ultimate respon-needs. Scientists must therefore makefederal agencies in Colorado. sibility in a democracy resides with thetheir expertise directly available to the public and Congress. individual citizen, and that denying Examples the information he needs to defend his The idea that the public, al well as own health and welfare effectively de-the government and industry, should In all these instances, the outsiders prives him of the rights of citizenship.have scientific advisers is an old onehave had a surprisingly largeeffect, The writers of our constitution under-as isthe idea that theinterests ofconsideringtheirsmall numbers, in stood this very well. James Madisonthe public should have lawyers to de-bringing to public attention an aspect Aid (22): fend them. It was not until the 1960's,of the issue that concerned them. Con- however, that public understanding ofsider a few examples: Knowledge will forever govern ignorance. And a people who mean to be their ownthe insensitivity of governmental and in- 1) Serious public opposition to the governors must arm themselves with thedustrialbureaucracies ledtoa sub- SST developed only after a few scien- power knowledge gives. A popular gov-stantial commitment in the legal pro-tists, notably Shiircliff, made dramati- ernment without popular information orfessiontopublicinterestlaw.It cally clear in press releases and adver- tlic mean. of acquiring it is out the pro- logue to a farce it tragedy, or perhaps both.appears to us that the scientific com- tisements that the sonic booms created munity may now havereacheda by a fleet of SST's flying sul,...Asonically It is obvious that the responsibilitiessimilarpoint.Thegrowingpublic overland would be intolerable (4). of government science advisers should awareness ofthedangerousconse- 2) The residents of the Denver area be discussed widely. both within thequences of leaving the exploitation of did not realiz'hat they mieht have a scientific community and in the largertechnology under the effective control problem until scientists of the Colorado politicalcommunity. Lack of suchof special industrial and governmental Committee for Environmental Informa- discussion lea% es scientists unpreparedinterests has led to a rerdiness withintion (CCEI) issued a public statement when they become advisers and findthe scientific community to undertake describingthepossible consequences themselves confronted with difficult and a serious commitment to what we have of an airplane crashing into the huge unfamiliar decisions often in an at-termed "public interest science." swckpiles of nerve gas stored near the nsphere of great pressure. Science There is an important difference be-end of Denver's busy airport. After advising, no less than scientific research,tween the practice of public interesttrying in vain to reassure the public, needs a code of ethics. And this codelaw and public interest science, how- and then to transport the nerve gas should take into account the fact thatever. In a legaldispute, once both across the country to dump it in the we live in a democracy in which theparties have obtained a lawyer, they ocean,the Army finally agreed to ultimate responsibility resides not withcan hope to obtain a fair and equaldestroy it(24). the President, or even with the govern- hearing in front of a trained judge who 3) The U.S. program of defoliation ment as a whole, but with the individualgivestheir argumentshisundivided and crop destruction in South Vietnam citizen. attention, whereas in a public debatecame to an end when a group of Before going on, let us try to rectifyover an application of technology.*e- scientistssponsoredbythe AAAS the misunderstandings that may havemendous inequalities exist. The con-brought back photographs and a de- re.mited from the discussion so far. tending sides must speak to a distraotedtailed report of the devastation that do not wish by our criticisms of thepublic through news media to whichresulted (25). abuses of the executive science advisory exec ye officials have comparatively 4) The deployment of an ABM system system to diminish or obscure the manyeasy and roetity, access. Moreover, anto defend the major cities of the United important and legitimate funotions in-executiveofficialspeakswiththeStates became a public issue only after side advisers perform(23).Their rolesauthority of his office, while an inde-scientists in the Chicago area and else- as independent critics and connoisseurspendent scientist is usually an unknown where raised what ni,st experts con- of technical policies and people arequantity to the public. sidered a minor issuethe possibility of essentialthroughouttheexecutive In viers of these inequalities,itis the accidental detonation of an ABM branch. The executive advising systeminterestingtofindout whetherthe (antiballistic missile) warhead in the also provides a tremendously importantpublic interest activities of independent metropolitan area it was supposed to path by which information and ideasscientists can activate political and legal be defending(26). can flow rapidly through the govern-restraints on irresponsible actions of Of course, we could equally easily ment, and between governmental andthe executive branch. In working on compile a list of cases in which public independent scientists, outside the slowthis question, we have thus far exam-proi.ests by scientists have had little 92 86

effect on federal policy. Most technicalsometimes come from the quotation ofargued technology. al issues before the issues cannot be taken directly to thegovernment reports that contradict thepublic have been honest and accurate. publicbecause thereislittle public official line. It has come from preparingA scientist'sreputationishis most resonance with theideasinvolved. a compelling and well-documf..ted caseprecious possession, and the scientist That does not decrease the importancefrom the open literature, as Carson didwho misrepresents the truth or makes of the issues that can be taken to thein her criticism of pesticide regulationunsound technical judgments calls down public, however. (14).It has come from a study spon- uponhimselfthecensureofhis Theeffectivenessofoutsidersinsored by a scientific organization: an colleagues. In any event, technicalargu- influencing government policy seems toexample isthe AAAS study of thements presented in public can bere- depend on many facto's.For one, effects of defoliation in Vietnam(25). butted in public, in the usual self-cor- where outsiders have been influential, Yet another technique for handlingrecting manner of scientific discourse. the dangers they pointed out usually thecredibility problem was appliedIndeed, it is unfortunate that the state- threatened huge numbers of peoplequite effectively by CCEI(24).In twoments of executive branch officials are personally.Their effectiveness seemsof the debates in which it becamenot subject to similar constraints. Ap- also to have depended upon how impor-involved the CCEI publicly challenged parently, the standing of these officials tant the policy being criticized was tothe responsible government agency todepends more on their loyalty than on the government. Consider the obsoleteestablish the basis for itsassertions. .he accuracy of their public statements. nerve gas, for example; leaving it at The Colorado group accompanied the As we have mentioned, the route of such a dangerous location was simple challenge with a specific list of technical taking issues to the public is very im- negligence that could be rectified byquestions, the answers to which wouldportant but also quite limited; many is- spending alittle money when itbe- make possible an independent deter-sues cannot be so treated. Other routes came clear that reassuring statements mination ofpublicsafety.Finally,are available, however. Sometimes re- would no longer suffice. On the ABM, credibilityand also pub:;eitycan becourse to the courts is possible. Recent SST, and pesticide regulation issues,obtained if one can persuade Ralphdevelopments in the law, particularly however, thecritics were attacking Nader to take up the issue. The extentthe National Environmental Policy Act policies that governed the allocation of to which we al' depend on Nader inof 1969, make this approach increasing- billions of dollars. Over these issues the these matters is a testimonial to thely effectiveTattinga,1,...t.ge of vac, battles have been rough and prolonged timidity of the professional societies,protection offered by the law requires and have required the active involve-universities, and national laboratories.more than public interest lawyers, how- ment of large number, of citizens in The scientist's public credibility must, ever. It requires public interest scientists addition to scientists. of course, be earned. A specialist whoas well. The collaboration of scientists The effectiveness of the outsiders alcn :iceshisauthorityacarernoni7Pri ni4I aumpre in *hp Pnvirnntnen..! often depends upon the timeliness ofSCit:Itit to lend support to a politicalfense Fund is one notable example; an- an issue. Thus, after Shurcliff and a fewposition without presenting the tech-other is the current collaboration be- others had been denouncing the SST nical arguments casts doubt both on his tweentheM.I.T.-basedUnionof for years, the new environmentalmove-political position and on his scientificConcerned Scientists and a number of ment came to see it as a symbol ofauthority. The standards of accuracy to the leading environmental organizations all that is destructive to the environ-which a scientistadheres in publicin a legal challenge to the Atomic En- ment. Similarly, the ABM became astatements should be no lower than ergy Commission to establish an ade- popular issue in part because the public these he strives to attain in his scientificquate basis for evaluating the safety had becomeconcernedaboutthework. It is also necessary for the scien- systems of nuclear reactors(28). insatiableappetitesofthemilitary-tist to maintain a sense of perspective; industrial complex. And, after a fewitisall too easy to exaggerate theOrganization and Funding biologists and ecologists had been pro-significance of a subject on which a testing for years about defoliation andcritic happens to be an expert. The crop destruction Thus far there has been little funding in South Vietnam,danger of crying wolf is act merelyfor public interest science. Almost all they were finally heard when the public that the next time a justified alarm who are involved do it as anunremuner- hal become disgusted with the Unitedmay be ignored; it may also happenative sideline. Perhaps this is good. Only St;,tes' entire Indochina policy. that the false alarm will be heededrecently the scientific community dele- Ourcasestudiesgivesubstantial and the nation stampeded towardagated its nubile responsibilities mostlyto ncouragement that some issues canfoolish or unnecessarily hasty action. the insiders. As governmental regulatory ce taken to the public by scientistsObviously, the proper ethics for out-agencies have repeatedly demonstrated, with partial success at least. It isnotsider science advising deserves discus-responsibility cannot be successfully del- easy, however. Enormot3 persistencesion within the scientific communityno egatedit can only be shared. Large and skill are required, as well as a good less than the ethics of insiders. numbers of part-time outsidersare re- and timr..4 case, to he heard above the During and after each of the majorquired to keep the system honest. din that accompanies everyday living intechnological debates of recentyears this country. More than part-time people arere- there have been charges that scientistsquired, however. The coordination of who participatedasoutsiderswerethe efforts of part-time people and the Credibility politically biased and scientificallyir-. lobbying to see that the issues they responsible(27).While therehaveraise get a fair hearing rapidly become It is also necessary for the scientistcertainly been a few instances that sub-a full-time job. This is the function, for to establish credibilitythat is, that hestantiate such charges, the vast majority example, of Jeremy Stone, executive is not a "crackpot." Credibility hasof indeperdentscientists who havedirector of the Federation of American 3 87

Scientists (29), Under Stone's leader-federalgovernment. And wehave New York, 1970), chap. 1. 18.H.Sutton,Saturday Reviewinterview,15 ship the FAS has been instrumental intried to demonstrate that public interest August 1970. establishing a new tradition of openscience is no more quixotic than public 19.The summary ofhe panel reportis repro- ducedinUnderground WeaponsTesting, adversary hearings before the Houseinterest law. Hearing beforetheSenateCommittee on and Senate Armed Services Committees Foreign Relaticws, 91st Congress, 1st Session, 29 September 1559. The panelreport was and in providing technically competent releasedthatsamemorning:Underground References and Notes NuclearTesting,AEC Report TID 25810, witnesses before many other congres- September 1969, pp. 51 ff. sional committees. I. Testimony before the Senate Appropriations 20.Pitzer's address, "Affecting National Priorities Examples of full-time pu1,11.: interest Subcommittee on Transportation(27 August for Science." before the American Chemical 1970),p.1336. Society, 14 April 1969[Chem. Eng.News, 21 scientistsare few and far between. 2. Report by the Panel on Envinmmental and Apnl 1969, pp. 72-741 was partly devoted to Sociological Impact of thePresident's SST the underground testing issue. Pitzer had just Ralph Lapp could be identified as such ad hoc review committee, March 1969. The received permission from the President's sci- a person, Like Ralph Nader, he sup- reportandothermaterialgenlratedby enceadvisertomake public hispersonal panels and members of the review ,tommittee views on theissue.For his congressional portshisactivities by writing and wereintroducedbyRepresentativeSidney tcgimony, see (19, p. 33). lecturing on the issues with which he Yates into theCongressional Record(31 Octo. 21.ABM, M1RV, a'ALT, and the Nuclear Arms ber 1969), pp. H10432-46. Some of this ma- Race,Hearings before the Subcommittee on iscurrently concerned. A number of terialis also reproduced as an appendix to Arms Control, International Law, and Orga- Shurcliff'sbook(3).CongressmanReuss nization of the Senate Committee on Foreign. academics seem also to have become tells how he used the Freedom of Informa- Relations, 91st Congress, 2nd Session, March- nearly full-time public interest scientists, tion Act to force the release of the reports June, 1970. Foster's citation of the committee Universitieshavethe advantage of inthe Congressional Record(18 No 'ember report appears on pp. 442-444; rebuttals by 1969), p. E9733. Drell and Goldberger appear on pp. 525-580. havingundergraduate and graduate 3. W.A.Shurchff,SST andSonicBoom Senator Fulbright was finally able to obtain students who are willing to commit Handbook(Ballantine, New York, 1970). a declassified version of the report and in- 4. We havepresentedacasestudyofthe s:rteditinthe Congressional Recordalong great amounts of energy and idealism involvementofscientistsas:nsidersand withhiscomments on pp.512901ff.,6 outsiders in the SST debate[Bull.At. Set. August 1970. to a project (30), although, as Ralph 28 (4), 24 (1972)). 22.James Madison, letterto W. T.Bar. y,4 Nader has shown, such students will 5. We discuss further examples inAppl. Spec- August 1822. We thank Paul Fisher, di ector trosc.23, 403 (1971), and inThe Politics of of the Freedom of Information Center, Uni- go where the action is even if itis Technology: Activitit 1 and Responsibilities ot versityofMissouri,forproviding us with not at a universit", ScientistsinthebirectionofTechnolci; this reference. (Stanford Workshop on Political and Sottal 23.The functions of the advisory system have Foundations are beginning to show Issues, 590A Old Union, Stanford University, been widely discussed; see, for example, T. E. Cronin and S. D. Greenberg, Eds.,The Prest- an interest in funding interest Stanford,California,1970).The SWOPS' dinNni puoiicauongrewoutuiasiuuent-iacuity dvim., science projects, and the federal and workshop atStanfordin1969-1970 led by Nork,1969). The essay by H. Brooks, re- J. Primack, F. von Hippel, M. Pert. See also printed in this volume, isespecially useful. state governmer s may begin funding 24. M. Pen,Science173, 1211 (1971); C. Schwan:. A short case study of theeffectivenessof them in earnest if the field becomes The Nation210, 747 (1970). theColorado Committeeinthisand two 6. ReportofL.L. other cases may be found in (5). Beranek, chariman, SST 25. lore respectable-like public interest Community NoiseAdvisory Committeeto P. Boffey,Science171, 43 (1971). w, Nevertheness, itis tionhtful that w. hi. hingrnder, of SST De:elep- 26.A. H,Cahn, Eggheads and Warheads: Sci- ment, Department c.f Transportation, 5 Feb- entists andtheABM,thesis, "assachusetts -ect government funding will provide ruary1971. Institute of Technology (1.71). kind of politimi insulation appro- 7. C. Lydon,New York Times,1 March 1971. 27.A recent, well-publicized example of such an p.15. attack is the Operations Research Society of priate to some public interest science. 8. SubcommitteeonPhysicalEffects America repo:t criticizing congressional testi- ofthe mony of several scientistsagainst the Safe- Responsibility for some funding should Committee on SST-Sonic B_om,Report on Physical Effects of the Sonic Boom(National guard ABM system. (ORSA Ad Hoc Com- be closer to the scientific community Academy of Sciences-National Research mittee on Professional Standards,Operations Council, Washington, D.C., 1968). Res.19 (5), 1123 ff. (1971)). The first part of itself. Scientific societies could do some 9.New York Times,5 March 1968. the ORSA report purports to be a statement of it. Another possibility would be for 10. ReItsof government tests over a number ofethicsforoperationsanalysts,buta ofcitieswithmilitaryjets,compiledby provides little ethical guidance beyond urging universities and other research con- loyalty toone's employer under almostall Shurcliff (3), give an average of about 5600 circumstances. The tractors to devote part of their over- damageawardspermillion"man-booms" report'sattackonthe ^yen for booms considerably less intense than anti-ABMscientistsfocusesupontvery head on research contracts to a fund these that would have accompanied U..: SST. narrow technical issue, from the analysis of If we then assume that each of 400 SST's which thereport then draws a broad and for public interest science controlled flies 10,000miles(1 mile = 1.6 kilometers) unjustifiablecondemnationof the ABM by the scientists at the institution. This daily at supersonic speeds, creating a boom critics. (For detailed criticism of the ORSA path 50 miles wide, populated with an average report. see statements of numerous technical is in effect how law firms and medical densityintheUnitedStatesof about 69 experts collected and reprinted intheCon- doctors support their pro bono ac- peop.e per square mile, we obtain a rougl gressional Record.pp.S1921-51,S26I2-13, estimate of 52.5 billion annual damage. Al- S352I-23(17and29 February:7 March tivities. though this estimate could doubtless be made 1972); and P. Doty, Mincrsa, in press. One need only look at the student- more exact,itcertainly indicates that sonic 28.R. Gillette.Sven a176, 492 (1972). boom damage is not a negligible probl:m. 29.The Federation American Scientists, 203 funded Public Interest Research Groups 11.Effects of 2,4,5-T on Man and the En,.on- C Street, NE, Washington, D.C., is the only in Minnesota and Oregon (31) to see ment,Hearings before the Subcommittee . registered lobby of scientists FAS has been Energy, Natural Resources, and the Environ- traditionallyinterestedinissuesassociated how varied thepossiblesources of ment of the Committee on Commerce, Li led with nuclear weapons, butrecentlyithas States Senate, 91st Congress, 2nd Session, 7 provided testimony before Congress on many support for public interest science are. and 15 April 1970. This historyis summa- othertechnologicalissues. The morediversethesourcesc' rizedinthe testimony of Surgeon General 30.A goo', example of such a university-based Jesse Steinfeld on pp. 178-180. program is the Stanford Workshops on Politi- .upport, the more securely established 12T.Whiteside,Defoliation(Ballantine, New cal and Social Issues.More than a hundred public interest science will become as York, 1970), p. 21. "workshop ".coursesforacademiccreditat 13 A. Galston, inParent Earth,3. Harte and Stanford University have been sponsored by one of the responsibilities of the scien- R. Soccdow, Eds. (Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, SWOPS' during its 3 years of existence, and tific community. New York, 1971). these have produced more than a dozen com- 14. R. Carson,Silent Spang(Houghton Mifflin, prehensive and authoritativereports on sub- Boston, 1962). jects like "Air pollution in the San Francisco 15. This exampleisdocumentedinCyclamate Bay area," "Balanced transportation planning Sweeteners, and The Safety and Effectiveness forsuburbanandacademic communities," Sin o/ New Dm,(1. arket Withdrawal o/ Drugs "Logginginurbancounties," and "DOD- ?mary ContainingCyciumates).Hearingbeforea sponsored researchat Stanford." Several of Subcommittee of the Committee on Govern- these reports have had considerable political We have described some of the ment Operations, House of Representatives, impact (for SWOPS1's address see(5)1. 10 June l'70 and 3 May 1971, respectively. 31.For athscussio.,ofthemannerin which abuses that develop when policy for 16.Regulation o/ Cyclamate Sweeteners,Thirty- such groups can be organized, see R. Nader closed SixthReport by the House Committee on and D.Ross, Action for a Change-A Stu- technologyismadebehind Government Operations, 8 October 1970. dent's Manual for Public Interest Organizing doors in the executive branch of the 17. 1. S. Turner,The Chemical Feast(Grossman, (Grossman, New York. 1971). c4 88

that (i) most people feel that science and technology have made life better; (ii) the prestige of scientists and engineers is relatively high; and (iii) there is a high degree of confidence in the ability of science and technology to solve a wide range of social problems. The conclusion invited by such findings is that the American public is generally friendly toward the scientific community and that scientists and engineers may proceed with atleast cautious optimism about the public fate of their activities. That conclusion is predicated on the Therelativelyrecentprominence of science and technology has passed.assumption that the public makes no given to issues concerning the environ- 'they agree that the widespread convic- distinction between science and tech- ment, notably the debate on supersoniction about the inevitablebenefitsto nology and, further, that if the public transport, and to the so-called energy come from scientific advance (a convic- generally is friendly toward scientists, crisisreflectsagrowinguneasiness tion pointed to as early as 1830 by de then technologiststhose who imple- about technological matters among aTocqueville as imprinted on tne Ameri- ment technological systemsneed fear generally acquiescent public. There nocan genius) has been severely eroded. no animated opposition(7).But al- longer appears to be a broad consensus Edward Shiis sums up the case (1): though a single web of logic and theory on the automatic benefits of technologi-Whereas it was once believed that every undergirdsbothscientificknowledge cal development; its consequences are new technological possibility was automat- and technological implementation,our increasingly perceived as problematical. ically and inevitably beneficial, the greatappreciation of their sociopoliticalcon- This new situation could affect bothachievements in outer space (among others] have helped to dim the light once casttexts is not enhanced by attributing to scientists and engineers in terms of the the irthlicat by technological progress....Science, large crs melding legitimacy accorded theirwork,the engineering and technology have all be-of their social effects. limits within which they may do it, and come amalgamated into a engld entity Public opinion data do not speak for the level of resources made available which is conceived as a source of damage and costly waste. The research workers, themselves. What they say depends upon for it. For even though a direct rela- the questions put to them. In the study flemmhip between %ttituetn °W4 engineers, military men, industrialists, and politiciansareseenashomogeneous reported here we sought answers to the way decision-makers behave is diffi- groups with each section pursuing its own questions about the "general climate cult to establish, the public's mood does advantage at the expense of the rest of ...for the development and use of create boundaries within which officials society. scientificknowledge" and about the generally act. This slackening in public approval"choir e of ends" to which they are This article presents findings concern- has been attributed toa number of directed (5. p. 96). Our findings suggest ing the public's attitudes toward tech-factors. Robert Morrison, for example, that tile themes of available systematic nology and science which suggest that cites the distrust of the waypower hold-studies as well as of the more pessimis- considerablerefinement of our pasters manipulate the world; the concern ticimpressionistic accounts must be generalizationsisnecessary. Evidenceover maldistribution of resources; anxie- somewhat modified. They also tell us suggests that (i) the public makes aty about the ethicalimplications of that equally misleading isthe charge distinction in their evaluations of thefurther technological advances insome that those who arc uneasy about or outcomes of scientific work and tech-areas of medicine and the biological hostile toward technology are antira- nological work; A') the public's reactionsciences; and growing awareness that tional or anti-intellectual. To accept this to the impact t-.! technology upon soci- muci, sc.ntific researchlackssocial claim does nothing to assist in the dis- ety is one of wariness and some sletpti-relevance (2). The picture of the public covery of what may be behind such eism; (i i) the public applies r rathermind presented in such commentariesantagonisms or to determine whether wide range of sometimes contradieoryis painted intones of suspicion andthey are justifiable. values to its evaluation of technology;guarded pessimism. Cognizant of this (iv) the public has a distrust of thedecline in the prestige of scicncc, still institutionsassociatedwithdecision- other writers appeal for circumspectionThe Study Context making in technical policy areas; and lestnegative public reaction lead to (v) a clear element of political ideology "harmful restrictions onallscientific As part of a larger study of tech- is present in the evaluations of tech- research" (3). nology and social change, we set out nology made by an important segment But a somewhat differentpicture in 1972 to probe public opinion of the public. on a emerges from reports of recent work wide range of technology-related topics. Only recently has there been suffi- done by public opinion researchers (4- Accordingly,asurveywas commis - cient evidence concerning potential pub-6). That the scientific community, and siuned to gather information on the lic uneasiness about science and tech- other interested publics, have fallen vic- nology to stimulate systematic attempts tim to "quick overgeneralizntion and Mr. La Porte isan associatepofessor in the to gauge prevailing opinion on thesegrand simplifications as to the scope, Department of Political Science and associate director of the Institute of Governmental Studies matters. Most commentaries on thesesource, and direction of anti-scicncc at the University of California. Berkelv, 94120. attitudes have been largely impression- sentiments" (4) is the finding ofatleast Mr Metlay is a graduate student in the same department and is also affiliated with the Institute istic. They note that the "golden age" two studies (4, 5). These reports note of Governmental Studies. 95 89 Table I. Should science and technology be controlled? volume o; work has purported to de- Strongly Agree- Strongly scribe some of the sogal effects of Statement° agree disagree disagree technology on people's lives, outlook, (11,12).Some observers 1 2 3 4 5 and values have argued that technology has become Science I. Allow studies; obtain future benefits 54.2 32.1 3.8 5.9 4.0 the source of disquieting changes in the 2. Science good, use of science bad 45.9 29.0 5.4 13.5 6 6 human condition and that it ',and sci- Technology ence) is running rampant, beyond c-,n- 3. Control invention and lift worsens 14.7 22.5 11.0 19.8 21.9 4. No interference with right to trol. This argument is perhaps most buy justifiable 18.1 26.8 8.3 27.1 19.6 strongly put by Jacques EllulinI. s 5. Insufficient knowledge for regulation 21.4 25.1 10.8 27.4 15.3 description of the "technological phe-

The full wording of the statements for agreement or disagreement were as follows:1.Unless nomenon," a pervasive situation where scientists are allowed to study things that don't appear important or beneficial now, a lot of very decision-making processes are so struc- beneficial things probably won't ever be invented. 2. Basically all scientific discosenes are good things; itis Just how some people use them that causes aU the trouble. 3. Any attempt to control which tured as to admit of only one outcome inventions arc widely produccd or made available will make OW lives worse. 4. No one should attempt -the rather hiind, never-ending imple- to regulate which inventions arc produced because it interferes with the individual's right to decide what he wants w buy. S. No one should attempt to regulate which inventions are produced b=. oust mentation of new techniques(12).If they do not know how to Jo it.All data are expressed as percentages (percent across; N = 30). such misgivings were widespread they Those expressing no opinion ranged from1 5to 2.0 percent for statemer 1 and 2, and from 4.1 to 5.6 percent for statements 3 to 5. could provide a milieuinvhich the control of science as well as technology would be sought. But such a situation hinges on a general public belief that perceived importance of te-hnology asever, among groups with different edu-scientific discovery and consequent tech- a fea:ure of social change; on criteriacational attainment(8, 9). nological implementation are nearly in- considered important in technology as- Moreover, when we compare our sur-distinguishable aspects of a continuous sessment; on approval or disapprovalvey to that recently sponsored (5) by theprocess. of 12 specific future technological ca-National Science Foundation (NSF), Table 1 presents data related to sev- pacities; on perceptions of technology'sseveral items common to both surveyseral aspects "f he public's evaluation eff^^ts ^n the winlity of !ifPand nn sh^w a s"**.sonabiy high degree c f cc: of the so( . ...or science and of attitudes toward scientific work as dis- respondenceindistributions(10).In technology. For the purpose of this tinguished from technology. Using a sl- t, evidence available from indirect survey, we have chosen to define science multistage sampling design, we inter-inc .ators concurs that California does and technology as follows (7): Science viewed 980 adult Californians. not deviate from the rest of the nation is, implicitly, the activity of discovering Since most polices with respect toin impuriani ways with regard to atti- new knowledge and includes the devel- science and technology are national in tudes toward science and technology.opment of prototype inventions. Tech- scope, the question of the generality ofIndeed, since the population of Cali-nclogy, on the other hand, is the activity our results should be raised; for strictly fornia is nearly one-tenth that of thewhich leads to the widespread avail- speaking "the public" referred toin entire United States and since its econ- ability of products based predominant- what follows is the California popula-omy includes a large proportion of thely on such scientific knowledge. The tion. However, that we can have con-total scientific and technological workdata show that there was considerable fidence in the generality of the data wedone in this nation, our findings mayagreement that scientific activities are collected is indicated by national esti- havegreaterpolicyrelevancethan intrinsically beneficial and should not mates of demographic characteristicswould be the case for data gleaned from be controlled, but that the use to which such asage, income, sex,race, a4any other singe state or region. scientific knowledge is put can make occupational distributions obtained from Research in public opinion is besettrouble. They also demonstrate that the the 1970 census: these estimates deviate withsomeformidablemeasurement standard defenses of technological au- no more, and usually somewhat less,problems. The data gathered are "opin- tonomy are rejected by a saostantial than 4 percent from theCalifornia ions" and as such may be transiently fractionofthoseinterviewed. More profiles. On only onecharacteristic, held, possibly changing with time andpeople disagreed that regulating tech- education, do national averages differcircumstance. This may be particularlynology would affect the quality of life significantly from California's. The per- true when the attituoes examined areadversely than those who believedit centage of Californians (31.4 percent) not central to the person interviewed;would. Again, more people felt that the such with at least 1 year of college educa- is often the case with the dataadvantages of regulating technology out- tionis about 35 percent greater than gathered here. In addition, the opinions weighed the benefits of a laisse--faire thenational average (23.3 percent).measured may ncl be founded on cor- approach. Interestingly, the sample was This sl'ght skewing of educational dis- rect :actual information; thus, they canalmto evenlysplitwithrespectto tribution extends to our sample as well; icaltered by additional informationjudgraznts about whether or nott/ 47percent hadatleast 1 year of fromeducationaleffortsorotherregulation of technology was possible. college.This higher educationlevel sources. Net'`:less, if we are inter-Taken together, these data imply that suggeststhat Californiansingeneral ested in what the public at large th'nksthe public at large does not find the and our sample in particular may be, about science and techn, logy, this tech-outcomes of scientific activitya prob- on the average, more likely than re- nique with all its limitations is the onlylem. Rather it is the outcome of tech- spondentsinanationalsampleto one available. nological implementationthatisthe be informed about science and tech- source of concern, thereby creating a Social Perceptions in Technology nology. Over a wide range of attitudes potential both for the demand and for we found no significanr difference, how- Over the past 10 years an incica.ingtheexpecte:ionthatthose outcomes 9 6 90 Table 2. How disenchanted are people with technology? the public which determine whether a Low Inter- High technological developmentis"advan- Statement* disenchantment mediate disenchantment tageous."

1 2 3 4 5 Respondents were asked to rank a number of social values-ranging from 1. To go back to nature desirable 32.3 24.6 8.7 22.1 12.2 2. Life too complicated 24.5 33.3 8.0 24.3 10.0 highly utilitarian values to more human- 3. Overdependence on machines 9.2 12.8 5.7 34.3 38.0 istic and egalitarian concerns-and to 4. Technology can solve problems 5.5 10.3 5.2 30.9 48.3 indicate the importance they should be The full wording of the alienation-confidence statements was as follows:I. It would be nice if we given in evaluating technology's impact. would stop building so many machines and go back to nature. 2. Technology has made life too complicated. 3. People have become too dependent on machines. 4 People shouldn't worry about harmful Not unexpectedly there was no strong effects of technology because new inventions will always come along to solve the problems. All data consensus on what values should be are expressed as percentages (percent across; N = 980). The numbers of people expressing no opinion ranged from I 5 to 2.6 percent. givenpriority. Yet arelativelyhigh degree of support was expressed for a wider range of priorities than simply should be regulated. A plausible corol-lems associated with technological devel- the economic values of employment and lary tothesefindings, somewhatat opment. Perhaps more significant is the taxes which are often presented as the odds with other survey research, is thatfact that only 5 percent expressed no basis for lecisions on technology-related if the public came to see science and "disenchanted" sentiments, 70 percent public policy. Table 3 presents the per- technology as indistinguishable on theexpressed at least two, and 50 percent centages of respondents indicating what practical level, the very large consensus three or four such notions. values were considered "extremely" im- favoring unregulated scientific activity In a sense, the data in Tables 1 and portant, as well as the average rank might diminish rapidly. 2 provide evidence that Ellul's vision of accorded them by the whole sample. a populace enamored with technique Not surprisingly, the impact of tech- and unable to resist technological devel- nological development on employment Alienation and Confidence opment for its own sake does not hold was ranked as the most important con- for our sample. An undercurrent of sideration, though pollution effects drew Uneasinessabouttechnologycan skepticism about dependence on tech-the highest percentage of "extremely have a more nearly Luddite character:nology does restrain wholehearted en- important" designations.Perhaps the the belief that further techno-industrial thusiasm about itseffects, anditis most interesting result is that four of advance will result in net social loss. likely that if such skepticism grows, so the seven values were believed to be Expressions of longing for a return towill pressures for regulating technical extremely important by a majority of nature or to a more simple life unen- development. the sample. That the public considers cumbered by machines typify that trou- a wide-ranging combination of values bled attitude as, to a lesser extent, does to be important criteria for evaluating reduced confidence in technology's pow- Technology, Past Benef ts, and the consequences of technical develop- er to solve man's problems. People most Value Criteria ment complicates both the activities of disenchanted with technology tend to technologists and the task of policy- accept these notions. Table 2 presents Against this background, what can makers, for some of these values seem the pattern of responses to four ques- be said about the public s evaluation ofclearly to be in tension. (Notably, neith- tions probing the degree to which thespecific existing technological develn:-er the importance of the U.S. image "alienated" attitude they convey is held ments? Our sample was asked to indi- abroad nor leisure time struck a par- b) the public. It shows opinion to be cate whether each of five such develop- ticularly responsive chord i t the public.) divided on the desirability of returning ments have made life in general better Thus our data show that a plurality to a more natural state and on whether or worse. The technologies in questionof the public seems to approve of the life has been made too complicated by were highly visible ones, widely imple- regulationof technology,that many technology. While a little over half ofmented and quite well known to most more desire a wide range of values to those questioned did not agree with people: household appliances, automo- be taken into account in its implementa- those notions, a third of the sample did. biles, automated factories,the space tion, and that in varying degrees an Thus, although the typical notions asso- program, and atomic weapons. These uneasinessaboutthesocialconse- ciated with technological alienation did things formed a measure of respon- quencesofthisimplementation is not predominate among our sample, dents'overal:evaluationofpresent present. Now we ask what level of they were accepted by a strong minority. technology (13). confidence our public expressed in the More clearly evident were attitudes Figure1 presents the distribution of technology-related decisions made by expressing a limited confidence in tech- this index. It reflects a distinctly posi-its institutions of governance. The de- nology. Strong majorities, over 70 per- tive evaluation of present technology gree to which it regards those engaged cent, agreed that we had become tooand is consistent with the results of the in decision-making as legitimate pro- dependent upon machines and that it isNSF survey (5). The data, therefore, vides an approximate answer. not sensible to expect technologyto show positive public response to past develop solations to problems causedand present technological development, Technology and Decision-Makers by technological development. Theseoverlaid with a set of concerns about relatively high percentages seem to sig-the more general consequences of that Six situations in which decisions are nal deep wariness about overdependence development. This combination of atti- made about how to implement a par- on or overcor.fidence in technology as tudes appears to reflect a tension in ;:ular technology were set before re- a means for dealing with social prob-values, visible in the priorities held by spondents (14). The respondents were 97 91 Table 3. What are the important values to be considered in the implementation of technology? government could be a reaction to what No. who they perceive as the inability of these considered goal Mean Standard groups to gatthings done correctly; Goal of "extreme" rank- devia- N importance (%) ing tion what they consider failure on the part of busine...men and politicians to meet To increase employment 60.6 300 1.55 933 public commitments they may attribute To reduce pollution 72.3 3.16 1.74 929 simply to incompetence. To make life enjoyable 47.0 3.33 1.99 929 An alternative explanation can be To reduce taxes 56.3 3.71 1.91 933 To improve the lot of poor people 59.7 3.76 1.69 929 foundinthedistinctionsnotedby To improve the IJ S. image abroad 32.6 5.05 1.71 931 Herbert Simon between factualand To increase leisure time 17.8 5 96 1.41 929 valuational premises as components of decision-making(16).The abilityto render a competent decision requires Table 4. Attitudes and characteristics of the "potential public" for technological politics. factual knowledge. A person's knowledge about a decision situation legiti- Matrix of association (Pearson's r) Index mizes his involvement in it; hence, as 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 we have just noted, the trusted stature of technical experts in the public's mind. 1. Evaluation of technology 2. Confidence in But valuational elements also are an technology .302 integral part of any decision process. 3. Alienation from Advocating certain social values, politi- technology -.402-.349 4. Effect on standard cal and business leaders claim the right of living .273 279-.255 to participate in decisions on technologi- 5. Public undercal issues. In so doing-in setting goals representation -.311-.229 .207 6. Party/ideology -.348-.256 .358 .328 and establishing priorities-they are ex- 7. Age .211 .270-.289 * -.303 pectedtoreflectthepublic'svalue 8. Pollution rank -.234 interests; otherwise, they lose that right 9. Regulate technology .300 and their involvement in technological Correlation coefficients below Lt 2 and not significant. decision-making will begin to be considered invalid. That those interviewed then asked to indicate which of eight public saw itself as the "actor" mostin our survey evinced just such a mis- actorsorinstitutions would actually entitled to be involved in all decisiontrust of business leaders and govern- have the most (and the least) say in areas in question. At the same time itment officials opens doubt that these making each kind of decision(15).In saw itself as accorded least access todecision-makers were really represent- addition, our respondents were asked them-again in all six areas. ing the public's value preferences. At to indicate who ought to have the most These data are consistent with a num-the same time, the public clearly ac- (and least) say in the same decisions. ber of recent findings. Certain Harriscorded itself legitimacy to participate Estimates were then made of the degree Poll results have shown that the public to which the respondents felt that those places "a great deal of confidence" in 350 35 5 35 9 actors whom they saw as actually mak- scientists and engineers; the NSF-spon- 340 . 34 8 330 4- 33 8 ing the decisions in these various tech- sored study (5) indicates that a substan- 320 - 32 8 nical areas were, in their opinion, really 310 31 8 tial minority feels that "the degree of 300 30 7 entitled to do so. Similarly, the degree control which society has over tech- 290 29 7 280 28 7 to which respondents saw illegitimate nology should be increased." And many 270 27 7 260 26 6 involvement in decision processes can polls show a significant increase in the 250 25 3 25 6 240 24 6 be estimated. public's distrust of all public and pri- 230 23 5 23 6 The specific results varied somewhat 220 22 5 vate institutions. Apparently the institu- 210 - 21.5 from one decision area to another, but t;ons established to represent the values 200 20 5 190 - 195 several consistent patterns emerged. (i) which people want used as criteria in 180 - L 184 170 .174 Technical expertsratedhighly;they decisions to be made about technology's 160 ± 164 were seen as exercising legitimately a 150+ 154 use have not kept up public confidence. 140 , 143 great deal of influence over decisions 130 133 At the same time, technical experts, sci- 120 123 in each of the technical areas. (ii) Top 110 - 113 entists, and engineers, have been able 100 - 102 government leaders drew considerably to maintain it, at least until now, even 90 , 92 82 lesssupport. Those interviewed per-in the face of apparently substantial 70 72 60 61 ceived government leaders to be in- mistrust of the technological decision- 50 51 40 -- 39 41 volved in all six areas, but in only two, making processes themselves. 30 31 space travel and military uses of space, This public confidence seems a signal 20 09 20 10 I 10 was their presence seen as warranted. accomplishment for the scientific and 01 2 0-3 0 4 0-5 0 6 0-7 0 (iii) Business leaders received little or technological communities. It may rest 1 0-2 0 3 0-4 0 5 0-6 0 no confidence from our sample. While on the public's perception of the tech- Fig.I.Frequency distribution of Gutt- they were perceived to be influential in nical expert's role as a man of knowl- man index of evaluations of implemented four of the six areas, they were notedge; he is viewed as competent. Sim- technologies (mean, 4.846; variance, welcomed in any of them.(iv) Theilarly, people's distrust of business and2100, standard deviation,1.449).

9 8 92 in decisions on technological matterswere designated the potentialpublic. summarizingthedegree of perceived while feeling far removed from any ac-Thirty-one percent of the sample (303 illegitimate exclusion of the public in cess to the decision process. respondents) fell into this group. This the decision-making process for three These findings have direct implica-number represents a fairly substantial formsofpublictechnologyrapid tions for scientists and engineers: (i) As proportion of our total sample, prob- transit, military technology, and space opposing value preferences continue to ably higher than the putative national exploration; (vi) pollution rank, indicat- compete in the decision process, thefigure, because of the higher education ing the importance placed on environ- scientific and technological communities levelof Californians. Comparison of mental concerns compared with other will almost inevitably be drawn deeply the potential public with the remain- criteria;(vii) anit Sex of technology into political controversy. Technical ex- der of the sample showed that the only regulation, in which we used the last perts could be pressedtorepresent major differences in demographic and three items in Table I; (viii) age; and, socialvaluesas wellasto provide politicalcharacteristics were thatthe (ix) a six-point scale combining party factual information for policy decisionspotential public was somewhat younger, andideologicalidentificationranging (17). (ii) That members of the public made several thousand dollars more per from "liberal Democrat" to "conserva- are seriously disquieted about the exist- year, and on the average had 2 more tive Republican" (20). ing decisiou processes related to tech-years of education (about 2 years of Our primary interests here are those nological development could result in college). While the potential public was attitudes toward technology which fall strong pressure for its public control. a bit more "pro-technology" withre- into three arePe of opinion: (i) attitudes (iii) Should that occur, and should thespect to the variables reported above, associated with evaluations about spe- public begin to link scientific discovery the differences were too small to sub- cific benefits of present technology; (ii) determinantly to the negative effects of stantively significant (19). In shun, the attitudes associated with confidence or technology, the relative autonomy ofpotential public for technological poli- lack of It about depending on technol- science could diminish. tics is generally similar to the rest of ourogy to solve social problems; and, (iii) sample over a wide range of opinion. attitudes related to a feeling of disen- A very interesting difference between chantmentwith,or alienationfrom, Technology and the Potential the potential public and the rest of the some of the general conditions prompted by technology. Such opinions would Public for Political Action sample, however, is the degree to which theirattitudesareinterrelated.For indicate how the potential public sees Whatever the public's attitudes, they those not included in the potential pub- specific uses of technology for the near are not likely to become the basis for lic, most attitudes appear to be hap-future and what its feelings are abotu publicpolicyunless crystallizedinto hazardly organized. That is, they display the longer term, broader consequences articulate demands for change. Efforts no consistent pattern of internally coor- of technological development. to voice demands, to organize pressure dinated opinion. But the potential public The data show that thepotential for or against policies and political can- does exhibit a patterned and cohesivepublic, like the entire sample, was gen- didates come only from those portions set of attitudes toward the outcomes erally positiveabout thebenefitsof of the general population motivated to of scientific work and toward techno- present technological development. over action. Those people most likely to be- logical activities. While we do not wish 65 percent indicated that these develop- come involved in activities calculated to suggest that theattitudesofthe ments had been appreciably beneficial. to prompt policy action on technolcgy- larger group are unimportant, its rela- while only 16 percent believed that they related matters we shall call here the tively random responses do indicate that had not been. There was much less "potential public" for technological poli- itis not likely to be a source of much confidence in the idea that our der end- tics (18). criticism. The issueareaapparentlying on technologyasasolutionto Certain aspects of social life seem a lacks salience for these people. They present problems is sensible: only slight- priorito make people aware of and are therefore likely to be acquiescent toly over one-third (35 percent) felt quite interested in policy for science or tech- policies governing technology, unless of surethatitissensible, while almost nology. More highly educated people, course they are personally confrontedhalf (49 percent) felt that it is not. Final- people who have voted in past elections, with visible outcomes of such policiesly, while the feelings of the potential and people who hold jobs closely in- or lack of such policies as was the casepublic did not extend to widespread volved with some type of technology for gas station owners, truckdrivers, andalienation by the more general condi- are likely to number disproportionately others during the recent fuel distribution tions prompted by complex technologies, amongthecitizenry concernedwith emergency. 45percentreported somesenseof such policy. To the extent thatthe Nine indices were used to analyze re-alienation. public enters into controversies involv- lationships among this potential public's The first three indices display a con- ing technology, participants and leaders attitudes:(i)a technology evaluation sistent set of relz (ions. Table 4 shows in the debate are likely to come from index, as described in Fig.I;(ii)an that those who regarded present tech- the segment so described, To the extent index of confidence in technology, com- nology as beneficial also tended to ex- that decision-makers monitor public at- posed of the last two items in Table 2;press confidence in technology and to titudes, they will feel the views of this (iii) an index of technological alienation.hold fewer alienated attitudes. Similarly, potential public disproportionately, How in which we used the first two items in those who expressed confidence in the then did our respondents feel about the Table 2; (iv) an index of an effect on efficacy of technology also expressed less social effects of technological develop- standard of living, indicating the degree disaffection. Each of these indices had ment? to which it was believed that there would other correlates. Those people who posi- Using thefactors noted above, we be "a decline in the standard of living tivelyevaluatedpresenttechnologies developed a scale by means of which if there were less technological develop- also tended to believe that technology respondents scoring on its upper half ment"; (v) an underrepresentation index, is necessary for maintaining our stan- 99 93

Table 5. Regression coefficients from the "potential public," calculated for primary attitudes and other factors.

Living Repre- Pollu- Regu- Eva lu- Confi- Alien- R Index stan- sent a- Party Age tion late Polon dence ation dard tion

Evaluation of technology .11 --.20 .15 .16 .17 .53 Confidence in technology .11 .24 .17 .10 * .15 .17 .49 Alienation from technology .18 .21 .11 .18 .15 .24 .60

Not significant at P < .05. The standard error in all instances ranged from05 to .06, for regre.sion. N = 262 dard of living(r =.273) and to be lessof attitudes based on judgments about are young and who identify themselves inclined to feel that the public is under- the relationship of technology to eco-as "liberal" form the core of potential representedindecisionsaboutgov- nomic well-being, on concerns for the opposition to technological development ernment-supportedtechnologies(r =environment and for democratic deci- and that such opposition is at least in .311). People who gave positive eval- sion-making, and on approval of regu- part a function of different value prefer- uations were, notably, somewhat olderlation of technology were consistently ences. The associations between political (r =.211) than those who did not and, related to a more generalized conditionidentification and attitudes about tech- probably associated with this age factor, of technological dissent. nology, distrust of decision-making, and they were relatively conservative politi- To complete our analysis, regression concern for environmental impacts all cally. The intervening variable of ideol- coefficients were calculated for the pri-make this point. In short, "technological ogy correlates(r =.348) with themary factors to determine the propor- dissent" cannot be written off as anti- positiveevaluations.The degreeto tion of variance explained by the set of intellectual and without foundation. It which our respondents were confidentattitudes discussed above (see Table 5).is, in fact, preeminently sensible. or dubious about depending on tech-Some of the associations considered in What the alignments visible within nology for solving problems displayedTable 4 proved to be dependent upon thepotentialpublic portend for the a similar set of associations. For this an intervening variable. Nevertheless,future is not clear, although they do not variable. however, we observe a some-age, political differences, dissatisfaction allow us to accept an inference drawn what stronger relationship with age andwith decision-making, and value judg-from past studiesthat becausethe a bit less pronounced association withments remain important predictors ofyoung retainconfidence inscientists political ideology. attitudes toward technology (2 I) . and engineers all is well for the general The more general attitudes which we climate of science and technology. We have summarized as a feeling of "aliena- Summary can only speculate whether,as these tion"attraction to the idea of a less Our analysis of the interviews with ayounger people grow older, they ill complicated and more natural worldsample of the California public aboutcarry their uneasiness about technology were associated with the greatest num- a range uf their attitudes toward tech-with them. Were they to do so, and ber of other attitudes. Those who tended nology shows that a modification of ourwere this group to be joined by still to express a disaffection toward tech-understanding of the collective state ofyounger people who also holdthese nology also tended to put a lower evalua- mind on this subject is in order. Thewary attitudes, the context of scientific and technological work could become tionon the benefits of technologicalcurrent assessment of the publicas development and to have less confidence largely, and somewhat vacantly, enam-much more fraught with political con- in technology as a problem solver. Theyored with science and technology doestroversy. Another point emerging from were alsomore skepticalabout thenot hold. Nor does a picture of a publicour interpretationis how very crucial necessity of technological developmentgenerally hostile and alienated by tech- to continued free scientific inquiryis for the sake of maintaining presentnology. Neither panglossian optimismthe distinction between scientific work standards of living(r = .255)andnor prophecies of doom can be sup-and technological activities apparently were concernedabout publicrepre-ported by these interviews. Rather anow made by a sizable portion of the sentativeness in technological decision- more mixed picture emerges. Out ofpublic. Should this distinction become making(r = .207). In addition, theirthat picture, a potential public can be lost, perhaps through continual merging alienation was related to the convictionisolated, whose mood it behooves sci-of science's role with technology's by that the effects of pollution should beence policy-makers to watch. This group the popular press, attitudes now mainly more taken into account whenever tech- tends to associate a number of relatedassociated with technology could spill nological decisions are being made(r =conditions with technological develop-over to scientific research as well. .300) and, perhaps more significant-ment; moreover, itislikely to make Yet our data also provide evidence ly, to an increasing propensity to con-assessments on those relationships soof the successes of the scientific and sider seriously the need for regulating perceived. technological communities. They have technology(r = .234). Those tend- To the degree this group has "anti-become such a critical part of life that ing toward feelings of alienation were technological" feelings,thesefeelings peopleare seriouslyconcernedwith relatively young(r = .289). This ageare clearly linked to the group's aware-their future development. The oppor- factor was probablyassociated withness thatthe social consequences oftunity is present for both communities their partisan and ideological persua- technologycanproduceconditions to find ways of responding to the situa sions for they were also preponderantlywhich threaten important values. Thetion so that thoughtful action can be Democratic and liberal(r = .358). particular distribution of age and politi-taken to implement technology for the Thus in the potential public a number cal identification suggests that those who benefit of the commonweal. 100 94

References and Notes variables, both studies uncovered similar at- 16. H.Simon,AdministrativeBehavior(Free titudes.Smalldifferencesareevident,but Press, New York, 1957), pr. 15-60. See also 1. E.Shill,inCivilizationand Science:In these could be attributable to method variance Conflict or Collaboration? CIBA Foundation J. Thompson, Organizations in Action or sample error. On the fourth variable, much (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1967), pp. 134-149. Symposium (Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1972),p. the same concordance is observable, though 42. 17. While this could conceivably occur we do the California sample is somewhat less favor- not suggest that technical experts would be 2. R. Morrison, Science 165, 150 (1969). able to present technology than is the national 3. P. Abelson, ibid. 1.73, 285 (1971). more able than any other group to do so with sample. But, again, the differences could be extraordinary effectiveness. 4. A.Etzioniand C. Nunn,ibid.181,1123 due to mea turement method: Our study used (1973). See also Science Indicators (5, pp. 96- 18. Our reasoning closely follows the arguments a scale of questions to measure the respon- of those who distinguish between the gen- 100). dent's evaluation, while the NSF study simply 5. National Science Foundation, ScienceIndi- erally uninvolved public and those who, by asked the subject, "Have science and tech- virtue of their education or personal associa- cators (Government Printing Office, Washing- nology changedlifeforthebetterorfor ton, D.C., 1973). tion with issues, or both, are aware of them theworse?"Interestingly,however,ifwe and hence likely to be motivated to act on 6. For a review of otherstudiesrelatingto cross-tabulate response on this variable with pi ills attitudes toward technology, see G. R. them. Set P. Converse, in Ideology and Dis. suchdemographiccharacteristicsas race, content, D.Apter,Ed. (Free Press, New Funlffiouser, Public Understanding of Science: education, sex, income, and age we find the The Data We Hate, Workshops on Goals York,1964); G.Almond,TheAmerican same generalpatternsemerging inboth People and ForeignPolicy and Methods of Assessing the Public's Under- studies. (Praeger, New standing of Science (Materials Research Lab- York, 1960); and Devine (9). See especially Ellul (12); H. L. Neibi rg,In 19. Even an F-test was justbarely statistically oratory, Pennsylvania State Univ., 1972); and the Name of Science(QuadrangleBooks, significantatP = .05formanyofthese I. Taviss, Technol. Culture 13, 606 (1972). Chicago,1966);V.Ferkiss,Technological 7. Our conceptions of science and technology Man: The Myth and the Reality (Braziller, variables. include both the definition of their activities New York, 1969); 20. The items for each index constructed loaded L. Mumford, The Myth strongly on only one factor when the principal and the people who are mainly engaged in oftheMachine,vol. 1, Techniques and carrying them out. The definitionsin both Human Development (Harcourt Brace, New components solution was rotated to a varimax casesarefamiliar;seeJ.K.Fiebleman, York, 1967); W. Sypher, Literature and Tech- solution. Technology. Culture 2, 305 (1961); and C. nology: The Alien Vision (Random House, 21. The most important cases were the relation- Mitcham and R. Mackey, Eds., Philosophy New York, 1968). See also, J. D. Douglas, ship of age and party or ideology to tech- andTechnology (FreePress,New York, Ed., The Technological Threat (Prentice-Hall, nology evaluation and alienation on the one 1972). The people who animate science are, EnglewoodCliffs,N.J.,1971);M. Brown, hand and to confidence in technology on the of course,scientists Technologyiscarried Ed., The New Technology and Human Values other.Inthe former case,the relationship out by engineers, architects, physicians, and (Wadsworth, Belmont, Calif., 1966); P. Good- has party or ideology intervening between age technical experts of many kinds. man, The New Reformation: Notes of a and the attitude in question. In that instance 8. Other evidence bearing on the question cf Neolithic Consertative (Random House, New age does not have an independent effect;it educationallevelandopinionresponseis York,1970); and L. Winner, public Policy disappears when party and ideologyis con- mixed. Devine (9) reports no systematic differ- 20, 35 (1972). trolledfor.Inthelatter case, age has an ences between high and low educational groups 12.JEllul, The Technological Society, translated independent effect which remains even after on a range of policy questions, while others by J. Wilkinson (Knopf, New York, 1956). controllingfor party and ideology. No at- do find some differences of opinion (see, for 13.While the choice of these technologies was tempt was made to develop a causal model example, S. Verba and N. Nie, Participation arbitrary we ieel that they reflectthevari- because of the likelihood that the three major inAmerica (Harper and Row, New York ance of opinion concerning technologies and attitudinalvariables are reciprocallyrelated, 1972)1. that they are suggestive of the broad notions a condition which would make any causal 9. D. Devote, The Alienate Public (Rand Mc- of technology seen as capability. These pre- model underidentified. Nally, Chicago, 1970). suppositions were supported by the fact that 22. Thisprojectwas supported bythe Ames 10 In particular, Science Indicators (5) contains the five items form a well-defined Guttman Research Center, NASA (grant 05-003-0471). four questions th..t were designed to probe scale and when factor-analyzed they loaded The scope of the survey was broadened by dimensions which we also examined in our strongly on a single factor. The scale had a additionalassistance from theInternational Californiastudy:(i)therelativeprestige coefficientofreproducibility0.93,Menzel's Technology Assessment Program,Institute and confidence adheringtoa numberof coefficient of scalability is 0.67. of International Studies, Universityof Cali- Professionsincludingbusinesspeople,sci- 14.These included decisions on the regulation of fornia,BerkeleyThe staffof theInstitute entists,engineers, and nationallegislators, energy consumption, mass public transporta- of Governmental Studies assisted ably in this (ii)the need for increased social control of tion,geneticengineering,ch..abanks,and andseveralearlierstudiesrelatedtothe science and technology;(iii)the benefits of civilian and military uses of outer space survey. We gratefully acknowledge the com- a number rif technical capabilities including 15.These werecongressmen,executivebranch ments of Kai N Lee and Mary Fcnneman space exploation, military technology, health officials, thecourts, consumer groups, busi- on earlier versions care, and 'Toss rapid transit; and (iv) evalua ness leaders, technical experts, he public in lion of prey nt technologies On the first three general, and no one.

As to the scientific community, It has considered It primary role as one of acquiring and extending knowledge, leaving to others the roles both of educating the public about the social implications of science and of exercising responsibility over ways and means for adapting and cc trolling natural forces The scientific community may also share in the blame for weakening of an intellectual conscience that underpins critical discern- It ment. Meeting needs for public understanding ot symptoms ot devitalization and degenera- Granted, various groups of scientists have science was adopted as federal policy In tion. Science as new knowledge has not set- become crusaders for specific issues. A few 1950 legislation creating the National Sci- tled into the culture, and the aggregate of have tackled broader questions of survival. ence Foundation. On the basis of currently discoveries cannot be equated to culture. While not identified with causes as such, low levels of citizen comprehension. that Among knowledge consumers, with other scientists have become ac,ivists in their original NSF program can hardly be viewed everyone getting a taste of everything, there own community, applying their expertise to as successful. But how should we expect any is depreciation of critical judgment. And that local issues. federal program to buck a powerful cultural process Ls been accelerated by techniques Professional organizations also now get tide? of mass entertainment wherein participation involvedJournals have earned articles on Huizinga addressed this issue aimost half slides from active to passive mode, speeding key policy issues to enlighten members. a century ago (/) As he wrote, universal abdication of informed judgment to others. Some organizations have confirmed their education and modern publicity, instead of Everyone becomes a trivial, Monday morn- tax-exempt status, then summoned up their raising the level of culture, have produced ing quarterback. courage and taken public positions. sub- 01, 95 mitted testimony, and stepped up attention to to discourage participation by any but thedress the stark questions of who wins, who professional activities in which ethical di- expert. loses, and how much, then they may also mensions of social responsibilities are at Thus the sciatific community and the en-recognize that the attack on these questions stake. The concepts of technology assess- gineering professions have failed to help theof cultural and psychological as well as opment have begun to be integrated Into pro-other 98 percent of the population who are erational effects involves a kaleidoscopic fessional engineering practice and teaching. nonspecialists to grasp the technical founda- blend of technical with social knowledge. Looking ahead, the scientific and engi- tions of modern life and associated threats toThis surely will widen the perspective and neering communities could be of more direct survival. Some of the difficulty arises fromenrich the value base intrinsically present in assistance through heavier commitment ofcultural isolation of the scientific and engi- all judgments that the technical community their professional societies to public interest neering communities. One antidote lies in a is called upon to make on technology- activities and to c;:i7.en understandingAt more systematic exposure to issues that con-intensive public policy (2). present, organizations of scientists and engi- cem society generally, especially regarding neers devote the greatest fraction of their In- those whose lives seldom intersect the tech- REFERENCES AND NOTES come from dues to dissemination of techni- nical aristocracy. and whose consequently I 1 Huinnga, In the Shadon of Tomorrun (Norton. cal information. The public is never ex-remote concerns and dreams are alien and New York. 1936), p 79 2 This editonal is excerpted from E Wenk. Jr , Mar. cluded, but the content and style of such heard vicariously, if at all. When the techni- gins for Survival (Pergamon. New York, 1979), pp. communication are so highly specialized as cal community recognizes that it must ad- 144-147

Difficulty anses in the scientific community from confusion of the role of scientist qua scientist with that of scientist as citizen, confusion of the ethical code of the scientist with the obligation of the citizen, blurring the distinction between intrinsically scientific and intrinsically political questions. When scientists fail to recognize these boundanes, their own ideological beliefs, usually un- spoken, easily becloud seemingly scientific debate. Important to the future of science and viciously infiltrates the news media, affect- A decade ago it might have been desirable technology is the fact thathe public has ing the intelligentsia and decision-makers to flag potential hazards for public attention somewhat lost confidence ..1 the ultimate alike. It must be confronted at every oppor- and proceed as if each were a clear and pres- value of the scientific endeavor It is not that tunity. ent danger. It is time to return to the ethics they hold pure science or scientists in any The public image of science and scientists and norms of science so that the political less esteem. But they are less certain that has been distorted by the participation of sci- process may go on with greater confidence. scientific research will Inevitably yield pub- entists in public policy formation. Beneath The public may wonder why we do not lic benefit. the surface the environmental and consumeralready know that which appears vital to For the first time in centuries, there are movements may be an expresssion of an-decisonbut science will retain its place in thoughtful persons who are not morally cer- omie, a cry of protest for the sense ofpublic esteem only if we steadfastly admit tain that even our greatest achievements do, powerlessness of the individual educatedthe magnitude of our uncertainties and then indeed, constitute progress To some philos- citizenpatently a serious sociopolitical cir- assert the need for further research. And we ophers itis no lenger clear that objectivecumstance. However, a frequent surrogate shall lose that place if we dissemble or if we knowledge is an unquestioned good Glimp- for that deep-seated complaint is an expres- argue as if all necessary information and ses of such doubts have emerged in public sion of concern about the safety of someunderstanding were in hand. Scientists best discussions of nuclear energy or sociobiolo- product or technology, based always on anserve public policy by living within the gy, and, most recently, in the heated but assertion of risk that was first brought for- ethics of science, not those of politics. If the foolish discussions of research utilizing reward by some member of the scientific com- scientific commur..ty will not unfrock the combinant DNA The intellectual elite in ev- munity. The societal response has been at- charlatans, the public will not discern the ery era has always been pessimistic But to- tempts at examination of such matters by risk differenceand science and the nation will day, concerned that "that which can be done,and cost/benefit analysis. Well, nsk/benefit suffer. There is, in short, a large burden on will be done," there has arisen an anti- analysis can certainly inform the decision- the scientific community to be seen as con- scientific, antirationalistic trend that shouldmaker. But his decision must necessarily still structive in dealing with real problems, as give us pause. At its ugliestor most turn on a value judgment, conditioned by his straightforward, forthcoming, honest, and absurdit finds expression in gurus, tarot social, economic, philosophic, and religious courageousnot intimidated, as all too cards, and astrology, faddist approaches to views. But that is the nature of the political many have been for the last decade. nutrition, and easy assertion and acceptanceprocess. The public acceptability of a given Excerpted from a speech on "Science and of unfounded allegations of environmental level of risk is a political, not a men' the American Future," given at Duke Uni- hazard. That antiscience attitude per- question. versity. Durham, North Carolina, on 6 March 1980.

11'2, subject for research and that no results, at present, warrant short-term or public warnings. A critical, objective look at the assembly of precursory phenomena collected up to now might lead most scientists to take this stance, in view of the potential for litigation and loss of public confidence to ensue from erroneous public predictions. A different position has been taken in the past. In 1979 the U.S. Geological Survey issued a press release noting anomalous variations in radon emission and strain accumulation in southern California. It was hoped that the release would spur prudent One of the more vexing questions con- concern over potentially precursory changeshomeowners to prepare for a possible large fronting scientists whose research may have must be so hedged with qualifications thatearthquake. A factual account of the a direct impact on the lives of the public haspublic officials would have no basis for tak- observations and their significance, or lack to do with the pressures to release observa- ing any but routine precautionary measures,thereof, is the only way to dispel the rumors tions and conclusions prematurely. One ex- such as leaving fire trucks outside fire sta- that flourish in the absence of official state- ample is the question of early dissemination tions. Estimates of the time and magnitude ment:,. Thus, discussion of the observations of information bearing on the likelihood of a of the possible event would probably be toohas appeared to be the soundest polic)de- major earthquake. uncertain to call for such measures asspite uncertainty about the public's reaction Geophysicists generally agree that results evacuation of unsafe structures and shut- to the expressions of concern accompanying of earthquake prediction studies to date, down of nuclear reactors. However, betweenthe discussion. although promising, do not indicate early these extremes there is still a range of pre- As our understanding of precursory phe- arrival at the goal of providing accurate precautions that could be taken, although atnomena improves, there will undoubtedly be dictions of the time, place, and magnitude of some expense and with some loss of normal warnings that are more specific and hence large earthquakes. It is possible, from ret- public services. If a severe earthquake likely to occasion a serious response. Unless rospective looks at phenomena immediately following a vague warning does occur withallowances are made for the possibility of an preceding some large earthquakes and from a injury and loss of life, does the failure oferroneous or ill-timed warning, few scien- few accurately predicted events such as the public officials to act render them liable fortists will be willing to risk the opprobrium 1975 Haicheng earthquake in northeast Chi-civil suits? If, on the other hand, the earth- and litigation that could arise from open dis- na, to see certain premonitory patterns quake does not take place, are the costs of cussion. Thus, there is a conflict between the However, when confronted by one or more having taken routine precautions likely to re-public's need for information and the scien- apparent anomalies in geophysical observa-flect on the competence of the officials? In- tists' need to be protected against threats to tions in earthquake-prone areas, what is the direct costs to individuals, such as loss intheir livelihood. Unless some legal protec- responsible course of action for the scientists property value, might also make for civiltion is forthcoming, the matter will most involved? liability. likely be resolved by the scientists retreating There have been too few repetitions of the In our litigious society, little allowance is to an uninformative conservatism when precursor-earthquake reiationship to allow made for normal human errors if they have a asked to interpret their results in the public any realistic estimates of the probability of substantial effect on someone's pocketbookforum. an earthquake's occurrence. Therefore, at- or health. A course of action might be to tempts to inform the public of the scientists' maintain that earthquake prediction is still a

103 Debate over the social responsibilities of academics and their straints or bamers At the same time, universities are warned to avoid institutions often mirrors changing social conditions. In re- entrepreneurial actions that could jeopardize their scholarly integrity. cent years, discussions have focused on appropriate re- In addition to these concerns, leaders of the American scientific sponses to the shifting global economy and political tensions between community urged their colleagues to turn attention to global problems the Unit ,:d States and the Soviet Union. Should faculty members that had been long neglected. An article by David A. Hamburg direct their efforts toward research designed to provide a competitive encourages scientists to apply the tremendous resources of science advantage for U.S. interests? Should universities collaborate with and technology to the social probiems presented by the prevalence of industrial sponsors to stimulate more productive and innovative tech- totalitarian governments and the proliferation of nuclear weapons. nologies? When science becomes a source of national and com- Gerard Piel, in an editorial, again underscores the need to protect mercial advantage, how can the principles of autonomy and in- openness in science. "without publication, science is dead." dependence that have traditionally characterized the work of scien- Problems less global in nature but nonetheless indicative of the tists and their institutions best be protected? social tensions permeating through science and technology in recent This chapter examines sources of major social tensions and oppor- times are discussed in Ronald L. Numbers's article on creationism in tunities for adapting scient:e to the challenges of the modern world twentieth century America and in Brian G. Zack's editorial on abor- Scientists are cautioned, in an editorial by J.R . Pierce, to be careful in tion. Each provides a glimpse of the conflicts that surface when seeking government funds to support their research goals. Dorothy scientific expertise enters spheres once dominated by religious aa- Nelkin's article illustrates how changes in the public status of science thonty. We see again a search for balance and new efforts to define an affect the control of research data and other forms of intellectual appropriate relationship between moral principles and scientific property by analyzing selected legal and administrative disputes facts. involving access to scientific information. Another aspect of tensions in modern science is evident in recent Emerging relationships between universities and industrial spon- concerns about the impact of fraud and misconduct in sc:ence. As sors offer another subject for debate A Bartlett Giainatti, Robert D. scientists are caught up in competitive pressures and research supervi- Varrin and Diane S. Kukich, Philip H. Abelson, and Robert L. sion becomes lax, the incentive to cheat and cut corners becomes Sproull all highlight noteworthy initiatives, but their enthusiasm is tempting. Can the ,cientific community effectively deal with mis- often tempered with concern about potential conflicts between the conduct by its members'? Are tighter governmental controls necessary world of academia and the world of commerce. Industry is advised to to ensure 0,, integrity of research? This dark side of science is respect and support values that have long characterized basic research examined in the following chapter. as authors consider the need for openness, sharing of research data, equipment, and personnel, and institutional reforms in light of reports of deception by scientists the right to publish and disseminate findings without artificial con- RC 98

duced fusion power o' a cure for cancer because scientists do not yet know how to attain these goals. Scientists do know that the act, evement of these goals will require basic understanding that they do not yet possess They do have fruitful ideas for research. They cannot predict when research will give them the knowledge necessary to attain the goals, but they will know when research has produced adequate basic knowledge to make the goals attainable. In the end, most scientists will do whatev- Scientists include a few inspired and dedi- others who want to give them huge sums of er there is money for doing. Scientists know, cated individuals, some self-deluded charla-money toward ends that scientists have or should know, which socially and econom- tans who overestimate what they know and neither the knowledge to reach nor highly ically useful goals are within reach and can do, and a very large number of in- promising avenues of approach. which have a good chance of accomplish- telligent, well-taught, skilled, and talented Mammon worship holds that money can ment through promising research. Yet, in men and women who are capable of con-buy anything. Organization worship holds their personal and collective actions, scien- tributing substantially to man's knowledge, that organization can accomplish anything. tists often seem more concerned with the to- capabilities, and welfare. Money can buy many scientists, but it cannot tal number of dollars, with the public image Scientists have friends in government who always buy results. Organizations can con- of science, and with the cry for certain want to see them well nourished and well sume scientists, but they do not necessarily specific results than with the sensible selec- employed. Scientists also face serious produce results. tion and vigorous pursuit of fruitful areas of hazards and temptations. Scientists are With money and organization, the atomresearch and application. It will be a sad assailed by people who believe that ignorant bomb was made quickly, because scientists thing for scientists if they fall choose and intense talk, concern, love, hate, and already knew how to go about making it. wisely and act energetically toward valuable social and political action bring human bet- Money and organization put men on theand attainable goalsfor, if they do not terment rather than stultifying and unprofit- moon, because scientists know how to get choose what they shall do, others will choose able conformity. Scientists are tempted bythere. Money and organization have not pro- for them.

reality, is justified in defin'ng life, and in defining human, and in concluding that within this scientific conceptual model the fertilized egg of a human being is in itself a human life. Junsprudence, as a field of scholarship, and legislative action, as one of its practical applications, are concerned with very different sorts of inquiry Broadly speaking, the law has as its purpose the establishment of a code of conduct to govern the actions of the members of a community in order (at least in our society) to e 'milk them to best live together in harmony. One of the most basic The Congress of the United States has world perceived by our senses and, when our fun, :ions of the law must then be to identify asked medical science to tell it when human senses are insufficiently precise, by our in- those actions which are abhorrent to the life begins. The very asking of the question struments. community and outlaw them. Thus murder, by a legislative body, the directing of the Life, in a scientific sense, is a hypothetical conmdered abhorrent by most members of question to the field of inquiry known as sci- construct which is valid only to the extent most communities, is widely regarded by the ence, and the answering of the question by that it aids in accurately conceptualizing the law as the most serious of crimes. And so the scientists indicate a misunderstanding of the biological world. Itis a powerful concept law wants science, the definer of life and the appropriate roles and relationships of science precisely because it has performed that func- definer of human, to tell it when human life and jurisprudence. tion so well. But life, to the scientist, is not begins, so that it may know when to define Science is only one of a number of valid an elemental quality, as were earth, fire, air, its ending as a crime. fields of inquiry, and it must not take onand water to the ancients.Itis a state of It must now be clear that the human life of itself the responsibility for providing an- being, a matter of dPfl.nition, and the line the scientist's perceptual modeling and the swers to questions outside its proper realm. between life and nonlife is not always drawn human life whose inviolability the law seeks Science deals with the prediction and ex-easily. Is the smallest known virus particle to ensure are coincidentally the same words planation of events in the physical (including alive? used in two entirely different conceptual biological) world. Far from dealing with This same discussion can be applied to frameworks. The law wants to know if the absolutes of truth and right,it attempts toany scientific conceptualization or defini- zygote, embryro, and fetus are human lives construct a hypothetical model of reality tion, including the definition of human. The because it wants to know if these entities are which reflects as closely as possible thescientist, as a model builder of perceived entitled to the same rights and protections 105 99 which the community has agreed to confer quire the attributes of a human being be issue. It will be the difficult task of the law- on human beings who have already been vested with the rights and protections makers to create from this turmoil a reasoned born. accorded that status. It is to the moral codes and just code of action, but these anthe The issue is thus not whether the zygote, of the people that the law must turn for guid- voices which must first be heard. Science embryo, and fetus are human lives in a ance in this matter, not to the arbitrary defi- may never make moral judgments. the law scientific, definitional sense. The asking of nitions of science. The people are, of course. must. To ask science to define human life in that question is testimony to a profound mis- divided: the separate and combined in-scientific terms for use by the law in moral understanding of the capabilities and limita- fluences of religious belief, secular morality, terms is a travesty of both honorable traditions of science. The issue is at what stage of personal experience, blind emotion, and tions. development shall the entity de :tined to ac-even caprice will be felt on all sides of the

a wider phenomenon. By describing diverse disputes over the control of research. I hope to suggest the broad range of situations in which questions of intellectual property have become important, the implications of recent changes in the relation of science to government and industry, and the problems involved in negotiating the principles of ownership and control (4).

Public Access versus Professional Control Who should control scientific informa- inconsistent and often conflicting laws. tion? This issue is at the center of a policies and practices" (2). With few In 1976 a group of physicians filed a growing number of legal and administra- guiding principles. the struggle over con- request under the Freedom of Informa- tive disputes To whom do the data from trol of scientific data and ideas has taken tion Act (FOIA) for data gathered during federally funded research belong: the the form of' discrete disputes in which all a long-term clinical study of the effects of scientist who does the research or the parties stake their claims in terms of fivediabetes treatment regimens.in government agency that pays for itAt moral rights and responsibilities:the which 1000 patients had been monitored what point in the research process are "right to know," the "right to privacy." over periods ranging from 5 to 8 years. A the data to be made available to interest- the "right to access." the "right to con- private consortium called the University ed citizens, competing scientists, or in- trol one's own product." the "obligation Group Diabetes Program (UGDP) had dustrialfirms? May theresearch: -s to protect research subjects." and the conducted the study under the sponsor- themselves use their data and ideas in "responsibility to protect the public in- ship of one of the National Institutes of any way they choose'? terest." Health (NIH). Under the terms of the Such questions have long been contro- Scientists who accept public funds are grant NIH had the right to access to the versial because of the application of sci- required by federal regulations to beraw data. butitnever exercised that ence to practical problems and its role in accountable for the use of those funds, to right. public affairs. They have become more give the funding agency access to their The UGDP researchers found that cer- urgent, however, as the gap between the results as stipulated in a prior agreement. tain regimens might increase the inci- production of knowledge ant: its applica- and to accept concomitant public disclo- dence of heart disease without any off- tion has narrowed. Related changes in sure.Thefederalagency'sspecific setting benefits. When they published policies concerning information disclo- choice of funding instrument has itself a these findings, the FDA recommended sure. university-industry collaboration, practical importance for the recipient'schanges in the use and labeling of a patenting, and military security follow control (3). Exc't in the case of classi-particular diabetes treatment drug. An directly from the utility of research. turn- fied military research. scientists assume association of physicians. concerned lest ing scientific data and even ideas into that data from projects funded by grants a useful drug be removed unnecessarily "intellectual property"something that (as opposed to contracts or cooperative from the market, requested access to the is "owned or possessed" and therefore agreements) belong to the researchers. raw data and when refused brought suit subject to competing claims (/). External controls on work done under (5). The U.S. Court of Appeals in 1978 Few principles exist to establish a defi- grants are seen as a threat to the quality ruled against disclosure on the grounds nition of intellectual property. A con- and integrity of research and an infringe- that the data, which were not actually in gressionalcommittee report has de- ment on scientific freedom. In this con- the possession of NIH, did not constitute scribed the confused state of government text, applying concepts of "property" to "agency records," defined by statutory information policy: the "profusion ofscientific ideas is extremely controver- language as materiai that an agency has sial. "created or obtained." In a dissenting Much of the recent discussion about opinion, however, Judge David Bazelan The author is a professor at Cornell University in intellectual property in science has fo-argued that federal funding of the re- the Program on Science. Technology. and Society and the Department of Sociology. Ithaca. Nev, York cused on the commercialization of bio- search and reliance on the data for regu- 14853. medical research, but this is only part of latory action were sufficient reasons to 1rt6 100

require disclosure and that, under FOIA, An EPA administrative law judge grant- permission. Eventually MSRI released dataunderlying governmentactions ed Dow's request and issued a subpoena. the tapes (9). must be open. In1980 the Supreme but Allen refused to comply. on the Conflicts over confidentiality are most Court upheld the ruling of the lower principle of the scientist's right to auton- common in medical or social science court, avoiding the policy issue concern- omy. Following this reasoning. a U.S.research in which personal information ing the public's right of access and bas-districtcourtoverturnedtheruling. is gathered (19). Special problems arise ing its decision on the narrow legal ques- agreeing that disclosure of data to ain the study of deviant or politically tion of possession. company with vested interests could sensitive groui,s, Federal agencies re- A case with a different outcome alsojeopardize a costly study and that thequire that in research on crime. drug turned on the principle of custody. Inpublic interest was better served byaddiction, political protest, and mental 1978 Milo Shannon-Thornberry complet-withholding data until after peer review illness guarantees he provided to protect ed data collection on the socioeconomic(7). This decision was tipheIC by a feder- research subjects who could he liable to factors affecting infant feeding practicesal appeals court in 1982. legal pressures if their identities were and therelative effect of bottle and The right of public access to informa- revealed. However, release of personal breast on morbidity and mortality rates. tionissometimes invoked to obtain data gathered in health and epidemiologi- A group of nonprofit church organiza-copies of unfunded research proposals. cal research could be equally damaging tions had sponsored the research. Lack-Requests to NIH for copies of proposals to individuals (// ). !Ire right of research- ing the resources to convert the data toincreased from 300 in 1975 to more than ers to protect their subjects is especially computer records. Thornberry enlisted1600 in 1979 (8). Although only a few of vulnerable when it conflicts with politi- thefacilitiesof theDepartmentofthese requests (11 in 1979) have been for cal or policy goals. For example, there is Health, Education, and Welfare's Centerunfundedapplications.scientistsare the well-known case of the political sci- for Disease Control (CDC) to help in thesensitive to the threat of disclosure and entist Samuel Popkin, who was impris- tabulation. He agreed in return to make contend that this would jeopardize theoned for contempt of court in 1972 be- the survey material available to the fed-grant evaluation process and allow pla- cause he refused to give the names of the eral agency.In September 1979 twogiarism or the pirating of ideas. Ideas, persons he had interviewed to a federal manufacturers of infant formula, Mead-the scientist's "stock in trade." are ingrand jury investigating the publication Johnson and Abbott Laboratories, re-their view analogous to trade secrets in of the Pentagon papers (12). The case is quested the raw data. Thornberry object-industrial firms. not unique. One study found that be- ed. He had collected them with private tween 1966 and 1976. 50 subpoenas were financing and claimed prior rights to ana- issueddemandingrevelationofthe lyze and publish them. He feared that the The Right of Access versus sources and subjects of research (13). intent of the request was "industrial sab- Obligations of Confidentiality The principles governing confidential- otage" of research threatening to corpo- ity in research remain Inconsistent. The rate interests. In fact, a division of Ab- In 1976 the National Heart and LungNational Research Act of 1974 contains bott later circulated to physicians a letter Institute (NHLI) of NIH supported aprovisions to protect tht. privacy of hu- undermining the credibility of the relongitudinal study of the health history ofman subjects, but it does not protect search. individuals with certain medical profiles. them from .ubpoena by the courts: nor In April 1980 a federal district courtThe researcher maintained detailed per- does the legislation protecting the pri- held that the CDC's possession of thesonal records and, in compliance withvacy of medical information used in data and its involvement in the projectthe Privacy Act, submitted only the final health research (/4). Researchers seek defined the data as "agency records"report of his findings to NHLI. Duringimmunity from subpoena in order to (6). Although CDC's role in the researchthe course of study an independent In-avoid compromising their sources of was mostly clerical, the court consideredvestigator requested ,access to the rec- data. but access to those sources is often disclosure to be proper: it chose to avoidords in order to conduct his ow n re- necessary for law enforcement or policy the policy question about the intent ofsearch. NHLI allowed its contractor to purposes. or simply in order to maintain FOIA requests. decide how to comply with the condi-accountability in competitive areas of In other cases the courts have taken ations governing the disclosure of confi- research. more substantive view of requests thatdential personal information (2. pp. 9- threaten professional control. James Al- 10i. len, of the University of Wisconsin. had In other cases, however, federal agen- Competitive Secrecy versus been working on a long-term, federallycies try to maintain greater control. For Open Communication funded study of the effect of dioxin onexample. HEW funded a study by a rhesus monkeys. In 1979 he presentedprivate research organization, Minneso- In 1977 a man with leukemia donated a preliminary results as testimony during a ta System Research Incorporated sample of the cancerous cells from his hearing of the Environmental Protection(MSRI), to evaluate the accuracy ofbone marrow to research hematologists Agency (EPA) on the use of dioxin in HEW project ratings. When interviewingat the University of California School of commercial pesticides. After the hear- the scientists who had rated the projects. Medicine. The scientists succeeded in ing, Dow Chemical Company tried toMSRI researchers promised not to re-creating a new cell line that could be obtain all the data from Allen's study.veal theiridentity. HEW, however,used to study leukemia. They sent a arguing that if results were made publicasked for the computer tapes. whichsample to a colleague. who discovered the background data should be availablecontained the names of the respondents. that the cell line produced interferon, the as well. Allen objected. on the groundsThe investigators objected on ethicalbody's natbral antiviral protein. That sci- that the work was not completed orgrounds. but HEW insisted that a re- entist sent his sample to another col- properly analyzed and that the testimony searcher could not promise confidential- league. who worked at the Roche In- was only a preliminary progress report. ity without first obtaining written agency stitute of Molecular Biology. funded by 167 101 the pharmaceutical firm HoffmannLa on open discourse, and between federal change for an advisory role. Roche. He, in turn, used the sample to and industrial research sponsars when The cryptography case must he seen in develop an optimal medium for the pro- there is a mingling of research support. the light of two emerging trends: the duction of interferon. The biotechnology Tensions between commercial and ac- trend toward extending national security firm Genentech. under contract to Hoff- ademic interests are not new. Research controls to projects that are not spon- mannLa Roche, then used the cells to cooperation between universities and in- sored by agencies concerned with mili- manufacture interferon genes, creating duciry flourished in the early part of the tary technology, and the trend toward the potential for a profitable enterprise. century. drastically reshaping the uni- applying such controls not only to hard- There followed a dispute between the versity system (21). Just as they are ware but to basic ideas and to "strategic University of California and Hoffmann today. academics were ambivalent, wel- information," that is. to information that La Roche over the ownership of the coming such collaboration as a source of if released could possibly harm the na- genes (15). The University of California vitality but fearing its intrusion on aca- tional interest. claimed ow nership. and the right to fu- demic freedom. Industry - university rela- Constraints on research of military sig- ture royalties. as the institutional home tions stabilized, however. through a sys- nificance are obviously not new. Under of the scientists who had created the cell tem of contracts and cooperative agree- the Invention Secrecy Act., patentable line. HoffmannLa Roche also claimed ments in engineering and the applied discoveries may he placed under "secre- ow net ship. and filed a patent application sciences. Scientists doing basic research cy orders" if disclosure is deemed detri- covering both the interferon and the gene participated mainly through individual mental to national security. This usually splicing manufacturing process. Law- consulting arrangements (221. pertains to inventions developed by peo- yers from the university protested. argu- Today these traditional modes of inter- ple working under defense contracts. but ing that the firm had made unauthorized action are changing. Ad hoc consultingit has been more and more frequently use of the material, taking commercial arrangements have turned into equity applied to other inventions as well (23, advantage of the open exchange of infor- participation innew venture-capital 261. mation and material among academic firms. In line with federal policy encour- Formidable secrecy controls also gov- scientists. agingindustry-universitycooperation. ern atomic research (27). Since World This is but one of several disputes that universities are accepting collaborative War II the federal government has main- may affect the practice of freely circulat- arrangements in areas of basic as well as tained unambiguous authority to control ingmaterialsandresearchfindings applied research. By the end of 1981, all such research within or outside gov- among colleagues.Donald Kennedy eight major agreements were either e, n- ernment laboratories. Information in this president of Stanford University. oh- summated or undergoing final negotia- area is "born classified"it is an official serves: "Scientists w ho once shared pre- tions. secret from the moment it exists. With publication information freely and e;- the commercial development of nuclear changed cell lines w ithout hesitation are energy, some provisions of the Atomic now much more reluctanttodo National Security versus Energy A t of 1964 w ere relaxed. How- so ... the fragile network of informal Scientific Freedom ever, federal controls over access to communication that chat acterizes every information in this area give government especially active field is liable to rut). In the summer of 1980. a computer agencies all proprietary rights. ture" 116). scientist at the Massachusetts Institute The International Traffic in Arms reg- Two decisions in 1980 Nought these of Technology wrote a proposal to work ulation (ITAR). authorized by the Arms issues to public attentionFirst was the on the mathematical basis for developing Export Control Act, provide that publi- Supreme Court decision to allow the computer techniques that would he im- cation of unclassified information that patenting of a genetically engineered pervious to code breakincl. He applied can advance any significant military an- bacterium (17). Second was the signing for a grant from the National Science plication requires prior approval ny a of the Patent and1'i-tidemark Amend- Foundation (NSF). which has routinely cognizant agency. This provision is so ment Act allowing universities. nonprofit supported cryptograph) research. Since inclusive as to allow flexibility of inter- institutions, and small businesses to ap- 1977 NSF has sent such proposals to the pretation with respect to research (28). ply for patents on federally funded re- National Security Agency (NSA) for Several incidents suggest the trend tosearch. the profits to he used to support technical review because of their poten- ward more rigid interpretation of such further research (18). tial significance lot foreign intelligence regulations. In ti.c winter of 1980 a series Patents are specifically intended to activities. That agency is responsible for of restrictions was imposed on scientific avert proprietary secrecy as well as pro- the collection of intelligence informa- exchange (29). The Department of Ener- vide incentives for invention. But some tion, does most of its own research, and gy issued an order requiring goarnmen fear that patenting possibilities in areas has been increasingly uneasy about stud- clearance of any communication be- of basic science could also lead to clos- ies relating to its concerns but outside its tween its contractors and Soviet scien- ing of communication among researchers control. This particular project was the tists. The Commerce Department forced because of competition for patent prior- first basic research to attract serious the American Vacuum Society to with- ities (19. 20). As universities seeking new attention, and NSA wanted to assume draw its invitation to So*Aet bloc scien- forms of income and scientists attracted part of the funding so that it could re- tists to attend an international confer- by possibilities of commercial develop- quire review for military sensitivity prior ence on magnetic bubble memory de- ment become directly involved in the to publication. Mathematicians working vices. The State Department refused to industrial exploitation of research. ten- in this area were appalled at the idea that issue visas to eight Soviet scientists who sions also de4elop between university their work might be classified as unpub- had applied to attend a conference on adminstrators and faculty. between pro- lishable and therefore unavailable for lasers and electro-optical systems. Also. lessors with commercial interests and public use (23-25). They negotiated a it sent letters to university science de- graduate students whose careers depend system of voluntary restraints in ex- partments asking them to restrict the 168 102

movements of Chinese students and visi- Such questions have elicited efforts to A remarkable number of studies and tors. define the terms of access under the proposals have tried to resolve the prob- Some proposed bills would impose FOIA. The director of NIH. for exam- lems of proprietary secrecy and academ- further restrictions. One would require ple. sought a specific exemption for data ic autonomy associated with increasing academic institutions accepting foreign from ongoing clinical trials and epidenu- industry-universitycollaborationUni- students for study in certain scientific ological studies, although requests for versities are negotiating limited partner- fields to submit detailed information on such data have been rare. He brought the ship arrangements w industries that what they would be learning. whom they matter before the Ethics Advisory Board would yield economic benefits yet allow would work with, and wherethey of HEW arguing that premature release them to maintain internal control over planned to travel. More threatening is a of data from clinical trials could impede research practices and to publish in areas legislative proposal to extend to ideas the randomization necessary in the tri- where proprietary secreccould pose the provisions of the Arms Export Con- als, and in the case of epidemiological serious constraints. An NIH working trol Act which require a State Depart- studies could lead. to publicity about mis- group has recommended that all institu- ment license for exporting "critical tech- leading trend., that would unduly alarm tions receiving research funds have a nology" (30). Scientists who want tothe public. He hoped tc establish the written patent policy including provi- publish or lecture overseas on any sub- principle that data that are preliminary..sions for resolving proprietary disputes ject relating to a technology listed cn the incomplete.. or not yet validated should (20). The Recombinant DNA Advisory U.S. Munitions List would have to ob-be exempted from FOIA bt.c.tuse the Committee (RAC) of NIH has revised its tain a prior license, and would bear the public interest would thereby 1.)e better guidelines in order to protect proprietary burden of proof that they would not be served. The Lthics Advisory Board rec- information while allowing the necessary disseminating ideas harmful to our na- ommended legislation to provide a limit- review. These guidelines allow access to tional security. The scope of restricted ed exemption (32). research information only to committee subjects could include research related The National Commission for the Pro- members and staff. who must pledge to computers, lasers. and cryptography. tection of Human Subjects of Biomedical confidentiality and maintain locked files. but the list is far from clear. This and a and Behavioral Research reviewed the Military efforts to extend control over similar revision of the Export Adminis- implications of using FOIA to obtain the disclosure of nonclassified research tration Act have remained in the House information about researchprotocols are also under negotiation. The math- Foreign Affairs Committee. They are ob- and designs. The commission concluded ematicians concerned about control of structed by questions of constitutionality that HEW's policy of releasing data only cryptography have established a system and superseded by the Executive order after funding is awarded is necessary in of voluntary restraint. Researchers have that greatly increases the government's order to protect peer revue... ocedures. agreed to submit their papers to NSA for power to classify research not clearly and recommended legislation to ensure a review prior to publicati( n, and NSA in related to national security. The Execu- continuation of the existing practice (33). turn has agreed that, if there are poten- tive order omits the critical requirement As a result of these various pressures. tial security problems. it will consult an established during the Carter Adminis- Itis now proposed, iii a bill to reviseadvisory group before blocking publica- tration that decisions imposing secrecy FOIA. that research he added to thetion (25, 35). Vice Admiral Bobby In- must be balanced against the right to other matters, such as trade secrets, that man. seeing direct contradictions be- know. and mandates that "if there is are exempt from compulsory disclosure. tween scientific practices of open publi- reasonable doubt about the need to dos- Professijnal societies are establishing cation and national secttrity needs pro- sify ... the information shall he consid- their on special committees to respond poses extending this ,y stem of voluntary e,ed classified to questions of intellectual property and restraint to other fields. The threat of are experimenting with codes of ethics such restraints is forcine, a sharpening of Negotiations that include provisions about disclosure. distinctions between basic and applied Individual scientists have proposed re- research.althoughconvergencehas Scientists and their research sponsors search agreements that would confer aserved science well. are struggling to negotiate practices and status of "executive privilege" on re- Most chollenges to scieltitIc discre- articulate principles that would clarify searcn in order to protect confidentiality. tion end in appeals for statutory protec- questions of control in terms appropriate However, such agreements would not he tion, based on an assumption tuat the to the growing importance of scientific legally binding. Usually scientists pro- researcher has the "rightto assess the information. Open access to information tect information by practicing "defen-terms of disclosure. Such protection serves the public interest, being consist- sive record keeping," but they have akowould require a more coherent effort to ent with the democratic values of open sought protective legislation (34). Forclarify the social role of scientists and government and facilitating fiscal and example. in 1980 a bill was introduced in the nature of research that is worthy of management control over governmental- Congress on privacy of research records protection. Should criteria for protection ly funded ,..ctivities (3/1. But unlimited (S. 867 and H.R. 3409) which was intend- he based on the credentials of scientists access may threaten the scientific pro- ed to exempt researchers from subpoe-or on their sources of support. on the cess. At what point inthe course ofnas that would violate the privacy ofmethodology of a project or on the social research should data be released? Are their subjects. The subjects of researchpurposes to which it may he applied? ideas to be publicly available in their on drug and alcohol abuse are alreadyUnder what conditions would mandatory tentative stages? Are data tangential to a protected; this bill would have extended disclosure or, conversely. secrecy be project to be available as well? How can such statutory protection to all federally appropriate? the integrity of long-term projects such funded research. Legislation might have At present. the scientific response to as clinical trials be maintained while de- provided some clarification of the prob-such questions is curiously ad hoc. Aris- mands for public review are being satis- lem of confidentiality, but the bill nevering from individual incidents. the efforts qed? got as far as a hearing. to negotiate control over research are 1 09 103

its cognitive and practical dimensions. Is Privacy of Medical Information Act (House often inconsistent. Scientists appeal for Report 96-832. Government Printing Office. statutory protection from the disclosure science the pursuit of truth or the pursuit Washington. D.C.. 1980). part I. p 9 15.N Wade. 5( tea( e 209. 1492 11980). requirements of FOIA. but in doing soof useful knowledge, a carefully disci- 16.D Kennedy. Health research. Can utility and they help to weaken legislation that en-plined process or a professional and inquality co- exist''" lecture at the University of Pennsylvania. 6 December 1980. courages open exchange of information. strumental activity? The ambivalence so 17.Diamond v. Chakrabarty. 79-136. U.S. Supreme apparent in the disputes over the control Court. 16 June 1980 They seek greater military support of 18.Public Law 96-517. 12 December 1980. research but are outraged by nationalof research suggests that there have been 19For the intent of patenting. see R. B. Stevenson. Jr.. Corporations and Information (Johns Hop- security restraints. They emphasize thesignificant changes in the social role of kins Univ. Press. Baltimore. 1980). for concerns useful application of basic research butscience and in the importance of re- about effect on secrecy. see (20). 20..dvisory Committee to the Director of NIH. then draw distinctions to avoid externalsearch. Indeed. these disputes are part of Cooperative Research Relationships with Indus- control. Good reasons underlie each re-a larger struggle to renegotiate relations try NIH Patent Policy Initiatives (National In- stitutes of Health. Bethesda. Md.. 1981). sponse. but such contradictions may between science and the public that were 21D. F. Noble. America By Design (Knopf. New established at a time when science was a York. 1977). make science more vulnerable to con- 22.D. C. Bok. Harr. Mag. 83.23 (May/June 1981). trol. For example. in justifying nationalvery different social enterprise. 23.U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Government Operations. The Government's security constraints. Inman has called Classification of Private Ideas (House Report scientific claims of freedom "disingenu- References and Notes 96-1540. Government Printing Office. Washing- ton, D.C.. 1980). ous" in the light of the trade secrecy I. The term "intellectual property" is commonly 24.Proc. IEEE 67. 397 (1979). restrictions that academics routinely ac- used to refer to intangible properly rights in 25S. H. Unger. Technol. Ret. 85 (March 1982). trade secrets, patents. or copyrights. I am using 26.H. Relyea. "Business, trade secrets. and infor- cept as part of their industrial ties (36). It more broadly as "an aggregate of rights in the mation access policy. Developments in other results of creative efforts of the mind" (Web- countnes." paper presented at a meeting of the The response of scientists rests on the ster's New International Dictionary. ed. 2). and Amencan Bar Association. Washington. D.C.. principle of sovereignty and on the belief focusing on the question of control that is the II May 1981. most critical and yet ambiguous aspect of the 27 "Information, secrecy. and atomic en- that the public interest is better served if concept of ownership in science. ergy." unpublished (1981). research is under scientific control.It 2. U S House of Representatives. Lack of Guide- 28."International Traffic on Arms Regulations." line for Federal Contract and Grant Data 129th Title 22. Code of Federal Regulations. pts. 121- rests on a notion that scientists have a Report by the Committee on Government Oper- 128. February 1976. and Department of State. "right" to control their research. that ations. Government Printing Office. Washing- proposed revisions. Federal Register V. 45 (No. ton. D C.. 1978). 246). 83970 (19 December 1980). autonomy is necessary in order to main- 3 P. Raven-Hansen. -Quid pro quo for public 29.See summary by L. Lubrano. Sciences. N.Y. tain integrity, to avert the misinterpreta- dough." address at the New York Academy of Arad Sc:. 11. 12 11971). Sciences. New York City. 4 March 1981 30.22 U.S. Code. sect. 2778. tion of premature data. and to protect 4. I shall concentrate on basic research. excluding 31.H. Relyea. Soc . Indic. Res 7. 137 (1980) those areas of military and applied industrial 32Ethics Advisory Board of the Department of their "stock in trade.- Those who re- research that are indisputably subject to propn- Health. Education and Welfare. "Report on quest data claim the "right to know" as etary secrecy or military classification Howev- Request of the NIH for Limited Exemption from er. It is important to note that the debates about the Freedom of Information Act" (preliminary an essential condition of democracy. disclosure of scientific informnon take place in report. Washington. D.C.. 7 March 1980). Government agencies claim the right to the context of a broader debate over the exemp- 33National Commission for the Protection of Hu- tion of trade secrets from the Freedom of Infor- man Subjects of Biomedical and Behavorial information as part of their obligation to mation Act This debate has come to focus on Research. "Report on Disclosure of Research the proprietan status of test data on health and Information under the FOIA" (DHEW publica- assure responsible use of federal funds. safety. See T. 0. 61cGa ity and SShapiro. tion (0S)77.0003. Washington. D.C.. 1977). to meet policy goals. or to maintain lk,t, Lott Ret 93. 831 (1980) 34.P Nejelski. Sor. Probl. 21. 3 (1973). "The rule 5 See Forsham v Califano. 587 F 2d 1128 ID C of law and social research." paper presented to national security or law enforcement in Cir.. 1978). Forthain vHarm. 445 U S169 the Conference on Solutions to Ethical and the public interest. (1980) Legal Dilemmas in Social Research. Washing- 6. St Paul's Benet olent Edu«stional and Micsian- ton. D.C.. 23 February 1978. Nejelski argues In today's political context. resolution art Institute et al %, The U S cilAinenc a et al . that legislation is the only effective protection of these conflicting claims leans toward C 79-2047A (N D Ga ) 8 January 1980 and 29 and sees a model in the legal decisions allowing April 1980 journalists to protect their sources. greater constraints on freedom of infor- 7 Doi Chemical v, Dr James Allen. U S Court 35G B. Kolata. Science 210. 511 11980) apparentinthe of Appeals. 7th Circuit. 80.2013 36B. Inman. -National security and technical in- mation-constraints 8. B. Hosford. "FOIA Requests at NIH. 1975- formation." paper presented at the AAAS annu- weakening of FOIA. the extension of 1979" (National Institutes of Health. Washing- al meeting. Washington. D.C.. 7 January 1982. ton. D C . 1980) 37Material and criticism were generously supplied national security classification. and oth- 9 Letter from HEW Secretary for Planning and by Rosemary Chalk. David Goldwyn. Harold er restrictions on open communication. Evaluation to AAAS. 24 November 1975 Relyea. Robert Gellman. Barbara Mishkin. and 10 K Bond. Am Souol 13. 144 (1978) members of the AAAS Committee on Scientific some of which protect scientific sover- IIL Gordis and E Gold. S( ten( e 207. 15311980) Fixedom and Responsibility. The hospitality of eignty and some of which threaten it. 121 D Carroll. P S 6. 268 (summer 1973) the Laboratoire d'Econometne. Ecole Polytech- 13. and C. Knerr. "'Myron Farber. the Net nique (Paris). is appreciated Contradictions persist. reflecting the York Times, and American science." unpublished 11978). deep ambivalence within science about 14See U S House of Representatives. federal

1 0 104

Accordingly, research results obtained at industrial laboratories often go unpublished or are released slowly in the patent literature. In the university, fast publication of scientific findings is eagerly sought. Much of the activity in industry is conducted by interdisciplinary teams whose members are arbitrarily assigned to tasks. Projects may be suddenly terminated. Only a favored few in the typical industrial laboratory have the privilege of personally choosing a research area and sticking with it through discouraging phases of effort. This frenetic tempo is incompatible with the tempo of graduate Many universities are examining search-the financial ills of the universities. The training in the natural sciences. In their ingly their relations with industry. The basicmoney spent by industry at universities is thesis research, it is essential that students reason is financial. The academic communi- unlikely to top 10 percent of the federal pursue a line of inquiry patiently and in ty is nervous about federal funding of re-funds they now receive. Close cooperation depth. search. Some universities report that theybetween universities and industry could lead These -Aamples of differing values and have retained a satisfactory level of support.to harmful tensions induced by competing procedures make it obvious that close col- but half or more have not. Apprehensionvalue systems. Universities already have laboration between academia and industry is about federal support has been coupled with their share of such differences. The human- likely to create new problems and tensions. other financial problems of the universities ists look down on the engineers and vice ver- That is not to say that cooperation is undesir- brought on by recession and inflation. sa; the various science departments usually able. One time-tested method of cooperation In this environment it has become fashion-have little interaction. However, the faculty is that of consultation, preferably conducted able to look to industry as a possible sourceshare common goals in the pursuit of knowl- off-campus. Professors spend at most an of funds. Already a number of universitiesedge and in fostering the education of the average of a day a week at this. They bring have entered into contracts involving sub-young. Most of the faculty place these goals their expertise to industry and in turn learn of stantial sums, and additional arrangementsabove that of attaining personal wealth. :taw developments and new job opportunites will doubtless follow. In general, industry The value system and the mode of con- for their students. has not bee? devoting a sufficient sum toducting research and development in in- However, some of the new arrangements basic research within its own laboratories ordustry are quite different from those of aca- between universities and industry come close elsewhere. It was treated to a lesson when ademia. To survive, a company must make a to inserting an industrial enclave into the large number of comp: pies were caught flat-profit. It must evolve with the changing campus. It would be unfortunate if such ex- flooted by academic developments intimes. And it must be well managed, with a amples were carelessly multiplied. Rather, molecular biology. Other sectors of industryclearly defined chain of command. The emphasis should be placed on avoiding rela- have become concerned about future sup-bankruptcy courts are very busy these days. tionships that might damage the universities plies of personnel trained in computer-Only the strong and nimble remain viable. and their ability to carry out well their es- related fields. In industry, the pressure of the bottom line sential functions of undergraduate and Despite an apparent basis for closeinevitably dictates policies with respect to graduate education. cooperation between academia and industry. R&D. The goal is not pursuit of knowledge; the likely outcome is far from a cure-all forit is the attaining of proprietary advantage.

ranks of evangelical ChristiansIn the opinion of many observers, belief in special creation seemed destined to go the way of the dinosaurs. But contrary to the hopes of liberals and the fears of conservatives, it did not become extinct. The majority of iate-19th -century Americans remained true to a traditional reading of Genesis. and as late as 1979 a public opinion poll revealed that half the adults in America continued to believe that "God created Adam and Eve to start the human race" (2).

Scarcely 20 years after the publication who had not embraced some theory of The author is Professor of the History of Mediunc of Charles Darwin's Origin of Species in organic evolution (I). Liberal churchmen and the History of Science at thet. ni% ersits, of Wisconsin. Madison cri*Thisarticleis,in 1859 special creationists could name were already beginning to follow their ahridged version of an essay prepared for the ( ,irncr only two prominent naturalists in North Foundation-University of Wisconsin Conference on scientific colleagues into the evolutionist "Christianity and Science.21 to .":s April Mt The America.JohnWilliam Dawsonofcamp, and by the end of the century essay will appear in its entireis in the proLeedings of that conference. being Jointly culled by the author McGill and Arnold Guyot of Princeton. evolution was appearing even within the and David C Lindberg. 11 i 105

This article focuses on the intellectual most: democracy and Christ. inits . Two .hurehi:s of mcrica but from individ- leaders of creationism. particularly the b ioks in particular confirm ;0 , suspi- uals like Bryan and interdenominational small number who claimed scientific ex- cion. first. Vernon .C.211.,gg's Head- organizations sucl- the World's Chris- pertise. Drawing c,n their writings, it(mai ters Nights (11:). recounted first- tian Fundamentals Association, a pre- traces the ideological development of hand con v ers it ons with ('erman officers dominantly premillennialist body founa- creationism from, the crusade to outlaw that revealed the role of Darwin's biolo- ed in 1919 by William Bell Riley (1861- the teaching of evolution in th, 1920's to gy in the German decision to declare 19;7), pastor of the First Baptist Church the current battle for equal time. Durin war. The second. Benjamin Kidd's .5( i- in Minneapolis. Riley became active as this period the leading apologist, for ente of Power (1918). purported to dem- an antievolutionist after discovering. to special creation shifted from an openly onstrate the historical and philosophicalhis apparent surprise, that evolutionists biblical defense of then views to one links between Darwinism and German had already infiltrated the University of based largely on science. At the ..arne militarism (3. pp. 261-265). Minne sota (8;. The early 20th century time they grew less tolerant of notions of About the time that Bryan discovered witnessed the unprecedented expansion an old Earth and symbolic days of cre- the relation between Darwinian idea.. of public education (enrollment in public ation. common among creationists in the and the war, he also became aware, to high schools nearly doubled between 1920's, and more doctrinaire intheir his great distress, of unsettling effects 1920 and 1930), and fundamentalists like insistence on a recent creation in six the theory of evolution was having onRiley and Bryan wanted to make sure literal days and on a universal flood. America's ow n young people. From fre- that students attending these institutions quent visitsto college campuses and would not lose their faith. Thus they The Antievolution Crusade from talks with parents. pastors. and resolved to drive every evolutionist from Sunday School teachers,he learned the public school payroll. One creation- Early in 1922 William Jennings Bryanabout an epidemic of unbelief that was ist went so far as to say that the German (1860 i925). Presbyterian layman, thrice sweeping the country. Upon investigat- soldiers who killed Belgian and French the Democratic candidate for the presi- ing the cause, reported his wife. "hechildren with poisoned candy were an- dency of the United States, and secre-became convinced that the teaching ofgels compared with the teachers and tary of state under Woodrow Wilson, Evolution as :t instead of a theory textbookwriters who corruptedthe heard of an effort in Kentucky to ban the caused the stu. ,:nts to lose faith in the souls of children with false teachings and teaching of evolution in public schools. Bible. first. in the story of creation. and thereby sentenced them to eternal death "The movement will sweep the coun- later in other doctrines. which underlie (9J. try." he predicted hopefully, "and v the Christian religion" (4). Again Bryan will drive Darwinism from our schools" found confirming evidence in a recently Creationist Science and Scientists (3, p. 277). His prophecy proved overly published hook. Belies/ in God and Int- optimistic. but before the end of the mortalio (1916). by the Bryn Mawr psy- In 1922 William Bell Riley outlined the decade more than 20 state legislat'ires chologist James H. Leuha. who demon- reasons why fundamentalists opposed did debate antievolution laws, and at strated statistically that college attend- the teaching of evolution: "The first and least fiveOklahoma. Florida, Tennes- ance endangered traditional religious be- most important reason for its elimina- see. Mississippi. and Arkansaspassed liefs (3. pp. 266-267). tion," he explained. "is in the unques- restrictive legislation. Many individuals Armed with this information about the tioned fact that evolution is not a sci- shared responsibility for these events. cause of the world's and the nation's ence: it is a hypothesis only. a specula- but none had a greater share than Bryan moral decay. Bryan launched a nation- tion" (M). Bryan often made the same His entry into the fray produced a cata- wide crusade against the offending doc- point. defining true science as "classi- lytic effect and gave antievolutionists trine. Throughout his political career fied know 'edge . theexnlanation of what they needed most: "a spokesman Bryan had placed his faith in the com- facts (/ / ). Although creationists had far with anational reputation. immense mon people, and he resented the attempt mere compelling reasons for rejecting prestige. and a loyal following" (3. p. of a few thousand scientists "to establish evolution than thatit was "not a science." their insistence on this point was 272). an oligarchy over the forty million Amer- The development of Bryan's own atti- ican Christians" and to dictate what not merely an obscuranti.' ploy. They tudes ;award evolution closely paralleled should he taught in the schools (5). To a based it on a once-respected principle. that of the fundamentalist movement. Democrat like Bryan. it seemed prepos- associated with Sir Francis Bacon. that Since early in the century he had occa- terous that this "scientific soviet" would emphasized the factual. nontheoretical sionally alluded to the silliness of belies - not only demand to teach its insidious nature of science (12)By identifying ing in monkey ancestors and to the ethi- philosophy but insist that society pay its with the Baconian tradition. creationists cal dangers of thinking that might makes salaries (3. p. 239). Confident that nine- could label evolution as false science. right, but until the outbreak of World tenths of the Christian citizens agreed could claim equality with scientific au- War I he saw little reason to quarrel w ith with him (6). h.: decided to appeal direct- thorities in comprehending facts. and those who disagreed. The war. howeve r. ly to them. as he had done successfully could deny the charge of being antiscien- exposed the darkest side of human na- in fighting the liquor interests. "Commit tific. "It is not 'science' that orthodox ture and shattered his illusions about the your case to the people." he advised Christians oppose." wrote a fundamen- future of Christian society. Obviouslycreationists. "Forget. if need be. the talist editor. "No! no! a thousand times. something had gone awry, and Bryanhigh-brows both in the political and col- No! They are opposed only to the theory soon traced the source of the trouble to lege world. and carry this cause to the of evolution, which has not yet been the paralyzing influence of Darwinism on people. They are the final and efficiently proved, and therefore is not to he called the conscience. By substituting the law corrective power" (7). by the sacred name of science" (13). of the jungle for the teaching of Christ. it Leadership of the antievolution move- Creationists kept assuring themselves threatenedtheprincipleshevalued ment came not fromtheorganized that the world's best scielaists agreed 112 106

with them. They received an important his own reckoning. never lost a public plausible and just as cons incing if one should boost at the beginning of their campaign debate. After one encounter vv nth an evo- take the facts of European history and atfrom an address by the distinguished lutionist in Philadelphia. he wrote home tempt to show that all the various events were simultaneous. British biologist William Bate:ion,in gleefully that "the debate was a simple 1921, in which he declared that scientists walkover, a massacremurder pure an'i As Jordan recognized, Price lacked any had not yet uncovered "the actual mode simnle. The eminent professor was sim- formal training or field experience in and process of evolution" (/4). Although piy scared stiff to advance my of the geology. He v.as, however. a voracious he warned creationists against misinter common arguments of the evoluists, reader of geological literature. an arm- preting his statement as a rejection ofanti he fizzled like a wet fire-cracker" chair scientist vs ho :,elf-consciously min- evolution. they paid no more attention to (17. pp. 329-330). imized the importance of field experi- that caveat than they did to the numer- Price, a Seventh-day Adventist geolo- ence. ous proevolution resolutions passed by gist. was less skilled at debating than During the next 15 years Price occu- scientific societies. Rim mer but more influential scientifical-pied scientific settees in several Advent- The creationists could claim few scien- ly. As a young man Price attended an ist schools and authored six more books tists of their own: a couple of self-madeAdventist college in Michigan for 2 years attacking evolution, particularly its geo- ;nen of science, one or two physicians. and later completed a teacher-traininglogical foundation. Although not un- and a handful of teachers who, as one course at the provincial normal school in known outside his own church before the evolutionist described them, were "try- his native New Brunswick. The turn ofearly 1920's, he did not begin attracting ing to hold down. rat a chair, but a the Antury- found him serving as princi-r^"at attention until then. Shortly af- whole settee, of 'Natural Science' in pal of a small high school in an isolated 3ryan declared war on evolution, some littleinstitution(15). Of this part of eastern Canada. where one of his zepublishedThe NeuGeology group, the most influential were Harry few companions was a local physiciar. 923). the most systematic and compre- Rimmer (1890-1952) and George During their many conversations, the hensive of his many books. Init he McCready Price (1870-1963). doctor almost converted his fundamen- presented his "great law of confarmahle Rimmer, a Presbyterian minister and talist friend to evolution. Price nearly stratigraphic sequences. . by all odds self-styled"researchscientist."ob- succumbed on at least three occasions.the most important law ever formulated tained his limited exposure to science but each time he was saved by prayer with reference to the order in which the during one term at a small homeopathic and by reading the works of the Advent- strata occur. This law stated that "any medical school, where he picked up a istprophetess Ellen G. White, whokind of Msiliferouc beds luiteter. vocabulary of "double-jointed. twelve claimed divine inspiration for her view *young' or 'old.' may he found occurring cylinder. knee-action words" that laterthat the Noachian flood accounted forconformably or any other Msiliferous served to impress the uninitiated (16). the fossil record cn which evolutionists beds. 'older' or 'younger.* To Price, He attended Whittier College and the based their theory. As a result of these so-called deceptive conformatives Bible Institute of Los Angeles for a year experiences. Price vowed to devote his (where str ita seem to be missing) and each before entering full-time evangelis- lifeto promoting creationism of the thrust faults (where the strata are appar- tic work. About 1919 he settled in Los strictest kind (19. 20). ently in the wrong order) proved that Angeles. where he set up a small labora- By 1906 he was working as a handy-there was no natural order to the fossil- tory at the rear of his house to conduct man at an Adventist sanitarium in south- bearing we ks. all of w hich he attributed experiments in embryology and related ern California. That year he published ato the Genesis flood. sciences. Within a year or two he estab- small volume entitled Illogical Gtologv. A Yale geologist reviewing the book lished the Research Science Bureau to The Weakest Point in the E;ohition The- for St tent e accused Price of "harboring prove through findings in biologvpale- w:v, in which he brashly offered $1000 a geological nightmare" (22). but Price's ontology, and anthropology that science "to any one who will. in the face ofreputation among fundamentalists rose and the literal Bible were not contradic- the facts here presented show me how dramatically. Rimmer hailed The Neil tory" ( /7. p. 278). The bureau staffthatto prove that one kind of fossil is olderGeologx as "a masterpiece of REAL is.Rimmerapparently used income than another. (Like Rimmer, he never sciern.e [that] explodes in a convincing from the sale of memberships to finance had to pay.) According to his argument. manner some of the ancient fallacies of anthropological field trips in the western Danvinism rested "logically and histori- science falsely so called' (23). By the United States, but Rimmer's dream ofcally on tl c succession of life idea as mid - 1920\ Price's by-line was appearing visiting Africa to find proof of the dissim- taught by geology- and "if this succes- in a broad spectrum of conservative reli- ilarity between gorillas and human be- sion of life is not an actual scientific fact. gious periodicals, and the editor of Sci- ings never materialized. By thelate then Darwinism ...is a most gigantic ence could accurately describe him as 1920's the bureau lay dormant. and Rim- hoax. "the principal scientific authority of the mer signed on with Riley's World's In a review (21). David Starr Jordan. Fundamentalists" (24). Christian Fundamentals Association, as a president of Stanford University and an field secretary (17. p. 279). authority on fossil fishes. warned Price The Scopes Trial and Beyond Besides engaging in research. Rimmer that he should not expect "any geologist delivered thousands of lectures. primari- to take this world seriously." The un- In the spring of 1925 John Thomas ly to student groups. maintaining the known author had written "a very clever Scopes, a high school teacher in the scientific accuracy of the Bible and ridi-book" but it was small town of Dayton. Tennessee. con- -,4ling evolutionists. To attract attention. fessed to having violated the state's re- he repeatedly offered $100 to anyone a sort of lawyer's plea. based on scattering cently passed law banning the teaching who could discover a scientific error in mistakes. omissions and exceptions against general truths that anybody familiar with the of human evolution in public schools. the Scriptures: the offer apparently nev- facts in gereral way cannot possibly di, His subsequent trial focused internation- er cost him any money (18). He also. by pute.It would be just as easy and just as al attention on the antievolution crusade 1 j. 3 107 and brought William Jennings Bryan to lighted a serious and long-standing prob- Creationism Underground Dayton to assist the prosecution. !a an- lem among antievolutionists: their failure ticipation of arguments on the scientific to agree on a theory of creation. Even During the heady days of the 1920's, merits of evolution, Bryan sought out the the visible leaders could not reach a when their activities made front-page best scientific minds in the creationist consensus. Riley Ake Bryan, interpreted headlines, creationists dreamed of con- camp to serve as expert witnesses. The the days of Genesis as ages, belie% ing verting the world: a decade later. reject- response to his inquiries could only have that the testimony of geology necessitat- ed and forgotten by the establishment, disappointed the aging crusader. Price. ed this approach. Rimmer favored an they turned their energies inward and then teaching in England. sent his re- exegesis that identified two separate cre- began creating an institutional base of gretsalong with advice to Bryan to ations in the first chapter of Genesis. the their own. Deprived of the popular press stay away from scientific topics (20. p. first. "in the beginning.' perhaps mil-and unable to publish their views in 24). Howard A. Kelly, a prominent lions of years ago. and the second. in six organs controlled by orthodox scientists. Johns Hopkinphysician who had con- actual days. approximately 40(X) yearsthey determined to organize their own tributed to the l" .mdamentals. confessed before the birth of Christ. He adopted societies and edit their own journals. that. except for the creation of Adam and this view in part because his scientific Their early efforts, however, all encoun- Eve, he believed in evolution (25). Louismind could not fathom how. given Ri- tered two problems: lack of a critical T. More, a physicist who had just written ley 's scheme. plants created on the third mass of scientifically trained creationists a book entitled The Dogma 1,f Evolution day could have survived thousands of and lack of internal agreement. (1925), replied that he accepted ev olu- years without sunshine until the sun ap- About 1935 a small group of creation- tion as a working hypothesis (26). Alfred peared on the fourth (29). According to ists, led by a Wheaton College professor, W. McCann. author of Godor Gorillathe testimony of acquaintances. he also formed the Religion and Science Associ- (1922). took the opportunity to lecturebelieved that the Bible taught a I3cal ation to create "a unified front against Bryan for supporting prohibition in therather than a universal flood (30). Price, the theory of evolution" (35, p.159). past and for now trying "to bottle-up thewho .ared riot a whit about the opinionAmong those invited to participate in the tendencies of men to think for them-of geologists. insisted on nothing lessassociation's first convention were rep- selves" (27). than a single recent creation in six literal resentatives of the three major creation- At the trial itself, things scarcely %%tilt day s and a worldwide deluge. He regard- ist parties, including Price, Rimmer. and better. When Bryan could name or ed Riley 's day -age theory as "the devil's one of Dawson's sons who, like his fa- Price and the deceased George Frederick counterfeit" (3) and Rimmer's gap the- ther, advocated the day-age theory (35, Wrights scientists for whom he had ory as only slightly more acceptable (32). p. 209). But. as soon as the Price faction respect. the caustic Clarence Darrow Although the court in Dayton founddiscovered that their associates had no attorney foi the defense. scoffed: Scopes guiltyas charged. creationistsintention of agreeing on a short Earth had little cause for rejoicing. The presshistory, they bolted the organization, You mentioned Price because he is the only human being in the world so far as you know had not treated them kindly, and the leaving it in shambles (36). that signs his name as a geologist that belie%es taxing ordeal no doubt contributed to Shortly thereafter, in .938. Price and like you do .. every scientist in this country Bryan's death a few day s after the trial some Adventist friends in the Los Ange- knows 'he' is a mountebank and a pretender ended. Nevertheless. the antievolution- les area, several of them physicians asso- and not a geologist at all_ ists continued their crusade. winning vic- ciated with the College of Medical Evan- Eventually Darrow forced Bryan to con-tories in Mississippi in 1926 and in Ar-gelists (now Loma Linda University), cede that the world was indeed far more kansas 2 years later. By thi, end of the organized their on Deluge Geology So- than 6000 years old and that the 6 days of decade. however. their legislative cam- ciety and, between 1941 and 1945, pub- creation had probably been long.:r than paign had lost its steam. The presidential lished a Bulletin of Deluge Geology and 24 hours each (20. p. 24). election of 1928. pitting a Protestant Related Science. As described by Price, Thoughonecouldscarcelyhave against a Catholic, offered fundamental-the group consisted of "a very eminent guessed it from his public pronounce- ists a new diversion. and the (. aset of the set of men. ...In no other part of this ments, Bryan was far from being a strict depression in 1929 farther diverted their round globe could anything like the num- creationist. In fact. his personal beliefs energies. ber of scientifically educated believers in regarding evolution diverged considera- But contrary to appeatances. the crea- Creation and opponents of evolution be bly from those of his more conser% au% e tionists were simply changing tactics, assembled, as here in Southern Califor- supponers. Shortly before the ail he not giving up. Instead of lobby ing state nia" (20. p. 26). Perhaps the society's had confided to Kelly that he. too, had legislatures. they shifted their attack to most notable achievement was its spon- no objection to "evolution before man local communities. w here they engaged sorship in the early 1940's of a hush-hush but for the fact that a concession as toin 'the emasculation of textbooks. the project to study giant fossil footprints, the truth of evolution up to man fur- 'purging' of libraries. and above all the believed to be human, discovered in nishes our opponents with an argument continued hounding of teachers" (33) rocks far old( r than the theory of evolu- v. Inch they are quick to use, namelyifTheir new approach attracted less attention would allow. This find. the society evolution accounts for all the species up tion but paid off handsomely as school announced. demolished that theory "at a to man, does it not raise a presumption in boards, textbook publishers. and teach-single stroke" and promised to "astound behalf of evolution to include man ers in both urban and rural areas. Norththe scientific world!" (37). But despite Until biologists could actually demon- South. bowed to their pressure. Dar- such success and the croup's religious strate the evolution of one species ir to winism virtually disappeared from high homogeneity, it too soon founderedon another, he thought it best to keep them school texts, and as late as 1941 one- "the same rock." complained a disap- on the defensive (28). third of American teachers feared beingpointed member. that wrecked the Reli- Bryan's concession at Day ton spot- identified as evolutionists (31). gion and Science Association. that is.

1 108

"pre-Genesis time for the earth" (38). chemical laws (40). Conservatives with they finished their project. Morris had By this time creationists were also in the ASA not unreasonably suspected earned a Ph.D. in hydraulic engineering beginning to face a new problem: the that Kulp's exposure to "the orthodox from the University of Minnesota and presence within their own ranks ofgeological viewpoint" had severely un- was chairing the civil engineering depart- young university-trained scientists who dermined his faith in a literal interpreta- ment at Virginia Polytechnic Institute. wanted to bring evangelical Christianity tion of the Bible (4!). As more and more Whitcomb was teaching Old Testament more into line with mainstream science. ASA members drifted from strict cre- studies at Grace Theological Seminary in The encounter between the two genera- ationism. a split appeared inevitable. Indiana (43). tions often proved traumatic, as is illus- In 1961 they brought out The Genetic trated by the case of Harold W. Clark Flood (45), the most impressive contri- (born 1891). Once a student of Price's. Henry M. Morris and the bution tostrict creationism since the he had gone on to earn a master's degree Revival of Creationism publication of Price's New Geology in in biology from the University of Califor- 1923. In many respects their book ap- nia and taken a position at a small Ad- In 1964 a historian predicted that "a peared to be simply "a reissue of G. M. ventist college in northern California. By renaissance of the [creationist] move- Price's views, brought up to date," as 1940 his training and field experience had ment is most unlikely" (42). And so it one reader described it (46). Beginning convinced him that Price's Nett Geology seemed. But even as those words were with a testimony to their belief in the was "entirely out of date and inade- penned a revival was under way. led by a verbal inerrancy of Scripture" (45, p. xx) quate" as a text, especially in its rejec- Texasengineer,HenryM.Morris. Morris and Whitcomb went on to argue tion of the geological column. When Reared a nominal Southern Baptist, and for a recent creation of the entire uni- Price learned of this, he angrily accused a believer in creation,. Morris as a youth verse. a fall that triggered the second lay, his former disciple of suffering fromthe had drifted unthinkingly into evolution- of thermodynamics, and a worldwide modern mental disease of university- ism and religious indifference. A thor- flood that inIyear laid down most of itis" and of currying the favor of "tobac- ough study of the Bible after his gradua- the geological strata. Given this history, co-smoking. Sabbath-breaking, God-de- tion from college convinced him of its they argued. 'the last refuge of the case fying"evolutionists.DespiteClark's absolute truth and prompted him to re-forevolutionimmediately vanishes protests that he still believed in a literal evaluate his belief in evolution. After an away. and the record of the rocks be-

6-day creation and universal flood. Price intense period of soul-searching he con- comes a tremendous witness ... to the kept up his attack fo- the better part of a cluded that creation had taken place in holiness and justice and power of the decade, at one point addressing a vitriol- six literal days because the Bible clearly living God of Creation!" (45, p. 451). ic pamphlet. Theories of Satanic Origin, said so and "God doesn't lie. Corrobo- Despite the book's lack of conceptual to his erstwhile friend and fellow cre- rating evidence soon came from the book novelty, it provoked an intense debate ationist (20, p. 25). of nature. While sitting in his office at among evangelicals.Progressivecre- The inroads of secular scientific train- Rice Institute, where he was teaching ationists, who interpreted the days of ing also became apparent in the Ameri- civil engineering, he would study the Genesis symbolically, denounced it as a can Scientific Affiliation (ASA), created butterfliesandwaspsthatflewin travesty on geology that threatened to by evangelical scientists in1941.Al- through the window: being familiar with set back the cause of Christian science though the society adopted no statement structural design. he calculated the im-a generation, while strict creationists of belief, during its early years strict probability of the development of such praised it for making biblical catastro- creationists found its atmosphere conge- complex creatures by chance. Nature as phism intellectually respectable. Its ap- nial. However, in the late 1940's some of well as the Bible seemed to argue for peal, suggested one critic, lay primarily the more progressive members, led by a creation (43). in the fact that, unlike previous creation- geochemist, J. Laurence Kulp, began For assistance in answering the claims ist works.it "looked legitimate as a criticizing Price and his followers for of evolutionists, he found little creation- scientific contribution." accompanied as their attempts to compress Earth history istliterature of value other than the it was by footnotes and other scholarly into less than10,000 years. Kulp. a writings of Rimmer and Price. Although appurtenances (47).In responding to Wheaton alumnusanda Plymouth he rejected Price's peculiar theology. he then Jetractors. Morris and Whitcomb Brother, had acquired a doctorate fromtook an immediate liking to his flood repeatedly refused to be drawn into a Princeton University before joining thegeology and incorporated it into a little scientific debate. arguing that "the real Department of Geology at Columbia book, That You Might Believe (1946). the issue is not the correctness of the inter- University. Although initially suspicious first book, so far as he knew, "published pretation of various details of the geolog- of the conclusions of geology regarding since the Scopes trial in which a scientist ical data, but simply v. hat God has re- the history and antiquity of the earth, he from a secular university advocated revealed in His Word concerning these had come to accept them (39). As one ofcent special creation and a worldwide matters" (48). thefirstevangelicalsprofessionally flood" (44). In the late 1940's he joined Whatever :smerits. The Genesis trained in geology, he felt a responsibil- the ASAjust in time to protest Kulp's Flood unqu stionably "brought about a ity to warn his colleagues in the ASAattack on Price's geology. But his words stunning renaissance of flood geology' about Price's work. which. he believed. fell on deaf ears. In 1953, w hen he pre- (49), symbolized by the establishment in had "infiltrated the greater portion ofsented some of his own views on the 1963 of the Creation Research Society. fundamental Christianity in America pri- flood to the ASA, one of the few compli- Shortly before its publication Morris had marily due to the absence of trained ments came from a young theologian. sent the manuscript to Walter E. Lam- Christian geologists." In what was ap- John C. Whitcomb, Jr.. who belonged to merts, a MissouriSynod Lutheran with parently the first systematic critique ofthe Grace Brethren. Morris and Whit-d doctorate in genetics from the Univer- the "new geology" Kulp concluded that comb subsequently became friends and sity of California. As an undergraduate the "major propositions of the theory are decided to collaborate on a major de- at Rerkeleyt 4mmerts had di...ce,:ered contradicted by established physical and fense of the Noachian flood. By the time Price's Net Geology. and during the li5 109 early 1940's. while teaching at UCLA. (50. p. 63). Eschewing politics, the CRS Murray's ability to shield her child from he had worked with Price in the Cre-devoted itself almost exclusively to edu- religious exposure suggested to Segraves ation-Deluge Society.After the mid-cation and research. funded "at very thatcreationistparentslikeherself 1940's. however. his interest in creation- little expense. and .. with no expendi- "were entitled to protect our children ism had flagged, until reawakened by the ture of public money." Among the proj- from the influence of beliefs that would Morris and Whitcomb manuscript. Dis- ectsit supported were expeditions to be offensive to our religious beliefs" (47, gusted by the ASA's flirtation with evo- search for Noah's ark, studies of fossil p. 58). 1. was this line of argument that lution, he organized in the early 1960's a human footprints and pollen grains found finally persuaded the Board of Education correspondence network with Morrisout of the predicted evolutionary order,to grant creationists equal rights. andeightotherstrictcreationists, experiments on radiation-produced mu- Flushed with victory, Segraves and dubbed the "team of ten." In 1963 seven tations in plants, and theoretical studiesher son Kelly in 1970 joined an effort to of the ten met with a few other like- in physics demonstrating a recent originorganize a Creation-Science Research minded scientists at the home of a team of the earth (53). A number of members Center (CSRC). affiliated with Christian member in Midland, Michigan, to form collaborated in preparing a biology text- Heritage College in San Diego. to pre- the Creation Research Society (CRS)book based on creationist principles (54). pare creationist literature suitable for (50). In view of the previous history of cre- adoption in public schools. Associated The society began with a carefully ation science. it was an auspicious begin- with them in this enterprise was Henry selected.,18-man "inner-core steering ning. Morris. who resigned his position at Vir- committee," which included the original While the CRS catered to the needs of ginia Polytechnic Institute to help estab- team of ten. The composition of this scientists.. a second., predominantly lay. lish a center for creation research. Be- committee reflected. albeit imperfectly. organization carried creationism to the cause of differences in personalities and the denominational, regional, and pro- masses. Initiated in 1964 in the wake ofobjectives, the Segraves in 1972 left the fessional bases of the creationist revival. interest generated by The Genesis Flood. college, taking the CSRC with them, and There were six MissouriSynod Luther-the Bible-Science Association came to Morris set up a new research division at ans. five Baptists, two Seventh-day Ad- be identified by many with one man.,the college, the Institute for Creation ventists, and one each from the Re- Walter Lang. an ambitious Missouri- Research (ICR) (43). Morris announced formed Presbyterian Church. the Re- Synod pastor who assertively prizedthat the new institute would be "con- formed Christian Church, the Church ofspiritua: insight above scientific exper-trolled and operated by scientists" and the Brethren, and an independent Bible tise (55). As editor of the widely circulat- would engage in research and education, church (information about one membered Bible-Sc ience Newsletter, he vigor- notpoliticalaction(58).During the is lacking). Eleven lived in the Midwest.ously promoted the Price-Morris line and 1970's Morris added five scientists to his three in the South.. and two in the Far occasionally provided a platform for in-staff and, funded mainly by small gifts West. The committee included six biolo- dividuals on the fringes of the creation- and royalties from institute publications, gists but only ont geologist., an indepen- ist movement, such as those who ques- turned the ICR into the world's leading dent consultant with a master's degree. tioned the heliocentric theory and who center for the propagation of strict cre- Seven members taught in church-related believed that Einstein's theory of relativ- ationism (43).Meanwhile, the CSRC colleges, five in state institutions, the ity "was invented in order to circumvent continued campaigning for the legal rec- others worked for industry or were self-'the evidence that the earth is at rest'sognition of special creation, often citing employed (5/). (56). Needless to say, the pastor's broad- a direct relation between the acceptance To avoid the creeping evolutionism mindedness greatlyembarrassed cre- of evolution and the breakdown of law that had rent the ASA and to ensure that ationists seeking scientific' respectabil- and order. Its own research, the CSRC the society remain loyal to the Price-ity. who feared such bizarre behavior announced,. proved that evolution fos- Morris tradition, the CRS required mem- would tarnish the entire movement (57).tered "the moral decay of spiritual val- bers to sign a statement of belief accept- ues which contributes to the destruction ing the inerrancy of the Bible. the special of mental health and ... (theprevalence creation of "all basic types of living Scientific Creationism of] divorce, abortion, and rampant vene- things." and a worldwide deluge. It re- real disease" (59). stricted membership to Christians (5!). The creationist revival of the 1960's The 1970's witnessed a major shift in (Although creationists liked to stress the attracted little public attention until latecreationist tactics. instead of trying to scientific evidence for their position. one in the decade, when fundamentalists be- outlaw evolution, as they had done in the estimated that "only about five percent came arouscd about the federally funded 1920's, antievolutionists now fought to of evolutionists-turned-creationists did Biological Sciences Curriculum Study give creation equal time. And instead of so on the basis of the overwhelming texts, which featured evolution, and the appealing to the authority of the Bible, as evidence for creation in the world of California State Board of Education vot- Morris and Whitcomb had done as re- nature." The remaining 95 percent were ed to require public school textbooks tocently as 1961, they consciously down- creationists because they befit:yeti in the include creation along with evolution. played the Genesis story in "-ivor of what Bible (52).) To legitimize its claim to This decision resulted in large part from theycalled"scientificcreationism." being a scientific society. the CRS pub- the efforts of two southern CaliforniaSeveral factors no doubt contributed to lished a quarterly journal and limited full housewives. Nell Segraves and Jean this shift. One sociologist has suggested membership to persons with a graduate Sumrall. associates of both the Bible- that creationists began stressing the sci- degree in a scientific discipline (511. Science Association and the CRS. In entific legitimacy of their enterprise be- At the end of its first decade the socie- 1961 Segraves learned of the U.S. Su-cause "their theological legitimation of ty claimed 450 regular members. plus preme Court's ruling in the Madalyn reality was no longer sufficient for main- 1600 sustaimng membersthose who Murray case protecting atheist students taining their world and passing on their did not meet the scientific qualifications from required prayers in public schools. world view to their children" (47. p. 98). 116 110

There were alsopracticalconsider- Except for the battle to get scientific the 1960's rapidly spread overseas as ations. In 1968 the U.S. Supreme Courtcreationism into public schools, nothing American creationists and their books declared the Arkansas antievolution law brought more attention to the creation-circled the globe. Largely as a result of unconstitutional, giving creationists rea-ists than their public debates with promi- stimulation from America, Including the son to suspect that legislation requir-nent evolutionists, usually held on col- publication of a British edition of The ing the teaching of biblical creationismlege campuses. During the 1970's the Genesis Flood in 1969, membership in would meet a similar fate. They alsoICR staff alone participated in more than the British Evolution Protest Movement, feared that requiring the biblical accounta hundred of these contests and. accord- founded in 1932, quadrupled, and two "would open the door to a wide varietying to their own reckoning, never lost new creationist organizations sprang into of interpretations of Genesis" and pro- one (64).Morris preferreddelivering existence, the appearance of one, the duce demands for the inclusion of non- straightlectures and likened debates Newton Scientific Association, coincid- Christian versions of creation (60). to the bloody confrontations betweening with a visit by Morris to England in In view of such potential hazards.Christians and lions in ancient Rome. but 1973 (69). On the Continent the Dutch Morris recommended that creationists he recognized their value in carrying the assumed the lead in promoting creation- ask public schools to teach "only thecreationist message to "more non-Chris- ism, encouraged by the translation of scientific aspects of creationism" (61),tians and non-creationists than almost books on flood geology and by visits which in practice meant leaving out all any other method" (65). Fortunately for from ICR scientists in 1977 (70). Similar references to the 6 days of Genesis andhim, an associate. Duane T. Gish. holder developments occurred elsewhere in Eu- Noah's ark and focusing instead on the of a doctorate in biochemistry from therope, as well as in Australia, Asia, and evidence for a recent worldwide catas- University of California. relished such South America. By 1980 Morris's books trophe and on arguments against evolu- confrontations.If the mild-mannered. alone had been translated into Chinese, tion. The ICR textbook Scientific Cre-professorial Morris was the Darwin of Czech, Dutch, French, German, Japa- ationism (1974) came in two editions: thecreationistmovement,thenthe nese, Korean, Portuguese, Russian, and one for public schools, containing nobumptious Gish was itsHuxley. He Spanish (7!). Creationism had become references to the Bible, and another for"hits the floor running." just like a bull- an international phenomenon. use in Christian schools, which included dog, observed an admiring colleague: a chapter on "Creation according toand "I go for the jugular vein.- added References and Notes Scripture" (6!). Gishhimself(66).Such enthusiasm I. E 1Pfeifer. in The Comparative Reception of Darn inism. T. F. Glick. Ed (Univ of Texas In defending creation as a scientific helped draw crowds of up to 5000. Press. Austin. 1974). p. 203 alternative to evolution, creationists re- 2Christianity Today. 21 December 1979, p 14 Early in 1981 the ICR announced the 3. L. W Levine, Defende, of the Faith. William lied less on Francis Bacon and his con- fulfillment of a recurring dream among Jennings Bevan (Oxford Univ.Press. New York. 1965) ception of science and more on two new creationists: a program offering graduate 4 W. C. Williams. William Jennings Bryan (Put philosopher-heroes. Karl Popper and degrees in various creation-oriented sci- mu). New York. 1936), p. 448. 5. P. E. Coletta, Witham Jennings Bryan (Univ. Thomas Kuhn. Popper required all sciences (67). Besides hoping tofillan of Nebraska Press, Lincoln. 1969). pp. 3 and entific theories to be falsifiable; sinceexpected demand for teachers trained in 230. 6 W J. Bryan to W. A McRae, 5 April 1924 (Box evolution could not be falsified, argued scientific creationism, the ICR wished to 29, Bryan Papers. Library of Congress) the creationists, it was by definition notprovide an academic setting where cre- 7Christian Fundamentalist 2, 13 (1929). science. Kuhn described scientific prog- 8 M A Riley. The Dynamic of a Dream (Eerd- ationist students would be free from dis- mans. Grand Rapids. Mich 1938), pp101- ress in terms of competing models or crimination. Over the years a number of 102 paradigms rather than the accumulation 9 T T Mutt!). Hell and the High School (West- creationists had reportedly been kicked ern Baptist Publishing Co., Kansas City. Mo. of objective knowledge. Thus creation- out of secular universities because of 1923), pp. 164-165. 10 (W B Riley].Christian Fundamentalsin ists say-. no reason why their flood-geolo- their heterodox views, and leaders had School and Church 4. 5 (April -June 1922). gy model should not be allowed to com- warned graduate students to keep silent. 11 W 1Bryan. In His Image (Revell. New York, 1922). p 94 pete on an equal scientific basis with the "because if you don't, in almost 99 per - 12 G M. Marsden. Fundamentalism and American evolution model. In advocating this two- Culture (Oxford Univ Press, New York, 1980), cent of the cases you will be asked to pp. 214-215 model approach to school boards. cre- leave" (68). Several graduate students 13 L S !geyser). Bible Champion 31, 413 11925). ationists were advised (62): 14 W Bateson, Science 55. 55 (19221 took to using pseudonyms when writing 15 H D. Curtis to W J. Bryan, 22 May 1923 (Box for creationist publications. 37, Bryan Papers). 16 H Rimmer, The Harmony of Science and Scrip- Sell more SCIENCE.... Who can object to ture (Eerdmans. Grand Rapids, Mich.. ed 11. teaching more science? What is controversial 1945), p14. about that? ... do not use the word "cre-To All the World 17. W D. Edmondson. "Fundamentalist sects of ation." Speak only of science. Explain that Los Angeles. 1900-1930." thesis, Claremont Graduate School (190). withholding information contradicting evolu- It is still too early to assess the full 18. Christian Faith and Life 45, 215 (1939). tion amounts to "censorship" and smacks of 19. This and the following paragraphs on Price getting into the province of religious dog- impact of the creationist revival sparked closely follow (20). 20 R L Numbers. Spec Irian 9. 22 (January 1979) ma. ... Use the "censorship" label as one by Morris and Whitcomb. but its influ- 21. D. S Jordan to G. M Price. 28 August 1906 who is against censoring science. YOU are for ence,especially amongevangelical (PricePapers, Andrews University. Berrien sciencz: anyone else who wants to censor Christians, seems to have been im- Springs. Mich.). scientific data is an old fogey and too doctri- 22. C. Schuchert, Science 59, 486 (1924). mense. Not least,it has elevated the 23. H Rimmer, Modern Science. Noah'r ArL and naire to consider. the Deluge (Research Science Bureau. Los An- strict creationism of Price and Morris to gees. 1925), p 28 This tactic proved extremely effective.a position of apparent orthodoxy. It has 24 Science 63, 259 (1926). 25. H. A. Kelly to W. J. Bryan, 15 June 1925 (Box Two state legislatures and various school also given creationism a claim to scien- 47, Bryan Papers) boards adopted the two-model approach, tific 26 L T More to W 1 Bryan, 7 July 1925 (Box 47. respectability unknown since the Bryan Papers). and an informal poll of school board deaths of Guyot and Dawson. 27. A. W. McCann to W. J. Bryan, 30 June 1925 members in 1980 showed that only 25 (Box 47. Bryan Papers). Unlike the antievolutic,,. crusade of 28W..1 Bryan to H. A. Kelly, 22 June 1925 (Box percent favored teaching nothing but the1920's, which remained confined 47, Bryan Papers). evolution (63). 29. W. B. Riley and H. Rimmer. A Debate (undated mainly to North America, the revival of pamphlet in Riley Papers. Northwestern College 117 III

Library, Roseville, Minn.). ation-Life, San Diego. rev. ed.. 1978). p. 10. Science Research Center, San Diego. 1977), p. 30. R. D. Culver. J. Am. Sc.. Affiliation 7. 7 (De- 45.J. C. Whitcomb, Jr.. and H. M. Moms, The 17. ember 1955). Genesis Flood (Presbyterian and Reformed Pub- 60. H. M. Moms, Acts it Facts 3, 2 (September 31. G. M. Price, The Story of the Fossils (Pacific lishing Co., Philadelphia, 1961). 1974). Press, Mountain View, Calif.. 1954), p. 39 46R M Allen. J Am Sc.. Affiliation 17. 62 (June 61. _ Ed ,Scientific Creationism (Creation- 32. -, Outlines of Modern Christianity and 1965) Life, San Diego, general edition. 1974). Modern Science (Pacific Press, Oakland. Calif 47.V. L Bates, "Christian fundamentalists and 62. R. H. Leitch, Bible-Science Newsle,ter 18, 2 1902), pp. 125-127. the theory of evclution in public school educa- (March 1980). 33. M. Shipley, Curr. Ihst. 32. 330 (1930). tion." thesis, University of California, Davis 63 Am. School Board J. 167, 52 (March 1980). 34. W. B. tatewood, Jr.. EdControversy in the (1976) 64 H M. Moms, Impact, supplement to Acts & Twenties (Vanderbilt Univ. Press. Nashville. 48.H. M. Morris and 1. C. Whitcomb, Jr.. J. Am. Facts 10, iii (January 1981). 1969), p. 39: J. V. Grabmer and P. D. Miller. Sci. Affiliation 16. 60 (June 1964). 65... ibid. 3, 2 (March 1974), Science 185. 832 (1974). 49.D. A. Young, Creation and the Flood (Baker, 66. Interview with Harold S. Slusher and D. T. 35Christian Faith and Life 42 (1936). Grand Rapids, Mich., 1977). p. 7. Gish, 6 January 1981. 36. H. W. Clark to G. M. Price. 12 September 1937 50W. E Lammerts, J Christian Reconstruction 1, 67 Acts & Facts 10, I (February 1981). (Price Papers). 49 (summer 1974). 68. Interview with D. T. Gish. 26 October 1980. 37. Newsletters. Creation-Deluge Society. 19 Au- 51.Creation Res Soc. Q. 1 (No. 13) (July 1964). 69E. Barker, in On the Margins of Science, It. gust 1944 and 17 February 1945 521W. Langl, BibleScience Newslertrr 16, 2 (June Wallis, Ed. (Sociological Review Monograph 38. B. F. Allen to Board of Directors of the Cre- 1978). 27, University of Keele, March 1979), pp. 179- ation-Deluge Society. 12 August 1945 (courtesy 53I) T. Gish, Creation Res. Soc. Q. 12, 34 (June 200. of Molleurus Couperus) 1975). 70. W. 1. Ouweneel, Impact, supplement to Acts & 39J. L. Kula, J. Am. Sci. Affiliation 1, 20 (June 541 N. Moore and H S. Slusher, Eds., Biology. A Facts 7, i-iv (February 1978). 1949). Search for Order in Complexity (Zondervan. 71. Ibid. 9, 2, 7 (February 1980). 40. _ 2. 1 (No. 1) (1950) Grand Rapids, Mich., 1970) 72I thank Rennie B. Schoepflin for his research 41. Ibid. 2, 2 (June 1950). 55W Lang, Bible-Science Newsletter 16. I (Octo- assistance and the Graduate School Research 42R. Halliburton, Jr., Arkansas Hist Q. 23. 283 ber 1978), ibid. 15. 2 (March 1977). Committee of the University of Wisconsin- (1964). 56.Ibid. 15, 4 (January-February 1977). Madison for financial support dunnv the prepa- 43. Interviews with H. M. Morris, 26 October 1980 57.G. Wheeler, Origins 3, 101 (1976) ration of this article. and 6 January 1981. 58H. M. Moms. Acts ct: Facts I (June-July 1972). 44. H. M Moms. That You Might Believe (Cre- 59N. 1. Segraves. The Creation Report (Creation-

Iron, of the results of scholarly inquiry. The appropriate discipline on the dissemination of ideas is the critical scrutiny of responsible experts in order to assure the general public that complete- ness in investigation and citation, and rigorous and logical analysis in drawing conclusions, have been applied in the work. As the university in its corporate body pledges to protect and foster an environment conducive to free inquiry, so also must the individual members of the faculty. As that environment and those In this century, the time lag between the basis of the committee's recommen- principles engage a spirit that transcends the creation of a new scientific concept dations. and in consultation with the the letter of stated principles, so each andits general applicationisusually Research Advisory Board. chaired by faculty member must sustain the univer- measured indecades.Occasionally, the provost. we will soon bring before sity 's commitment to free inquiry by however, the gap is compressed as a new the Yale Corporation the results of these fostering a spirit of collegiality, a shared theoretical insight moves swiftly to the delibeiations. The corporation will then sense of respect for and trusteeship of stage of application and. hence.. of wide, issue a statement of policy to govern the shared values of opennes:, and intellectu- practical dissemination. We are now in nature and extent of university and facul- al freedom that the university exists to the throes of such a movement in the ty involvement in the commercial appli- embody in the larger society. And, as the field of applied research in genetic engi- cation of our scientific and scholarly universityinitsadministrative body neering. research. In this article I discuss some must recognize that the members of the At times of swift and intellectually principles on which such a policy can faculty, collectively and individually, are exciting development, with the potential rest. at the core of the university; and that, on for enormous benefits to society and The university exists to protect and behalf of members of the faculty, itis financial profits to skillful entrepreneurs. foster an environment conducive to free essential to protect academic freedom as it is natural to ask questions about the inquiry, the advancement of knowledge, well as to foster traditions of faculty self- appropriate relationship of universities and the free exchange of ideas. Such an regulation and self-government, so also to commercial sponsors of university re- environment depends crucially on trust is it essential that each faculty member search, and, indeed, about the very na- arid openness, and on a clear under- recognize that the primary and overrid- ture of the university. Because Yale par- standing of a set of principles governing ing obligation of every faculty member, ticipates actively in many developir.g ar- scholarly inquiry. The principles are sim- in terms of his or her commitment of eas of science and technology, we have ply stated: the university and individual tune, attention. and intellectual energy., been seeking answers to these questions. members of the faculty pledge them- is to the university, that is, to the stu- For the past year. a faculty Committee selves to the open, unimpeded, and ob- on Cooperative Research. Patents. and jective pursuit of ideas, to the exchange The author is president of Yale University. New Haven, Connecticut 06520. and is professor of En- Licensing has been considering the isof ideas openly and without deceit; and glish and Comparative LiteratureThis article is sues raised by our increasing relation- tothefullandwide dissemination. based on a speech given in September 1982 to incoming graduate and professionalstudentsat ships to private commercial firms. On through teaching and written publica- YalT. 112

dents, colleagues, and general mission of it openly and freely; and the industrial circumstances, such that the gr 'cluate or the university. imperative to garner a profit, which cre- postdoctoral student would not know. These principles of free inquiry andates the incentive to treat knowledge as when working witha professor,for open dissemination of ideas, as well as private property. whom he or she was workingthe uni- the values of collegiality. mutual trust, With these underlying principles ofversity, the profer.,or. or the company. and primary commitment, exist to pro- free inquiry and free market in mind, we Of all members of the university commu- tect the environment for free inquiry. can now examine specific issues con nity, the student especially ought to be They also form the principles and as- cerning university-industry relation- working for himself or herself. and ought sumptions underlying all that follows. ships. The first is the appropriate nature to be guided in research and trained in Both university-based research, con- of faculty involvement with profit-orient- skills and techniques that are designed to cerned primarily with the advancement ed companies, particularly such compa-produce a first-rate scholar, not profit for of fundamental knowledge, and industry- nies which seek to market new processes a company in the private sector. basedresearch, concernedprimarily and products growing from university- Ibelieve thatif a faculty member withmarketableapplication,should based research. The second is the appro- becomes a manager of a company pursu- serve the general .well-being of society priate conditions of grants or contracts ing commercial application of his or her albeit in differing ways. Since the knowl- for basic research by existing companies university-based research; or acquires. edge typically developed in university- to universities, especially when these through gift or purchase, stock shares in based research is of a fundamental na- conditions require some form of exclu- this kind of company in such proportion ture, it w:11 often have a multitude of sive relatiom-lip, of license or treatment, to the total number of shares that he or potentially useful applications. Because by the university with the company as a she can have a significant effect on the many of these eventual applications can- condition to the grant. There may well be decision making of that company, then not be foreseen, it is particularly appro- cases that are ambiguous and where rea- there is a presumption that the faculty priate that such knowledge be dissemi- sonable people will have to wrestle with member's involvement in the outside en- nated as widely as possible so that all theapplicationof whateverpolicy tity is substantial. In such an event, there may use itif they will. While private emerges. For that reason. I see the pro- should be a review of the relationship. industry pursues basic research. it does vost's Research Advisory Board playing the possible consequence being that the so less often, in part because itis so a continuing role in administering ourfaculty member might well have to de- difficult to capture an adequate financial policy. I believe that the following con- cide to leave the faculty for a limited return from such long-term, risky efforts. siderations must be taken into account in period of time, perhaps I year. by taking Universities are marketplaces where forming that policy. an unpaid leave of abscence to pursue ideas are freely available; where knowl- those outside interests. If. at tne end of edge is pursued by way of the norms of that time. the faculty member were to free discussion and the free access to and Faculty Involvement with wish to retain the c,titside interests de- exchange of information: and where the Profit Oriented Companies scribed above. then that person would freedom to publish must obtain. In con- relinquish tenure. if he or she had it, and trast to the university, the commercial There are potential conflicts of com- assume "adjunct" status if the relevant enterprise is appropriately animated by mitment and potential conflicts of inter- department or school were to recom- the profit motive. Commercial applica- est whenever a member of the faculty is mend such an appointment in the usual tion of new knowledge typically requires involved with extra-university entities. way. The alternative for such a person a substantial investment in applied re- Let us here consider the specific issues would he to sever completely all ties to search and development, and commonly surrounding the involvement of a mem- the university. Were such a person to in the equipment required by new prod-ber of the faculty with a company seek- wish to become a full-time member of ucts or methods of production. A profit- ing to exploit university-based research. the faculty at a later date, such a possi- making enterprise will undertake such an I doubt that a faculty member can bility would require the availability of an investment, and all its associated risks. ordinarily devote the time and energy the open position and the use of the institu- only when it can reasonably expect anuniversity requires and also pursue a tion's full appointments procedure. adequate return, a return not likely to substantial involvement in any such out- There are relationships of individual occur if competitors are first to the mar-side company. Such involvement neces- faculty members to commercial compa- ketplace. The opportunity for privatesarily demands great concentration and nies. even those using the results of profit provides the encouragement forcommitment. particularly at the outset or university -based iesearch, that tradition- the socially beneficial application of newif business goes badly . V hen a faculty ally the university has allowed and will technology. To realize profits from tech- member becomes substantially in, olved continue to allow. In these "consulting" nological innovation, however, a compa- ina company. the eonflictin norms relationships members of the faculty pro- ny must strive to protect its proprietary governing the dissemination of knowl- vide advice to companies but do not knowledge and to prevent its exploita- edge becomes very difficult to reconcile. directly managecorporateresearch tion by commercial competitors. The burden of maintaining a teaching --:onsulting can enhance a person's The development of theoretical con- program and two separate research pro- professional competence. and further the cepts, born in the university, and the grams. where the results of one research mission of the university. Our rule is that transformation by industry of those con- program are to be widely disseminated a faculty member may spend not more cepts into practical application. are oftenand the results of the other may have to than I day in a 7-day week in such a role complementary processes. The comple- be kept secret in the pursuit of commer- Thus there is a limit on the commitment mentary nature of their activities, how- cial success. is more than even the most of time and energy. ever, simply throws into relief the basic responsible faculty member can be ex- Serving as a consultant to a company difference between universities and in- pected to shoulder.Finally. such in- or, within the rule of reason, accepting dustries:the academic imperativeto volvement risks putting one's students payment in equities from some cash- seek knowledge objectively and to share and research associate, 1.ambiguous poor. idea-rich company. is less likely to

1 113

create conflicts of commitment or con- exclusivity often arise, either with regard her of the faculty's free inquiry or capac- flicts of interest than serving in a role to proprietary information provided by a ity orally to communicate the results of that has a significant effect on corporate company as part of an arrangement for his or her research. In addition, the decision-making. A faculty member who cooperative research or with regard to university will not accept any restriction has gone beyond any reasonable defini- exclusive license to whatever the univer- of written publication. save the most tion of "consulting" has reached the sity is entitled to patent. minor delay to enable a sponsor to apply point where the question arises whether The university is the only entity that for a patent or license. Such a del- he or she should remain a full-time mem- can enter into arrangements for coopera- should not be so long as to Iengt ber of the faculty. tive research, and the university's posi- appreciably the time normally reqL.....d Universities frequently require thattion with regard to exclusive licensing to bring results into print. faculty members wishing to engage in agreements is the following. In general. Yale has. through its faculty Commit- consulting obtain the permission of a the university would prefer to grant non- tee on Cooperative Research. Patents, chairman or dean. More recently. the exclusive licenses,in order to make and Licensing and its Research Advisory Committee on Cooperative Research. knowledge as widely available as possi- Board, the capacity to assess adherence Patents, and Licensing has also recom- ble. The university, however. in certain to these principles and conditions. The mended that each faculty member pro-circumstances. may grant an exclusive universitywill only agree to arrange- vide. as part of the routine annual report license, thus encouraging a firm to devel- ments for sponsored research. from any to the president. a description of the op an invention.Itwill sometimes he sector of society . which are compatible commitment and the organizations in- dear that society will he better served by with its norms and mission, and will not volved in his or her nonuniversity pro- the grant of an exclusive license in order agree to any arrangement which will fessional work. This recommendationto bring the knowledge to the public and impair the environment of openness and has been accepted. and V. will be imple- that the ben fits to society from such free communication of ideas. mented in the coming academic year. exclusivity are greater than the costs of I have by no means addressed all the Such disclosureof consulting rela- any diminished competition. issues in this area. Difficult cases and tionships. of relationships with outside Each individual agreement must and anomalous situations, requiring the pa- companies engaged in application of a will he negotiated on its merits. Through tience, wisdom. and goodwill of mem- Yale faculty member's research, or ofsuch negotiations. Yale willinsist on bers of the faculty and administration relationships with companies that sell topnriciples which seek to assure that its alike, will present themselves.I have. the university goods or sere icesis.I patentable inventions will he fully and however. suggested here some principles believe, the best sty against conflrcts of beneficiallyused, and that knowledge and general guidelines. We have respon- interest or conflicts of commitment. Dis- with a potential benefit to society at large sible forums to explore these suggestions closure of this sort recognizes that there will reach the public in a timely and and to assess the cases that exist or that are grey areas where reasonable people useful fashion. will arise. might have differing views and it pro- Research grants from business firms The opportunities for cooperative re- vides the occasion for discussion. In raise other questions as well. questions search between universities and indus- such disclosure to the administration,that are the same as those raised by tries are ..ery exciting and can rebound there is no monitoring of colleague by research sponsored by the federal gov- io the benefit of society . These opportu- colleague.Rather a premiumisput ernmentorby privatefoundations. nities should not drive us toward ar- w here it ought to he. on trust and open- When contemplating a prospective grant rangementsforbasic researchthat ness. or contract with any sponsor. the univer- abridge our principles. Nor should the sity will first consider vv het her the poten- univermty ;snore the potential availabil- tial would exist for upsetting the intellec- ity of funds from commercial sponsors. Conditions of Grants and Contracts tual equilibrium and human relationships We shouldnegotiate approptiat ar- in a department were one kind of re- rangements. openly arrived at. that can [he second issue for university -indus- search to he funded out of proportion to further our mission. The constant chal- try relationships concerns the appropri- other kinds of research As an indispens- lenge for the universityis to know in ate principles in an agreement between able condition to arrangements for coop dear and pnnupled terms how to cher- an established company and the univer- erative research with industly .Just as ish learning. and its pursuit. for its on sity when a company wishes to support withgovernment- sponsoredresearch. sake. and how to assist in bringing the basic research in a specific arca. In dis- the university will not accept restriction. results of free inquiry to the rest of the cussing such agreements. questions of of infringement upon a mem society for the good of the public.

0 114

not an industry. What is perhaps most at stake is attracting some of the ablest young people to those fields that can make a difference in the survival of our society. Parti cle physics ought to be done, just as art gal. !cries ought to be maintained, and the richer the country is the more particle physics and art galleries it should support. But it would be a disaster if protectionism, of e:ther the government or the industry variety, were to discourage some of the best young people from going into applied fields. There are many good reasons for the great The dominant problem of supporting Universities are resilient institutions. We current a,ention to university-industry rela-enough basic research in universities will re- are sufficiently strong in depth that we can tions, but there arc troublesome reasons as main. This must continue to be a federal re- afford to experiment. If we. move too fast or well. One is that universities are now un-sponsibility; no company or industry can in an inappropriate direction, we can pull usually hungry. There is nothing wrong with harvest the results soon enough to justify any back. Our resilience means that we do not hunger. But a hungry man may cut corners in investment larger than keeping a window on have to be so protectionist that we become his rush to nourishment, and he may be taken basic research and a conduit for the move- precious. After all, what we properly call advantage of in negotiations. Fear of this is ment of bright young people into the com- "integrity," the rest of the world calls leading to the threat of protectionism, as ex- pany. Hard work in the universities will lead -selfishness." Incidentally. 1 prefer Eric emplified by recent attempts to classify orto important cooperative research agree- Ashby's words "inner logic" to "integrity." otherwise control access to university re-ments with industry, but unremitting effort We must be careful to preserve our inner search, including that joint with industry. will be required to maintain or enlarge the logic, certainly, and incidentally our 501(c)3 In designing university-industry con- basic research on which all else rests. status (or the similar tax-exempt status of our nections, protecting interests by high-level But there is far more at stake than support affiliated foundations). But the public at negotiations is wrong. The adversary pro- for universities. University-industry interac- large is less interested in the precise bound- cess, and the proliferation of lawyers to ination should not be looked upon as support at aries between universities and industry or nipulate it, was never intended to apply to all, but as an absolutely necessary part of the universities and government; after all, the joint programs, where the output is also survival both of American institutions and of public is paying for all of these entities. joint, where it is by vo means a zero-sum the American economy. As the economyAbove all we should indulge in protection- game, and where the accomplishments for stumbles, protectionism of all kinds becomes ism of a higher sort: We should protect our all participants are far greater if speed and rampant, and everyone loses. From the uni- willingness and ability to take risks, to ex- simplicity of negotiations take the place of versity's standpoint, cooperative projects periment, to undertake new directions, and exquisitely detailed legal contracts. Pro- with industry affect graduate (and even to help a new generation prepare themselves tectionism is dangerous and habit-forming. undergraduate) work in healthy ways. To use for lives of service.Adupted from cm ad- Circumstances exist where it is appropriate, Harvey Brooks's phrase, giving students "redress at the Conference on University- but only for a short time. One of the few spect for applied problems" is an important Industry Relations. Madison, IV is(msin. /6 essentials of agreements is that any secrecy part of their education. Wisdom begins whenNovember 1982. or interference with open publication or stu- students (and even professors) realize that an dent interaction should be strictly temporary. invention is not a product and a product is

mtllion yearsFor almost that entire time, there were fewer thanImillion people on earth, subsisting by hunttng and gathering in small, nomadic groups. Agriculture and large, settled populations have existed for much less than I percent of that epoch, and our technical world has been present for a mere moment in the time scale of human evolution. The way we live today is, in many Important respects, a novelty for our species. Our ancestorsprehuman, almost-human, and distinctly humanlived in 14; father was born in 1900 and died in science and technology. We are so deep- 1984. In those years, he participated in ly embedded in the present that it takes a Dazed A Hamburg. president of the Carnegie one of the most drastic transformations difficult mental effort to comprehend the Corporation of Nett York. Nett1 ork 10022. is any species has ever experienceu. It is time scale of human life on Earth and the president elect of the AAAS i his article is based on his lecture at the AAAS annual meeting on 27 Ma) difficult to comprehend the extraordi- recency of the kind of world that live 19841n Nev. York City A fuller aLLount of the stets s nary changes that people have witnessed in now. Human ancestors have been presented here are in the President s Essas. Carne gie Corporation of Nets York. to be put lashed in in this century as a result of advances in separate from the apes for about 5 to 10 June 1984 121 !15

small groups in which they learned the our species from hardships and dangers: species:the magnitude andrateof rules of adaptation for survival and re- they provide gratifications that were be- change make it difficult for us to devise production. They used simple tools to yond reach at least for most people in the and implement solutions to these prob- cope with the problems of living and past. In many respects. ordinary citizens lems. In developing countncs. the shift struggled to obtain more control over live today as kings of an tarlici- time from old to new ways has occurred even their own destiny. For the most part. never could. more rapidly, and change has been partly they were vulnerable to the vicissitudes The automation of the household has imposed from outside. These nations of food, water, weather, predators, other drastically re& .:cd the requirement of confront exceedingly difficult problems. humanswhatever- nature might bring. physical labor at home. Its social impli- Across much of Africa. Asia. and Latin Their world began to change with the cations have been far-reaching. Similarly America, explosive population growth onset of agriculture about 10.000 years the revolutionintelecommunications and abject poverty have contributed to ago. But the most mcmcntous changes has conic close to making this country a extremely severe health problems that occurred with the industrial revolution single large community in some respects stand as an enormous obstacle to sus- two centuries ago. and above all with its and may one day have a similar effect on tained development and social progress. pervasive implementation inthe 20th the world as a whole. Their burden of early death and long- century. Technological innovation is now asso- term disability is exceedingly heavy. In- Much of the :cchnology that structures ciated with far-reaching and extremely fectious diseases take the lives of a great American lives today, in ways we iargcly rapid changes in the nature and scope of many infants before they reach 1 year of take for granted. is of extremely recent work available in this and other coun- age and handicap for life many of those origin. In 1900 there were few automo- tries. The pervasive mechanization of that survive. Susceptibility to a wide biles or household telephones, motion work appears to be tangible on the hori- raw of diseases is heightened oy the pictures were just getting under way: zon. not as a distant prospect. but as a marginal character of subsistence. there were no household radios. no air- powerful current gathering momentum planes, no televisions, no computers. and affecting the entire economy in far- Today it is almost impossible to imagine reaching ways. Benefits in productivity Global Interdepr ndence a world without these technologiesand are clearly visible. Concomitant social in this country. without the'presence dislocations are not as visible but are as This set of facts raises ethical ques- everywhere. What a difference a century likely to occur. tions for countries with strong scientific makesindeed, even a decade as events capability. In recent decades. the United move now. States has given little attentionin re- Growing Pressures on Resources search.education.andpracticeto some of the most important disease Opportunities and Complications There are in many parts of the woad problems in the world today. How can today strong tensions between popula- we and the other more developed nations The opportunities arising from our tion pressures and available resources. help improve health in developing coun- profoundly enhanced capabilityin sci- These tensions have explosive potential tnes? One way in which we are especial- ence and technology are visible in every within countries and also for Internation- ly able to help is through research sphere of human life-1n medicine and al conflet. It has become a matter of our including capacity-building in developing public health. in agriculture and food enlightened self-interest as well as of countries so that they can tackle their supply. in transportation and communi- decent human concern for us to try hard own problems. Priority areas ire. 0) cation. and elsewhere. Every advance to understand our species in its world- epidemiological assessment of specific has brought side effectslike a new wide interdependence. pay ing just as needs. (ii) applying molecular biology to medicine whose benefits are clear but much attention to the Southern Hemi- parasitic diseases. OW devising a wide' whose complications take considerable sphere as to the Northern Hemisphere. array of fertility-control methods with time to appear. But complications there For our on sake as well as theirs. we special reference to cultural acceptabil- are. extreme population growth in much need to strengthen our tie.. and work ity and feasibility of use. and clarify- of the world, drastic urbanization with coopciatiNely with people in developing ing relations of health and behavior. with its crowding of strangers beyond any countries toward the reduction of pover- special reference to breast-feeding. nu- prior experience. environmental dam- ty. ignorance, and disease. trition. child care. sanitation. water use. age. rey..itace depletionthe immense Since the sciences pros ide our most and family planning. What is fundamen- risks of weapons technology, and new powerful problem-solving tool, itis es- tally needed is a heightened awareness patterns of diseaseall are large'; prod- sential that we bring their strengths to within the scientific community of the ucts of changes that have occurred only bear on these problems to the maximum opportunities that exist, since even a in the most recent phase of human evolu- extent possible. The task requires an modest shift of attention to such prob- tion. We have rapidly changed our tech- intensive effort now to learn what can be lems could yield major be. :fits. nology, our social organization. our diet. extracted from the efforts at economic Difficult as these problems are. and our activity patterns, the substances of and social development during the past cry ing out for a larger place in the work daily use and exposure. patterns of re- several decades.sorting outfailures of the scientific community. another as- productive activity, tension-relief, and from successes, looking for strengths ua pect of our global interdependence is human relationships These changes are which to build future efforts of practical even more urgently in need of attention. laden with new ben, fits and new risks, value. I he overriding problem facing humanity andthelong-term consequences are The problems that face modern indus- today is the threat of nuclear holocaust. poorly understood. trial nations are related to sociotechnical Humanity 's capacity for destruction has Many of the technological changes are conditions that have 4ppeared very re- radically outstripped its institutional ca- exceedingly attractive since they free cently la the evolution of the human pacityto control intergroup violence. That violence is rooted in the nature of formation and implementation, people to resolve this paradox creatively? the human species. Mass expression of who understand human behavior under We must seek mechanisms to link the violencewar, terronsm. and genocide stress, and people who understand nego- science-rich sectors of our society and persists throughout the world: and no tiation and conflict resolution. Su soh ana- tile science-poor sectorsthat is, con- people should be considered incapable of lytical studies are likely to be more use- nect the scientific talent of universities, it. But the invention and deployment of ful if they take into account policy-mak- colleges, corporate laboratories, and na- nuclear weapons represents a qualitative ers' perspectives, and policy-makers can tional laboratories with the elementary break in the history of violence. It is now benefit greatly from ready access to new and secondary schools, thereby possible to destroy human life on Earth. ideas, a wider range of options. and strengtheningnationalcapabilityfor Both the United States and the Soviet deeper insights. broad education in the sciences: physi- Union probably have the capacity to do cal, biological, and behavioral. that, or atleast to make the human The linkir2 of science-rich to science- condition unbearable. In 1983. new evi- Commitment to Science Education poor sectors as partrcrs is a mear.3 to dence of the incredible devastation both teacher education and curriculum immediate, long-term. and permanent The rapid acceleration of technologi- development. We can learn from the of nuclear war was brought to light. cal and social change in recent decades successes and failures of the curriculum Former Secretary of Defense Harold sharply heightens the importance of our reform movement that followed Sputnik. Brown points out that in the firs; half- educational institutions. Indeed, during Improvements ineducatio-i can flow hour of a nuclear war there might well be the past year we have experienced a sort fromthecollaborationof classroom 100 million deaths each in the United of national rediscovery of education. teachers with subject matter experts (for States, in the Soviet Union. and in Eu- particularly with reference to science example, in physics, chemistry, or biolo- rope. It is plausible that a billion people and technology. We must address funda- gy) and also with scholars in the field of would die in just a few weeks. In point of mental challenges in education. human cognition and learning. Such col- fact. there is nothing in our history as a I) How can we give all our children, laborations could be an important step species to prepare us to comprehend the regardless of social background. a good toward incorporating teachers of science real meaning of such devastation. opportunity to participate in the modern into the scientific community. While ma- Human societies have a pervasive ten- technical world? In this time of high jor efforts must be made to improve the dencyto make distinctions between unemployment we must especially con- salaries of teachers, and especially those good and bad people, between heroes sider employment opportunity. of science teachers, it is equally impor- and villains. between ingroups and out- 2) What constitutes a decent mini- tant to find ways to bolster respect for groups. It is easy for most of us to put mum of literacy in science and technolo- their profession and strengthen their mo- ourselves at the center of the universe, gy that should be part of everyone's rale. Participation in the scientific com- attaching a strong positive value to our- educational heritage? munity would be helpful in this regard. selves and our group. while attaching a 3) Given the rapidity of sociotechnical Closer links of elementary and second- negative value to certain other people change. how can we make lifelong learn- ary schools with colleges, universities, and their groups. It is prudent to assume ing a reality so that people can adjust corporate laboratories, and gove :iinicnt that we are all, to some extent, suscepti- their knowledge and skills to new cir- laboratories could include summer insti- ble to egocentric and ethnocentric ten- cumstances? tutes for teachers, Saturday activities for dencies. The human species is one in 4) Since educational institutions will teachers throughout the school year, which individuals and groups easily learn more than ever be trying to hit a moving summer jobs in science for teachers, and to blame others for whatever difficulties target as they prepare people for unpre- the preparation of curricular materials. exist. But in the present predicament dictable circumstances, how can we pre- Leadership from different sectors of so- around nuclear conflict blaming is at best pare for change itself? ciety will be necessary for the major useless and most likely counterproduc- 5) How can we enlarge that talent upgi acting that is required. The schools tive. pool so that we can find promising peo- are central to the effort, but they alone A new level of commitment of the ple for science-based careers, regardless do not have the resources or the clout to scientific community is urgently needed of their socioeconomic background? do the job. to reduce the risk of nuclear war. This 6) How can we broaden the spectrum requires a mobilization of the best possi- of the sciences so that modern education ble intellectual, technical, and moral re- will become increasinglyinformative The Transformed World sources in a wide range of knowledge with respect to the human experience? and perspectives. A science-based effort 7) How can the educational system The rapid, pervasive, and truly un- is essential to maximize analytical capa- foster a scientific attitude that is useful in precedentedtransformationresulting bility. objectivity, and respect for evi- problem-solving throughout the society, from science and technology is a central dencethe outlook that is characteristic in relating scientific principles to the fact of our lives. It calls for the strength- of the scientific community worldwide. major issues on which an informed citi- ening of institutional capability for objec- These efforts should bring together zenry must decide? tive, scholarly analysis of critical issues scientists, scholars, and practitioners in 8) How can we achieve an informed based on a broad foundation of knowl- order to clarify the many facets of avoid- worldwide perspective in an era of pro- edge and experience. ing nuclear war. To generate new op- found interdependence? Colleges and universities, academies. tions for decreasing the risk, we need The American dilemma in science edu- and free-standing institutes can mobilize analytical work by people who know the cation involves a remarkable paradox. a wide range of talent to address the weaponry and its military uses, people We have the largest and probably the great issues of our time in a sustained, who know the Soviet Union, people who most respected scientific community in fascinating, and effective way. They can know internationalrelations broadly, the world, yet our precollegiate science give us a better chance to get the com- people who know the processes of policy education is at a low ebb. Is there a way plex facts straight and to clarify the most 123 117 promising optionsall this in a way that A particularly valuable undertaking is social concerns and basic inquiry. is credible and even intelligible to non-the intelligible and credible synthesis of specialists, Such efforts can be helpful to researchrelated to important policy open-minded policy-makers, but also questions. What isthe factual basis Conclusion and perhaps more importantly in the long drawn from many sources that can pro- runto the education of a broadly in- vide the underpinning for constructive There is little in our history as a spe- formed public on the great issues of our options in the future? This is especiallycies to prepare us for this hypermodern time and the policy choices available to significant in view of the fact that perti- world that we have so rapidly made. The us. nent information is almost always widely transformation of the world will press us Surely the problems associated with scattered. Moreover, it is very difficult toward transformation of our institu- the social and economic concomitants of for the nonexpert and sometimes eventionsto keep up with events, to under- technological change are not insuper- for the expert to assess the credibility of stand below the surface, to look ahead able. The opportunities provided by the assertions on emotionally charged is- and prepare, to enjoy the fascination of advancing technology, if judiciously uti- sues. In the current process of world deep insights, to make wise use of tech- lized, suggest that it is worth a lot oftransformation, such studies are needed nology, to relieve poverty and disease, trouble and hard work to find ways to to tackle vital and complex issues in an above all to resolve the deadliest of make a decent social adjustment. We analytical rather than a polemical way. conflicts. In the historic effort to avoid will require broad, mul. faceted analyti- Whether it be toward avoiding nuclear unmitigated disaster and fulfill the poten- cal work to understand more deeply war, strengthening education in the sci- tial of our species, science can help what is going on and to anticipate insofar ences, or fostering human resources in profoundly and in novel ways. But to do as possible the likely consequences of developing countries, there is a precious so, the sciences must transcend their major technological trends. resource in the great scientific communi-traditional boundaries and achieve an To deal effectively with real-world pol- ty of the United Statesand its links tounprecedented level of mutual under- icy problems requires novel conjunc- the worldwide scientific communitystanding, innovation, and cooperation, tions of knowledge and talent. Typically, which can be brought to bear on these These efforts will have to go across disci- many different facets of a complex issue crucial problems. This involves activa-plines, across sectors of societies, and must be taken into account. The great tion of a wide range of the sciences and across nations. problems do not come in packages that an unusual degree of cooperation among Let us hope that fundamental values of fit the traditional disciplines or profes-them. Furthermore, it involves linkingfreedom, curiosity, opportunity, diversi- sions, however excellent they may be. analytical work with education in a vari- ty, excellence, and human decency will Organizations such as universities, sci- ety of modes, for the general public must guide our institutions as they evolve. entific academies, and research insti-take an informed part in the decisions These enduring values can make it possi- tutes ran make a greater contribution that affect all our futures. The scientific ble for us to cope with the great prob- .roan they have in the past if they can and scholarly community can deepen itslems of our time, to work steadily to- organize effectively to share informa- contribution to pressing social concernswards the humane uses of science and tion, ideas, and technical abilities widely if it is informed and stimulated by those technology, and to take advantage of across traditional barriers and systems. on the firing line, whether the latter beunprecedented opportunitiesthat are Of course, most advances in knowledge engaged in teaching poor children, strug- emerging for the benefit of people every- require specialization. Yet for crucial gling with policy dilemmas, or coping where. social purposes these pieces must some- with international tensions. There can be how be related to each other. a mutually beneficial interplay between

carry out or support all types of research is critical. Focusing on these differences has engendered mistrust and fostered misunderstandings between the two sectors (1). Many of society's needs could be met most effectively if universities and industries joined their broad range of capabilities and facilities (2). Not only would society benefit from the fruits of cooperative research, but the private and academic sectors themselves would stand to gain much if they capitalized on their differences and developed ways to rein- Any discussion of cooperative endeav- nate new knowledge, that freedom isforce their strengths. Universities need ors between universities and industries essential to inquiry, and that researchthe financial support and the technical inevitably focuses on the disparities be- and teaching are inseparable. For indus- tween the two. Universities operate un- tries, making a profit and providing use Robert D Vamn is University Coordinator for Research and director of the Delaware Water Re- der several basic principles: that their ful products and services are the primary sources Center at the University of Delaware. New- ark 19716 Diane S Kukich is the editcr of Enquiry. primary functions are to preserve exist-functions, financial rewards are essential a quarterly publication that covers research at the ing knowledge and to seek and dissemi- for assuming risks, and the freedom University of Delaware. t. 124 118 know-how that industry can provide. attempt to reconcile these differences, ble; a license can be exclusive or nonex- whereas industry looks to the nation's Nith the ultimate decision being left to clusive. royalty bearing or royalty -flee. universities for new talent, new ideas, the university. depending on the circumstances. Most and basic research facilities (3). The in- Publication may pose a problem in universities prefer to grant nonexclusive creasing complexity of product and pro-research interactions that generate In- licenses, but exclusive licenses are fre- cess development has made it difficult ventions. The property rights to inven- quently granted at the request of the for industrial laboratories to have the tions are best protected by patents, but industrial sponsor (7). For a royalty- expertise needed to keep up with techno- preparing patent appl;cations is compli- bearing license, guaranteeing minimum logical and scientific advances (4). cated and time consuming. Problems royalties 2 or 3 years after licensing However, cooperative research rela- arise because publication of an invention provides an incentive for commercializa- tionships require careful managementprior to filing a U.S. patent application tion. This protects the inventor's rights (3). The key to their success liesin bars foreign filings. and U.S. applica- as well as those of the institution,, for anticipating potential problems and de- tions must be filed within a year of most universities share a significant por- veloping guidelines for averting them or publication. This issue can be resolved if tion of the royalties with the researcher dealing with them effectively if they oc-the university agrees to delay publication (5). cur. The following are among the most for up to 6 months in order to give the The university's obligation to protect critical guidelines for universities estab- sponsor time to file a patent application the inventor's rights means that royalty- lishing research relationships with indus- (6). free licenses should be granted only un- try. Although following them will not A graduate thesis becomes a publica- der exceptional circumstances, but in- guarantee perfect interaction between tion as soon as it is placed on the shelf of dustries may feel that a royalty-free li- the two types of organizations, it willa university library. If a thesis discloses cense is justified because they sup,orted promote the benefits of such interaction patentable material. the publication di- the work. How. then. does a university while limiting conflicts. lemma can be resolved by sequestering deal with a sp'onsor whose policy de- the document for no more than I year. mands ownership of the patents from a This policy should require that the stu- sponsoredresearchagreement? One Ten Management Guidelines dent. the faculty advisor, the department possibility is for the university to request chair. the dean of the college. and the that a portion (at least 15 percent) of the Retain publication rights. This policy dean of the graduate school agree on the research support be designated an unre- is based on the fundamental purpose of a need to sequester: the company must stricted research grant that can be used universityto preserve and transmit ex- supply satisfactory arguments to con- to reward the inventor. In all cases, isting knowledge and to generate new vince them of this need. patent ownership and distribution of roy- knowledge. As the primary trustee of the Sequestering a thesis usually benefits alty income should be stipulated prior to world's knowledge, the university has an the student, because at most universities initiation of the research. obligation to society; the ability to fulfillinventors share the income derived from Establish copyright policies for soft - that obligation is dependent upon the inventions. As industrial sponsors usual- ware. As computers have assumed an university's freedom to publish. Thely have some rights tothe research increasingly important role. academic in- f, eedom to publish is critical not only to through licenses. most will be amenable stitutions have devoted substantial funds faculty but also tottidents. for indus- tothissolution.Under no circum- to purchase computer hardware and soft- tries often use publication as a criterion stances, however, should this policy re- ware, to hire new faculty and staff, and of research competence when evaluating sult in a degree being delayed. the thesis to house this equipment and personnel. students for employment (5). should merely be held out of circulation. These investments have generated a Industrial sponsors frequently have Retain ownership of all patents. Uni- large amount of computer software rang- proprietary interests to protect, and they versities have an obligation not only to ing from personal programs of little v alue will ask to review proposed publicationsdisseminate knowledge through publica- to anyone uther than their authors to in order to ensure that proprietary infor-tions but also to make a best effort to general-interest programs of substantial mation is not revealed to the public. Thisbring Inventions to the marketplace. Al- academic and commercial value. As soft- request creates a potential conflict withthough itis usually advantageous forware technology continuesto grow. the university's need to publish researchcompanies to market their inventions. copyrights will assume greater economic results. However, the conflict is easilythey may decide as part of a profit- importance at universities (8). resolved if the university agrees to keepmotivated strategythat certain Inven- Software is usually developed under confidential any proprietary informationtions should be withheld. The principal policies based on the traditional scholar- it acquires to conduct the research, andway for a university to prevent a compa- ly activities of faculty. particularly book the industry agrees to publication of newny from withholding the products of a authorship. Most universities offer facul- research findings. joint research program is to retain own- ty members complete ownership of all The industrial sponsor has the right toership of all patents issued for faculty. scholarly works protected by copyright review publications as well as the right to staff. and student inventions. Property (9). The university's contribution to such request tha any proprietary information rights may be transferred from a univer- work typically comprises release time. be removed if it has been included in a sity to an industrial sponsor by a license secretarial support, supplies. and office publication. This rigl't should in no wayagreement. butthat same agreement facilitiesall at little incremental cost to be regarded as veto power. however.shouldprovidetheuniversitywith the institution. The contract should stipulate that themarch-in rightsif,after some clearly Nevertheless. because the creation of sponsor's approval shall not be unrea-defined period. the invention is not ex- software entails significant use of univer- sonably withheld. If opinions differ as toploited by the licensee. sity personnel. equipment, and funds, whether or not the company's rights The details of a license, except for the the university should claim some share have been violated, the two parties mustabove stipulLtion, should be left negotia- in the benefits from its commercializa- 1 2 5 119 tion. Universities therefore need policiesto their future employers allof theal support because the availability of to ptotect their lights in This urea, but knov,ledge they have gained. researchers with industrial experience because the issue is relatively new, such If the student must be exposed toenhances communication between the policies now vary widely from one uni-proprietary information, the confidenti-two sectors. versity to another. Some hold that theality agreement should be between the Faculty should not be permitted to software belongs wholly to the institu-sponsor and the student. The universityconsult with sponsors in the sponsored tion because it is a piece of technology cannot be responsible for the enforce-research area.One of the perquisites of produced with university equipment-,ment of such an agreement, and thisfaculty at most research universities is others treat programs as literature andposition should be clearly stated. the right to consult privately on a limited assign all rights to the author (9). Create research units with faculty andbasis. Consulting enhances both the pro- One way to deal with this issue is for students, and hire full-time researchersfessional competence of the individual the university to set a threshold below to staff such units if necessary.Many ofand the reputation of the institution (7), which it has no interest; that threshold is the most successful research relation-but faculty members must balance their usually the point at which computer soft-ships between universities and industriesoutside consulting activities with their ware becomes marketable. This elimi-have resulted from universities creatinginstitutional responsibilities for teaching nates most of the problem. For cases.research units devoted to specific prob-and research(12).A potential conflict where the software is commercialized, lems or areas. Often those research unitsmay arise, for example, if faculty mem- the university should not expect to re-are a response to an industry identifyingbers are invited b, the sponsors of their cover all developmental costs; however.a research need and recognizing that auniversity research to consult in the marketing expenses and legal fees should given university has the expertise to dosame specific research areas. Any know- be recouped before any income is shared the work (10). These centers or instituteshow of patents arising from this work with the author. The university's patentare staffed with faculty and students ascould accrue to the sponsor through the policy can serve as a guide to the equita- well as a contingent of full-time, nonfac-consulting agreement, whereas the work ble apportionment of income; this policy ulty researchers, many with industrialdone on the sponsored research nroject usually allocates the greater portion ofbackgrounds. The combination of facul-through the institution was probably des- the income to the institution--a two-to- ty, students, and professional research-ignated university property in the institu- one ratio is typical. ers enables these centers to respond totional agreement or contract. Minimize the use of proprietary infor- industrial needs in a more timely fashion The key factor in implementing this mation in research and do not requirethan is possible with the more traditionalrule is to define clearly the scope of the graduate students to sign confidentiality approach to research found at most uni-research being supported by the industry agreements.Most universities will not versities. and allow the rule to apply only to that undertake confidential research for the These units do not operate as privatenarrow area. This approach frees re- federal government or for industry. Theconsulting firms. They work in academ- searchers to consult with industrial spon- reason for this policy relates, again, toic-year cycles (that is, a minimum I-yearsors in their general fields of expertise. the fundamental purpose of a university.project duration), andeven more im-Unfortunately, enforcement of this rule If research results cannot be published,portantthey have a strong educationalis virtually impossible; its success de- the university has failed to fulfill part offocus. Students associated with these pends or the integrity of the researcher. its obligation to society. centers as part of their academic training Afacultyentrepreneur's company However, a university can accept pro-gain a great deal from such work: finan- snould not be permitted to sponsor his or prietary information from an industrialcial stability for their research, commu- her research on campus.This guideline sponsor if itis used to generate newnication skills, job opportunities, and arises from another recent development. knowledge that, in turn, is publishable.close interaction with industry, includingIn the past, faculty members consulted Although receipt of this information iscontact with management, exposure towith outside firms, but few started their tita problem in itself, the institutiontechnical knowledge, and use of equip-own companies. However, much aca- should minimize the amount of propri-ment and materials ( / /). demic research is now easily and rapidly etary information it accepts in order to The primary difference between a re-translated into products and processes avoid conflict when the new research search center and a more conventionalwith commercial value. In the area of results are published. academic department is that productivitybiotecnnology alone, for example, more The university should stipulate that itis enhanced by the full-time professional than 200 companies have been estab- will accept proprietary information only researchers. (An old adage seems partic-lished within the last 4 years (9). when it is in writing and designated asularly appropnate here. ten professors at Obviously new rules are needed to proprietary. The only individuals withone-tenth time do not a person-yeardeal with this situation. Implementing authorized access to this informationmake.) Moreover, a full-time researcherthem requires first that entrepreneur be should be full-time faculty or staff, stu-with industrial experience tends to pro-defined. If a company is wholly owned dents should be insulated from this typeduce more inventions than the typicalby a faculty member, then that indiidt' of data. Industrial sponsors may requirefaulty member. This is not to suggest a isclearlyan entrepreneur. However, investigatorstosign a confidentiality qualitative difference between the workwhen the faculty member on a per- agreement prohibiting them from divulg-done by the professional researcher andcentage of an outside company . some ing the information for a given period.that of the faculty member, but the In-gauge is needed to determine when that often up to 5 years (5). Such an agree-dustrially trained individual can morepercentage is high enough to present a ment is an unrealistic burden to place on readily recognize an invention. In fact,conflict of interest. While it is difficult to a student who may soon be seekingworking with professional researchersestablish a firm rule for this situation, a employment in the same industrial sectorfrequently helps faculty identify inven-general guideline is that more than 10 as the sponsor. The education of stu tions arising from their research results.percent ownership in a company consti- dents is a primary function of the univer-These research units are not only pro-tutes an equity interest. sity, and students should be free to bring ductive but also likely to attract industn- Once facultyentrepreneurship has 12 6 120

been established, the faculty member's drawing up international agreements lies and disputes. A complete and explicit on-campus responsibilities and off-cam- in assuming that the elements of a suc-contract is the university's best antidote pus venture must remain completely sep- cessful domestic agreement can be ap-to disaster(15). arate(13).Objectivityisdifficultto plied. A second error lies in assuming Share personnel and equipment with achieve when a researcher has responsi- that experience with one foreign sponsor industry.Although there is renewed in- bilities both to the institution and to a is applicable to another. Cultures vary soterest in cooperation between universi- venture in which he or she has a vestedwidely that experience with one countrytios and industries, in fact, the two par- interest, yet objectivity is essential to the may help very little in making arrange-ties have always interchanged ideas and judgments needed for education and sci- ments with another. Any guidelines orpeople. Many industrial employees have entific research(14). policies established by a university re- held adjunct appointments at uriversities The key issue is accountability: when garding international agreements mustjust as faculty have often had formal the institution accepts a research grant, therefore be sufficiently flexible to allowconsulting agreements with industries. it accepts the responsibility for accom- for case-by-case modifications. More recently, however, arrangements plishing the work, and the sponsor ex- A major difference between domestic have been made whereby a researcher's pects the project to be completed cor-and international contracts is that thetime is shared; the sharing need not be rectly and on time. A researcher who is negotiation phase of the latter can oftenon a 50:50 basis, but a split less propor- also a sponsor. however, becomes bothgenerate expenses that are substantial intionate than 25:75 is probably unwise. judge and jury. He or she is hardly in an proportion to the actual research sup- Such arrangements have potential pit- appropriate position to decide, for exam-port. Aside from the staff commitment to falls.Industrial research usually pro- ple, whether or not a late completionthese negotiations, legal fees both atduces proprietary information, whereas report is acceptple. The institution must home and abroad can mount up quickly. university work is expected to lead to deal with the spunsor in one way and theUnfortunately, recovering these negoti- publications. The question of patent or faculty member in another: when they ating and legal expenses is difficult. To copyright ownership must be considered are one and the same, this becomes be realistic, the university should double also, especially since many companies impossible. The faclIty entrepreneur's its estimate of the ex:..enses that will be do not share income with authors and company should, however, be allowed to incurred during the preproposal stage. inventors as universities do. Another sponsor other research on campus, even Another problem is that tax-exemptproblem may arise from the industrial within his or her own department, be- U.S. institutions seldom have the same prohibition against consulting with an- cause this situation allows a clear separa- status overseas. Income derived fromother firm, contrasted with the rather tion of roles. licenses on patents can be taxed by theliberal policies of most universities re- Theextensionof thisprohibition f reign licensee's government; as a regarding faculty consulting. A researcher against faculty sponsoring their own sult, the net income from the licensedworking for both a university and an work is that a researcher's graduate stu- product or process can be considerablyindustry would probably be restricted to dents should not be employed by the below the negotiated amount. the combined salaries of the two posi- researcher's company either. The reason Translation can present yet anothertions and not have the opportunity for is simple. Ideally, the choice of a gradu- problem with such arrangements. Mostextra compensation through consulting. ate student's research topic is a free one: contractual documents and deliverables However, the advantages of sharing in reality, however, the choice is often (completion reports, for example) areoutweigh the problems in most cases. made after the faculty adviser has been written in English. and the details as wellResearchers in industry have access to consulted and the availaiAlity of funds as the overall spirit of these documentsexcellent facilities and support staff, and considered. Even given these limita- must be preserved when they are trans-they usually work with a group of re- tions, the student should still have some lated into the sponsor's language. Ansearchers in a given area. The advan- choice. However, that choice may beattorney well versed in the spore -or'stages of a university association are the undermined if the faculty entrepreneur's language is almost essential. stimulation derived from working with company issupporting the student's If. after considering all the risks ofstudents and interacting with a more work: the research may be directed to- such an association, a university decides diverse group of colleagues(16). ward the specific goals and needs of .he to enter into an international agreement. Universities and industries can share company. Moreover, the work may beseveral suggestions can guide those In- not only personnel but also equipment. acceleratedtomeet thecompany's volved in drawing up the contract. The Sharing isparticularly beneficial with schedule rather than the student's needs. most important is I-, daffy the nature of sophisticated research equipment that These abuses may be rare, but guidelinesthe project immediately so that team and would be used infrequently by industry. are needed to prevent them from occur- technical requirements, cost estimates, In such a case, several companies can ring. logistic support, and other relevant fac- contribute to the purchase of the equip- A corollary to this guideline is That tors can be specified. ment, house it at a university. and sched- faculty entrepreneurs should never be While the guidelines for an interna- ule its use. The major advantage to the allowed to lease or use space in theirtional agreement must be general enough university hes in having state-of-the-art university departments for private busi- to allow for variations in details from one equipment for faculty, students. and ness. The resulting mixture of personnelcasetoanother,thecontractitseifto use when the sponsor is lot using it. and facilities can confuse colleagues,should be as specific as possible. Provi- The university should offer industrial students, support staff, and outsiders in sion should be made for scope of the personnel access to thequipment and determining whether a given project is work, financing, salaries, medical bene-make appropriate arrangemcnIs for li- part of an institutional responsibility or afits, language training. reports, publica-ability protection. Cooperative ari:nge- private business activity(7). tions, patents, subcontracts. taxes, trav- ments can help universities fill the needs Beware of international agreements. el, transportation and storage of materi-created by declining federal support of A common mistake universities make inals, equipment, training,termination. equipment and facilities (17). 127 121

Prepare a model research agreement with the same set of rules. not view our guidelines as an exhaustive for potential industrial sponsors. As in- set. Many more will be added as faculty dustry increases its support for research. Conclusion researchers, corporate sponsors, and the need for universities to develop mod- university administrators gain new in- el agreements for potential industrial There is much to be gained from insights from their experiences. sponsors becomes more compelling. Acreased interaction between universities university's negotiatingposition is and industries, both for the institutions strengthened when it presents standardthemselves and for society as a whole. References and Notes Innoyation cannot occur without basic IJ R Battenburg. Soc Res. Adm. J. 11. 3 (1980). provisions to prospective clients early on 2. National Commission on Research. Industry (.5). All of the above guidelines should be research as input, and basic research and the Universities. Developing Cooperative Research Relationships in the National Interest incorporated into the model agreement. that does not lead to technological inno- (National Commission on Research. Washing- The university should also have a stan-vation in the form of marketable prod- ton. D.C.. 19801 The commission disbanded in 1980: its work was continued by the ad hoc dard international agreement. Althoughucts and processes does little to better committee on Government-University Relation- the needs, philosophies, and expecta- our quality of life. Too much emphasis ships in Support of Science (GURSS) until 1983 and is presently carried by the Government- tions of foreign sponsors vary, a modelhas been plat'ed on the dichotomy be- University-Industry Research Rour.dtable spon- tween the "pure." basic research done sored by the National Academy of Sciences. agreement can still serve as a sound 3. (D19. 8S3.)Tatel and R. C. Guthne. Educ. Res. 64. 2 basis to begin negotiations for overseas at universities and the applied research 4. W. Lepkowski. Chem. Eng. News 61. 8 (1983). work. considered the province of industry. 5. The Society of Research Administrators and the The university's first contact with aRapid growth in scientific advancement National Science Foundation. IndustrylUniver- say Research Relations A Workshop for Facul- potentialindustrialsponsorisoften has blurred the line separating the two ty (Government Printing Office. Washington. through the faculty researcher (18). Fac- (16). Increased interaction between uni- D.C.. 1983). 6. N P. Suh. Technol. Rev. 83.4 (1981) ulty should therefore be familiar with versities and industry is inevitable as the 7. A..B. Giamatti. Science 218. 1278 (1982). 8. W. Lepkowski. Chem. Eng. News 59.47 (1981) these model agreements and present federal government contributes an ever 9. R. Browne. Bus. Week 2815 (1983). p. 86. them early in discussions with potential smaller portion of the research dollar: 10. T I Murray. Dun's Rev. 117.5 (1981). II T Gutkowski. paper presented at the Confer- sponsors. And, again, as n.lny details as such relationships may prove to be the ence on Cooperative Research: Mechanisms for possible should be stipulatedinthe best way to serve the needs of all in- Synergistic Interaction. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 19 to 20 February 1980. agreement, whether it be with a domestic volved, including the public (3). 12. National Science Foundation. Universityllndus- or a foreign sponsor, to circumvent prob- Many have expressed concern that try Research Relationships (Government Print- ing Office. Washington. D.C.. 1980). lems as the research association devel-universities are selling out by becoming 13. I. Peterson. Sri. News 123. 76 (1983). 14. L S. Wilson. paper presented at the Conference ops. Although many clauses in such anso closely allied with industry (19). But on University/Industry Relations. University of agreement will be open to negotiation. cooperative research can threaten aca- Wisconsin. Madison. 16 November 1982 15. JKmetz. "Suggestions for international con- having the framework of the agreement demic freedom only if universities allow tracting(University of Delaware. Newark. available from the beginning can avert itto do so.lf, instead, they monitor 1980) Photocopies are available from the au thors of this article. misunderstandings. Another advantage themselves closely, they can reap the 16. K. A. Smith. Phys. Today 37. 2 (1984). is that a model agreement, although sub-rewards of interactionwith industry 17. A. Crittenden. Nei York Times (22 July 1981). p. DI. ject to variation through negotiations.without sacrificing the principles that 18. D. R. Baldwin and J W. Green. Sac. Res. Adm. .1.. 15(4). 5 (1984). demonstrates to potential sponsors thatconstitute their very foundation. But uni- 19. S. Carey. Wall St J East Ed. (9 February the university approaches all sponsorsversity research administrators should 1982). p 33

sovereign He can accept no authority but his own conscience and jidgment. The work proceeds in ways very different from that suggested by its impersonality in formal publication. "The process ; want to call scientific," the physicist Percy Bridg- man wrote, "is a process that involves the continual apprehension of meaning. ..accompanied by the running act er checking to be sure elm I am doing what I want to do, and of judging correctness or incorrectness. This checking and judging and "Being well-informed about science is not Scientists know nothing for certain. The accepting...are dine by me and can be the same thing as understanding science." advancement of science is a social process, a doi.e for me by no one else. They are as Therewith, James Bryant Conant discounted pubic process, and yet an :ntensely private private as my toothache, and without them the popular interest in science roused by theone. Societies that would enjoy its material science is dead." thunderclap that ended World War II. Now benefits must understand science in both its The intensity of this private process-its as then, in a world transformed by the aspects. toothache-is raised by the fact that it is in- application of scientific knowledge. peopie "The truth of an idea," William James per- tegrally public. It is intended for publication. put that knowledge in the same category with ceived at the turn of this century, "is not a Without publication, science is dead. what they know by rev; .,ion or other re- stagnant property inherent in it. Truth hap- Upon publication, verification of the work

ceived authority. What needs to be under- pens to an idea...[by] the process of. . its proceeds. As the sociologist Robert Merton stood is how, scientifically, we come to verification." In the private process, the sci- has observed, "Only after the originality and know what we know. entist must face the singular loneliness of the consequence of the work have been attested 128 122

by significant others can the scientist feelexposed sooner rather than later by the com- Happily, the social process of science reasonably comfortable about it." Merton'smunal process of verification. With equal brings along the means to realize its values. term for this public process is "'Com-reliability the consensus of the communityFor it finds convincing verification in the munism'. .. .The substantive findings ofdistinguishes the significant from the trivial technologies it begets. During the past four science are the product of social collabora-This is the more remarkable considering centuries science has been liberating increas- tion and are assigned to the com-what Merton calls "the basic uncertainty of ing numbers, now nearly one-third, of man- munity. .. .The scientist's claim to 'his' in-genuinely independent originality in sci-kind from toil and want and even from sub- tellectual 'property' is limited to thatence." mission to received authority. No national recognition and esteem which, if the institu- Thus Niels Bohr was once prompted toconstitution written in this century has failed tion functions with a modicum of efficiency,observe of a radical and baffling proposal by to hold out the promise, at least, of political are roughly commensurate with the signifi-the aging Werner Heisenberg: "Yes, itis and economic democracy. The people of the cance of the increment brought to the com-crazy, but it is not crazy enough!" worldif nations can keep the peacemay mon fund of knowledge." It has been said that science will flourish.see this revolution in the condition of man The remarkable fact, established by theonly in a society that cherishes its norms. fulfill its promise in the next century. open public record of science, is that thisThe reason, openness, tolerance, and respectExcerpted from a public lecture given at social process functions with high efficien-for the autonomy of the individual that dis-Moscow State (Lomonsov) University, Mos- cy. It is not that scientists are more dedi-tinguish the social process of science, how- cow, U.S.S.R., on 25 November 1985, on cated, honest, and selfless than other citi-ever, are norms desirable in every humanthe occasion of the conferral by the univer- zens; they are disciplined to behave that waycommunity. They describe a world in which,sity of the degree Doctor Honoris Causa. by their collaboration. Error and fraud arewe can agree, all of us want to live.

biological evolution and mechanisms of aggressive behavior; deep inquiry into the origin and resolution of past conflicts and study of contemporary conflicts; formulation of fundamental concepts pertinent to a wide range of conflicts; experimental research on simulated conflicts; the study of negotiations, both in real-life circumstances and in simulated ones; the study of various intergroup and international institutions as they affect conflict; research specifically focusing on issues of war and peace; and the study of conflicts at various levels of organization, such as families, communities, and nations, The world is now, as it has been for a longportations. We have learned and are continu- in the search for common factors and princi- time, awasli in a sea of ethnocentrism, prej-ing to learn how great the horrors can beples, so that discoveries at one level may udice, and violent conflict. The worldwidewhen supposedly civilized nations set about illuminate issues at another level. The historical record is full of hateful and de-destroying depreciated people. strengthening of both experimental and structive indulgences based on religious, ra- In a world full of hatred, repression, ter-observational research, keeping in mind cial, and other distinctionsholy wars ofrorism, small wars, and preparation for im-actual conflict and real-world decision- one sort or another. What is new is the de-mense wars, human conflict is a subject thatmakers, could probably lead to major contri- structive power of our weaponry: nuclear,deserves the most careful and searching in-butions in the next decade. enhanced conventional, chemical, andquiry. The stakes are now so high that there It is certainly not beyond human ingenuity biological. Moreover, the worldwide spreadis an urgent need for cooperative engage- to move this subject higher on the world's of technical capability, the miniaturization ofment with these problems over a wide range agenda. Strong organizations covering wide weapons, the widely broadcast justificationsof inquiry involving the physical, biological,sectors of science, technology, and educa- for violence, and the upsurge of fanatical be-behavioral, and social sciences. There is notion can take a more active role in coping havior are occurring in ways that can readilyroyal road to truth, no single perspective thatwith this critical issue. The scientific com- provide the stuff of very deadly conflicts. Tooffers overriding promise. Just as the sourcesmunity is the closest approximation we now be blunt, we have a rapidly growing capacityand manisfestations of human conflict arehave to a truly international community, to make life everywhere absolutely miser-immensely varied, so too are there manysharing certain fundamental interests, val- able and disastrous. useful approaches to understanding, prevent-ues, and standards as well as certain basic Centuries ago, it was common for military ing, and resolving conflict. curiosities about the nature of matter, life, conquerors to put captives to the sword or to Conflict and its prevention or resolution behavior, and the universe. The shared quest reduce them to slavery. By the end of thehave not been major subjects for scholarlyfor understanding is one that knows no 19th century, it was widely believed that weinquiry until quite recently, and even nownational boundaries, no inherent prejudices, had achieved a sufficiently civilized status tothey attract only marginal interest in many ofno necessary ethnocentrism, and no bamers make such horrors impossible. Yet the worldthe world's great research institutions. to the free play of information and ideas. To since then has seen near extermination ofNevertheless, some interesting and usefulsome extent, the scientific community can peoples, massacres, and massive de-work is being done, including research on provide a model for human -Mations that

129 123 might transcend some of the barriers thatall of its aspectsthose we relish and thoseethnocentrism, and the greatly enhanced have long plagued us and have now becomewe fear. The time is ripe for the scientific risks of these ancient orientations in the so dangerous. community to provide worldwide leadership rapidly changing world of the late 20th cen- In a fundamental way, the modem world in addressing the ubiquity of prejudice, the tury. is the creation of science and technology inprofound and pervasie impact of

130 The internal mechanisms by which scientists validate each dividual investigators, he reports, may shield their work from appro- other's research results have been of little public interest until priate scrutiny by skeptical colleagues. His article prompted letters recently. But when charges of fraud, falsification, and plagiar- from Edith D. Neimark, Harold Hillman, Carve! Blair, and George ism are headlined in the morning newspaper, it is clear that these A. Silver presenting different views about the meaning of misconduct quality control mechanisms are no longer strictly internal matters. in research practice. While some maintain that scientists have tradi- Increased government scrutiny of the means by which scientists tionally demonstrated high ethical standards in their professional check their work can be expected when public funds have underwrit- work, others argue that more forceful monitoring is necessary. As an ten research that has been called into question. Congressional com- antidote to misconduct, DeWitt Stetten, Jr., suggests tighter supervi- mittees have criticized the early responses by government agencies sion within smaller research training groups. investigating allegations of wrongdoing by publicly funded research- More recently, Science editor Daniel E. Koshland, Jr., comments ers. Efforts are currently under way to assure honesty and integrity in that fraud is an unwelcome but inevitable part of the research process research by defining and strengthening the norms that govern pro- "as long as human beings are doing the experiments." He believes, fessional conduct in science. however, that "99.9999 percent of reports are accurate and truthful" Whether recent highly publicized reports of fraud demonstrate that in science, and that the cumulative nature of science makes it more misconduct has significantly increased within the scientific establish- likely that deceit will be uncovered more quickly than in other ment is difficult to deter^,ne. Even if hundreds of cases were professions. Raymond R. White, and Michael R. Rosen and Brian F. documented, these would still represent only a small fraction of the Hoffman respond with more skepticism. Their letters claim both that total research currently underway. Moreover, many officials fear that a greater amount of research may be in error than has been previously bureaucratic overreaction to selected incidents of fraud could cause reported and that proposed governmental regulations unfairly shield greater damage to productive research than the harm resulting from those who accuse others of wrongdoing. undetected deceit. Wherever the truth lies, the recent preoccupation with fraud and In any case, most research institutions lack formal mechanisms for misconduct in science has contrnuted to a "let's clean up our act" identifying and correcting deceptive or sloppy science Standard peer attitude and a desire to restore integrity in the house of science. The review practices are not designed to identify fraudulent research, and emphasis on responsibility in science has shifted from earlier social it is unlikely that collaborators would report suspicions about a reform efforts to a more centrist position emphasizing honesty and colleague if an institution lacks procedures to provide a fair and truthfulness in science. The health sciences in particular are attempt- impartial investigation of the matter. ing to define scientists' rights and duties in a time of rapid change. Following the early reports of individual cases of fraud in science, These issues are examined again in the next chapter as authors search William J. Broad prepared an in-depth examination of the signifi- for new principles of autonomy and accountability to shape the cance of scientifh. fraud. He concludes that the fact-checking mech- development and application of medical knowledge in the latter half anisms in science do not work effectively. The reputations of inof the twentieth century. RC 126

the limelight. Control was an internal matter. An informal group of scientists could hold court and decide to ban an offender from the realm of research. More fundamentally, science was said to be self-correcting. If an experiment was important enough, other scientists would tryto repeatit.This self-correcting mechanism would expose cheating and 'N:4. encourage honesty. It would detect and deter. Dubbed "organized skepticism," this view was originally set forth by There is little doubt that a dark side of John Long, aresearcherwith science has emerged dr .ag the past de- $750,000 in federal funds at Massachu-Robert K. Merton, the father of the sociology of Science. "Scientific inqui- cade. In ever-increasing detail, the scien-setts General Hospital, forged data and ry," he wrote, "is in effect subject to tific and general press have reported thefor 7 years watched over a cell line for rigorous policing, to a degree perhaps pira:ing of papers and the falsification ofthe study of Hodgkin's disease that unparalleled in any other field of human data. Four major cases of cheating inproved useless (Science, 6 March 1981). activity." Initially propounded in 1942, biomedical research came to light in 1980 Vijay Soman, a researcher at Yale this view has become the conventional alone, with some observers in the laymedical school, plagiarized a rival's pa- press calling it a "crime wave." Federalper, fabricated data, and received forwisdom. Donald Fredrickson, director of NIH, today puts 't this way. "We delib- investigators say two of these cases may 1980 alone some $100,000 in NIH sup- erately have a ,, ery small police force end in criminal charges. port. Eleven papers were retracted. He because we know that poor currency will In a profession that places an unusual ultimately returned to his home in India, premium on honesty, the emergence ofbut left his coauthor and boss, Philipautomatically be discovered and cast out." fraud has created something of a stir.Felig, it dministrative and ethical A sterling example of such self-correc- Scientific societies are holding symposiatangle (Science, 3 October 1980). tion comes from the case of the Nobel on the subject. The National Institutes of Elias A. K. Alsabti, a young re- retraction. The incident unfolded at Yale Health has taken administrative steps tosearcher from Jordan, pirated almost in the late 1950's, with the arrival of a cope with the putative rise in cheating.word-for-word at least seven papers and young graduate student in biochemistry. And Congress, as it does with issuespublished theminobscure journals. Working in the lab of Melvin Simpson, significant or otherwise, is preparing to (Science, 27 June 1980). the student quickly made significant Mold hearings on the falsification of data Marc Straus. a Boston University gains in the cell-free synthesis of cyto- in biomedical research. researcher who in 3 years was awarded chrome c, a key protein in cellular ener- Is the issue important? After all, re-nearly $1millionin cancer research gy-releasing reactions.In early1960, ported cases of cheating are few, andgrants, submitted reports containing re- Simpson and the student coauthored a NIH funnels government funds intopeated falsifications. He resigned under paper on the successful experiments that nearly 18,000 extramural projects. Sci-fire, insisting that he was the victim of a received wide attention because it was ence recently put the question to a dozenconspiracy by select members of his 20- the first time such a single, highly puri- research directors, NIH officials, benchperson staff. More than 2 years later fied protein has been synthesized outside scientists. and sociologists. One recur-after the Boston Globe ran a five-part a cell. The success carried the student. ring observation was that fraud has al-series on the affair, the National Cancer now equipped with a Ph.D. from Yale, to ways been around, but not always adver-Institute initiated an investigation. tised. A Nobel laureate. for example, the lab of Fritz Lipmann at Rockefeller In response to these and a few other was said to have coauthored a paper in University, where he coauthored a paper incidents, Congress has invited two wit-with the Nobel laureate. The promising the early 1960's that was retracted due to nesses to the falsification drama, Long the cheating of a junior associate. The career, however, soon suffered a set- and Felig, to come and give their views back. unseemly details of the Nobel retraction on what, if anything, is happening to never went out of the lab, and therein, Simpson. back at Yale in late 1960 U.S. biomedical research. Also invitedafter spending several months on sabbat- say some observers, lies one differenceare a bevy of NIH officials, research between the finagling of yesterday and ical in England, reassembled his lab and directors, and bioethicists. Cheating isstarted trying to extend the successful today. Changes in comtemporary sci- also being discussed during symposia at ence and its interactions with society are experiments with cytochrome c. His ef- the upcoming annual meeting of theforts met with failure. "I had gone all making fraud in the labs more visible. Council of Biology Editors. Meanwhile,around Europe giving seminars on our at the Harvard School of Public Health,success."herecalls."And nowI The House Science and Technology subcommittee the seventh national conference on Pub-couldn't repeat it. Imagine the agony." on investigations and oversight, chaired by Albert Gore (D-Tenn.). will hold heanngs on 31 March and lic Responsibility in Medicine and Re-A call from Lipmann at Rockefeller re- I Apnl, as this ii.sue of Scien.e is going to press search just held a session on "How tovealed that people in his lab were also Testifying will be Donald Fredrickson (NIH). Philip Handler (National Academy of Sciences). LeRoy detect and prevent fraudulent or unethi-having difficulty repeating the student's Walters (Kennedy Institute of Ethics at Georgetown cal research." University), Philip Felig (Yale). John Long (former- work. The student was called back to ly of Massachusetts General Hospital). Ronald La- Until recently, charges or even discus-Yale and told to duplicate the cyto- mont-Havers(MassGeneral).PatnciaWoolf (Princeton), Stuart Nightingale (Food and Drug Ad- sions of scientific fraud were seldomchrome c experiment. He worked under ministration). Alexander Capron (President's Com- aired in public. Most scientists, con-around-the-clock supervision, mission for the Study of Ethical Problems in Medi- and cine and Biomedical and Behavioral Research). and scious of their image and eager to avoid failed. He was subsequently told to leave William Raub (NIH). political interference, tried to stay out ofresearch in general. Two retractions, one 1 S 2 127

from Simpson and one from Lipmann's mont-Havers, a former NIH official whomore closed. People were afraid to call lab, were published in late 1961. Some- witnessed the Long affair from his posi-attention to cheating." In his own case, time laterit was discovered that the tion as director of research at Mass Gen- Wheelock at first hesitated to charge student's undergraduate college in Mas- eral. If this is indeed the case, troubledAlsabtiwithpiracy.Wheelock had sachusetts had no record of his evertimes may lie ahead. Since 1979, NIHkicked Alsabti out of his lab after two receiving a degree. has had a drop in purchasing power, and young researchers came to him with Since that time, revelations of cheat-this year the percent of approved grants proof that Alsabti was making up data. ingbut not necessarily cheating itselflucky enough to get funded has dropped Later, when Wheelock saw his work seem to have slowly but steadily in-to 30an all-time low. being published in thi.,scientific litera- creased. The cause? According to Rob- The increasingly close scrutiny of re-ture by Alsabti, he discussed the prob- ert H. Ebert, former dean of the Harvard search that has direct implications forlem with his program manager at the medical school, part of the reason maypublic policy or public health is also aNational Cancer Institute, who suggest- be increasing pressure. Writing in thefactor ininter-scientist exposure, ac-ed that he alert the wider community, New York Times about the fabrication ofcording to Columbia University sociolo-After first writing to Alsabti and de- data by John Long at Mass General,gistHarriet Zuckerman. This clearly manding retractions (that did not materi- Ebert said "it would be a mistake to seems to be the case in the Straus affairalize), Wheelock wrote letters to Nature, consider this an example of human frail-at Boston University. Data from about Science, Lancet, and the Journal of the ty and nothing more. Medical schools200 patients studied by Straus and hisAmerican Medical Association and de- and academic research centers have in-team were kept in the computer files ofscribed ways for researchers to "avoid advertently fostered a spirit of intense, the EasternCooperativeOncologysuch episodes in the future." often fierce competition, which beginsGroup, a 40-hospital consortium funded The list of possible reasons for in- during the premedical experience and is by the National Cancer Institute to con-creasing exposure rambles on, most ev- encouraged thereafter. .. . There is in-duct large-scale testing of new cancereryone having their own pet specula- tense pressure to publish, not only totreatments. In 1978, five members oftions. Lurking in the record of events, obtain research grant renewals but inStraus's team disclosed to officials athowever, is an intriguing contradiction. order to qualify for promotion." Boston University problems with theA review of the cases where cheating has The implication in this account of adata. Falsifications ranged from chang-come to light during the past decade rise in cheating itself is dismissed ining a patient's birthdate to reportingshows that the failure to duplicate ex- many quarters. Pressure, say a chorus oftreatments and laboratory studies thatperiments plays a relatively minor role in commenters, has always been around.were never done and inventing a tumoruncovering fraud. This self-correcting Moreover, many hold that the rate ofin a patient who had none. Boston Uni-mechanism "worked" inearlier epi- finagling has remained rrughly the same versity says a detailed study of medicalsodes: in the cases of Mendel, Newton, throughout the years, and cite the pur-records found no evidence of patientand Ptolemy (though it took two millen- ported cooking of data by Mendel, New- mistreatment or inappropriate care. Dis-nia), or in the case of the Nobel retrac- ton, and Ptolemy to back up their beliefs. agreeing with this view is a Food andtion. During the past decade, however, A radical view of the ubiquity of fraud DrugAdministrationofficialfamiliarother means have predominated, the comes from philosopher of science Paulwith an ongoing investigation of dr:mechanism often being the detective Feyerabend(Science, 2 NovemberStraus affair: "To say the least, some ofwork of young lab assistants or young 1979), who holds that small-scale cheat-this had serious clinicalimplications,scientific rivals who have extra-experi- ing is essential to the advancement ofboth in the sense that the patient in themental evidence of cheating, who have science. He argues that no theory, nostudy was endangered, and that data some independent reason for suspicion. matter how good, ever agrees with all the generated would present conclusionsThis was the case in all four of the 1980 factsin its domain. A scientist mustthat were poorly founded." fraud episodes. It was also the case with therefore rhetorically nudge certain facts Concerning exposure to the public,the Sloan-Kettering affair and the paint- out of the picture, defuse them with an one factor repeatedly singled out is theed mouse of William Summerlin (Sci- ad hoc hypothesis, or just plain ignoregrowth of a vigorous scientific press. ence, 14 June 1974), although Summer- them. A similar but less polemical view Indeed, the National Association of Sci- lin's work was also under fire because it is expressed by philosopher Thomas S. ence Writers, founded in 1934 by 15 could not at the time be repeated. Kuhn (Science, 8 July 1977). Kuhn di- reporters, now has more than 1000 mem- This gap between real and ideal ways vides the history of science into periods bers. And clearly, the NCI investigationof detecting and preventing fraud (what of normal and revolutionary activity, ar-of the Straus affair would never have sociologists of science euphemistically guing that during normal periods, anom- materialized had it not been for the series refer to as the ''social control of sci- alies observed by the scientist must bein the Globe. Some observers, however, ence") has helped fuel a heated critique* suppressed or ignored. suggest that the press for the most partof the conventional wisdom during the If finagling of one sort or another istends to purvey, rather than initiate, past decade. endemic, what then causes increased ex-exposures. On the deterrence side of the debate, posure? Here it is necessary to make a A general rise in social consciousness critics have argued that the self-correct- distinction: exposure of fraud to other among scientists may account for someing mechanism does not distinguish bescientists and exposure to the public. of the increasing public exposure, ac- tween error and fraud. In the published In the first instance, one mechanism cording to E. Frederick Wheelock, a mi-literature, an experiment is only found that may bring cases of cheating out in crobiologist at Jefferson Medical College the open is the denunciation of scientists in Philadelphia whose work was pirated For a summary. see J. Gaston. "Disputes and by Jordanian researcher Alsabti. "In the deviant views about the ethos of science" in The by one another due to cutbacks in re- Reward System in British and American Science. search funding, according to Ronald La- past," he says, "the system was much (John Wiley and Sons. 1978). pp 158-184. 128

right or wrong. Given the ever-presentwere found to be riddled with internal might have been tempted to look away. academic pressure to succeed in a spec- implausibilities and basic methodological Over the years, the administrative costs tacular way, this chance of being foundoversights. Some researchers concluded charged by universities for nurturing the wrong may not deter a researcher fromthat Burt may have doctored or evenresearch enterprise have risen so that cheating. After all, guesses, fudging, andinvented his collection of !Q data. they now average more than 27 percent unconscious finagling that are correct go Critics for the most part do not argueof a grant. undetected. that the conventional wisdom is wrong, No person or institution has yet been Defenders of the conventional wisdombut rather, taken alone, it is inadequate debarred, and NIH officials say they to explain how science really works on a say that this weakness, by definition, have no plans to make debarmentretro- does not make any difference. The onlyday-to-day basis. Perhaps the most trou- active. If it were, all of Yale University, thing that matters is the accumulation ofbling observation is that even when thefor example, could well be cut off from scientific "truth.". and not whether aself-correcting mechanism works, it ad-the federal research - dollar pipeline. In falsifyingresearcheriscaughtanddresses only experiments and observa- addition to the threat of debarment, NIH punished. tions that are "important" to pure sci-officials say they have now built into It is here, on the detection side of theence, to the accumulation of scientifictheir vast computer network an alert debate, that critics rail most vehemently.truth. No one, after all, takes much time system so that NIH administrators are The acceptance or rejection of claims into repeat clinical trials of new drugs, warned if an investigator applying fora science often depends not so much ontherapies, or treatments. Replication of a new grant is himself under investigation "truth," according to such observers asmulti-institutional clinical trial, such as for cheating. Flagged so far by this sys- philosopher Ian I. Mitroff at the Univer-the one at Boston University that Straus tem are Straus, Soman, and a third. sity of Pittsburgh, but on who makes theworked with, is financially and structur-unidentified researcher who is currently claim and how well the claim fits prevail-ally impossible. In terms of the self- under investigation. ing beliefs. In short, the goodness of acorrecting mechanism, these are not ap- Is it important? Perhaps the emerging reputation or the attractiveness of a the-plicable areas of research, although they issue of fraud represents a small, seamy ory often gives immunity from scrutiny.may be important in terms of patient side of science that warrants nothing This circumvention of the idealizedwelfare. more than a cursory glance before being mode of detection was probably a factor Just as there was no scientific or insti- tossed onto the pile of passed-over isin why the problems with John Long'stutional mechanism to detect or dealsues. One might argue that the major contaminated cell lines at Mass Generalwith fraud in the Straus affair, neither cases are few, and the minor ones arc escaped detection for so many years. Hewas there a federal mechanism. Whenjust that, minor. Science is above It all. worked in a prestigious lab at one of thethree top officials at Boston University Nobel Prizes are awarded and greatness world's leadingteachinghospitals. medical :enter flew to Washington to tellis measured not on the basis of "hones- With the credentials of background andthe NCI director about their rapidly un-ty. but insight. Newton and Mendel training that Long presented, the studyfolding problems, NCI told them there may have finagled. but their theories are section would expect that he would bewas nothing the government could do. today committed to memory by every aware of this [contamination] problem," The slow response of the federal bu- high school student. says Stephen Schiaffino of the NIH divi-reaucracy, the questioning of the self- In a sense. all this is correct. It is also sion of research grants. correcting mechanism, and the emer-true that fraud in the literature wastes Immunity from scrutiny was alsogence of a few graphic examples of fraud the time and money of researchers who clearly a factor in the case of Cyril Burthave combined to stir considerable activ- pursue leads only to find them wrong. (Science, 26 November 1976), the En-ity concerning data abuse. At Boston Simpson spent I yerr untangling the cy- glish psychologist whose studies of iden- University, the multi-hospital group thattochrome ( mess. and. because of this tical twins supported his theory that in-got stuck with the project's bad data has unanticipated chore. lost a priority battle telligence is determined partly by hered-set up a system of random audits toin a different area of biochemistry. Simi- ity, and whose work went unchallengedensure that the program will never againlar amounts of time are probably wasted bevulnerabletosuchfalsification. during his lifetime. As a government in other fabrication episodes. Further,in adviser in Britain inthe1930's andCongress is in the process of holdinga profession where "organized skepti- hearings. The President's commission on 1940's, Burt was influential in setting up cism" is meant to he the rule, theemer- a school system in which children werebioethics plans to hold a number ofgence of a type of fraud not detected by sessions at "sites of controversy involv- assigned to one of three educational lev- thisself-correctingmechanism may els on the basis of a test given at the ageing the conduct of research." prove especially corrosive to community of I I. According to Leon Kamin, a psy- Confronted with the increasing reports ideas. 'I his mechanism did not and could chologist at Princeton, Burt's data re-of fraud-related incidents, NIH recently not deter data fabricators at Boston Uni- mained unchallenged for so long becausetook steps to prevet abuse in the future. versity, with the result that patient safety they confirmed what everyone wanted toIn November 1980, debarment regula- was probably jeopardized. And the fact believe. "Every professor knew that histions went into effect that allow the gov-that immunity from scrutiny often seems child was brighter than the ditchdigger'sernment to cut off an entire institutionto supersede any kind of "organized child," he says, "so what was there tofrom NIH grants if just one researcher isskepticism" can only lead to the discour- challenge?" caught misusing grant money or falsify- agement of the young, who tend to he far Burt's work was picked up by re-ing reports (Science, 14 November 1980, from immune. In the case of the imbro- searchers in the United States, and fig-p. 746). This sweeping mechanism wasglio at Yale. it was a 29-year-old NIH ured prominently in the debates overneeded, says NIH associate directorresearcher who brought charges against whether heredity might underlie racialWilliam Raub, in order to put the onusSoman. an assistant professor. and Fe- differences on IQ scores. Eventually,for prevention and detection of fraud onlig, a professor with an endowed chair. after a reign of nearly 40 years, his datathe institution. Previously, institutions"I just found it hard to believe that Felig D4 129 had engaged in any hanky pay." said recentcasesilluminate much. They researchenterprise.Perhapsfurther an appointed NIH auditor who, after a disclose a gap between the ideal ant! the study of the dark side will disclose more wait of 6 months, decided not to investi-real, between reliance on automatic sell- about the structure of science. At the gate the data of Soman and Fclig. Duringpolicing and the fact that mechanisms very !east, the recent cases illustrate that thisnoninvestigation,theyoungre- such as immunity from scrutiny often "organized skepticism" and the self- searcher quit NIH andresearchin prevail. They hint at support of philo- policing nature of science need general. sophical views that say finagling of onethemselves be taken with a little more No matter why they come forth, the sort or another may be endemic to the skepticism.

broke." don't fix it. It is not clear that 19 March 1982 the standards of scientists need fixing beyond regular maintenance. EDITH D. NEIMARK Fraud Investigation Department of Psychofgy. Douglass Scientists are quick to demand aca- College. Rutgers. State University of demic and scientific freedom, as in con- New Jersey. New Brunswick 08903 demning Admiral Inman's suggestions for classification of certain cryptograph- ic research (News and Comment, 22 22 May 1981 31 July 1981 Jan., p. 383). Yet one result of unbridled freedom was the academic cover-up of a Fraud, Science, and Safeguards Research Practices recent alleged biomedical fraud. Scien- tists in a democracy should temper their The article by William J. Broad on The article by William J. Broad on love of individual freedom with recogni- fraud and the structure of science (News fraud and the structure of sciz:m.:e (News tion and acceptance of their unique re- and Comment, 10 Apr., p.137) was and Comment, 10 Apr., p. 137) and the sponsibilities toward their country and timely but perhaps a bit too bearish on subsequent letter from Edith D. Neimark their fellow citizens. M Thomas Paine the current state of morality in research. (22 May, p. 873) raise moral questions. I observed in a different but no less perti- Any deliberate fudging of the data for would like to mention other, more com- nent context, "Those who expect to reap personal aggrandizement is to be demon practices. the blessing of freedom must, like men, plored whenever it occurs; however, giv- 1) Collaborators or supervisors put undergo the fatigue of supporting it." en the huge increases in the number of their names on manuscripts (and thus CARVEL BLA: A persons doing research, I do not think assume intellectualresponsibilityfor Department of Oceanography. that the relative frequency of instances them) reporting research work which Old Dominion University. of fraud has increased. My guess would they themsePes have not done and Norfolk. Virginia 23506 be that the safeguard mechanisms are which they have discussed inadequately working adequately and that the relative or not at all with the workers who carried frequency is, if anything, lowerthan in earlier periods. It would, of course. be 2) Research workers do not submit for good to have accurate data. publication single experiments or series 19 March 1982 A corrective perspective is to view of experiments which do not fit in with fraud in science in the context of fraud in their hypotheses. Recent allegations of fraud, fabrica- other areas of endeavor. especially com- 3) Scientists fail to do relevan ucial tion, and plagiarism among investigators merce and the professions. When placed experiments which they then-4Pb, nave in the biomedical community raise a dis- in the come t of escalating malpractice identified, or to which their atten. i has turbing question about biomedical re- suits and tilt. clamor for consumer pro- been drawn. search practices: Is it in the nature of the tection agencies and legislation. and the 4) Authors deliberately fail to cite oth- association between biomedical research sorts of incidents that have produced er authors whose work predates or con- and medical education that one may seek these treats, one must conclude that tradicts their own. the source of the apparent increase in scientists have managed to maintain high 5) Referees fail to read sufficiently uathical practices? ethical standards in a society where per- carefully manuscripts of papers, book, While the incidents have been well sonal integrity as a cherished virtue is or theses, thus missing findings or desid- covered in Science's News and Com- rapidly disappearing. It is to be hoped erata which are crucial to the validity of ment columns and the reporters deserve that the response of the scientific com- potential publications. prat: for their careful and comprehen- munity to lapses of honor among re- These widespread practices have a sive presentations, it is important to researchers can serve as a model and an considerably greater impact on knowl- member that they are subject to the inspiration for other areas of endeavor to edge than the relatively rare acts of constraints imposed by the protective "clean up their act." It is easy to lose fraud. codes observed by the scientists provid- perspective when one focuses exclusive- HAROLD HILLMAN ing the informationcodes, incidentally, ly on individual acts of fraud and to come Unity Laboratory. observed with equal force in the official up with recommendations for corrective Department of Human Biology and reports submitted by these same scien- measures which may not, in fact, be Health, University of Surrey, tists. The "courtesy" displayed toward needed or useful. If something "ain't Guildford, Surrey GU2 5XH, England colleagues, while not deceitful, is surely

11.)e; 130

self-serving. The biomedical research been hit by a wave of accounts in jour- on the road giving lectures and partici- community may not be any less honor- nals and newspapers of fraudulentre- pating in various committees and editori- able than other professional groupsnor porting of scientific data. Many factorsal board functions, reduces the time the any more so. Shaw (I) noted that every may have contributed to this, includingpreceptor may spend with each trainee. profession was a conspiracy against the an increase in the number of personsThere are cases ir which the trainee laity. The appearance of full disclosure devoting substantially full time tore- meets with his preceptor far 1/2 hour may be there, but one can be sure there search: an increase in the competition every 6 weeks. This is simply not enough will always be a bit of suppressio yeti for available support dollars: an increase if the preceptor is to take his teaching and/or suggestio fair'. in the pressure to publish abundantly: responsibility seriously. He should re- As a consequence, I believe that a full possible changes in the nature of the view with each trainee experiments done and forthright examination of these prob- training process that leads to the Ph.D. yesterday. and he should outline with the lems in all their complexity is in order degree: and possibly. just possibly.a trainee the experiments planned fog to- and that such an examination must be deterioration in the morality of our scien- morrow. He should guide the trainee overseen by a nonscientist. I argue from tists. Assignment of weights to each ofthrough the maze of the literature, and analogy with situations in which an out- these and other factors is. at this time. he should assist the trainee in the acqui- side prosecutor isselected when an not possible. However, review of report- sition of the necessary experimental elected official is to be investigated. ed cases indicates that certain general- skills. The competition for place and status ities may be noted. In addition, both by example and by that now pp; iccupies workers in the The frauds appear to occur most fre-precept, he has an obligation to mpke field deserves much more questioning quently in our most prestigious researchcertain that each of his trainees is fully and justification if it is to be continued. and teaching institutions. A youngman sensitized to the absolute requirement of The shameful scrambling for space and enters the labo.-atory of a very successful total honesty in the reporting of scientific grants in the face of dwindling research investigator, one who has an unusually results. Many professions recognize un- funds and increasing numbers of investi- large bibliography and who has. there-acceptable deviations from strict hones- gators has an almost Malthusian ring! fore, secured generous grant support and ty. The banker cannot tolerate the em- Clearly, something is amiss in the struc- abundant laboratory space. The youngbezzler. The military person cannot tol- ture of biomedical research. Can it be man (there is a paucity of cases in which erate the deserter. And the intelligence that a relationship we have taken for women are involved in fraud) inspectsservices cannot tolerate the mole. Sci- granted over the past 50 years is flawed? his new environment to ascertain what it ence cannot tolerate the man who takes The sociological studies of Barber et al. takes to succeed there, and hesoon lightly his moral obligation to report (2) indicate that the perversion of ethics concludes that, since his preceptor, who strictly what is true. in research is a result of competition. is obviously 'successful. has publishedan In light of the foregoing, it is suggested And Reiman (3) acknowledges the influ- unusually large number of papers. this isthat research training groups under a ence of an industrial value system on the the route to success. He therefore tries single preceptor he kept small in size, medical establishment, although he care- to follow this example and ma} publish permitting abundant contact between fully avoids inculpating medical educa- ten or more papers in a }ear. Those of us preceptor and trainec. The preceptor. if tion and its research-oriented goals. experienced in the production of bio- he is to fulfill his moral obligation, will Let there be a national review, and let medical research know that to generateundertake to spend significant periods of us not ove!lc-ok the possibility of sepa- novel research results sufficient to filltime at frequent intervals with each of rating biometiical research from medical that number of papers in the allotted time his trainees. The candidate trainee will education, thereby restoring traditional is not easy. Our young candidate, there- be well advised to select a preceptor who ethical qualities to both fore. is forced by circumstances to con- is not excessively encumbered with large GEORGE A. SILVER sider the routes ht. may follow to achieve numbers of trainees. He should re .og- Department of Epidemiaogy and his ambition. On the one hand hemay nize that a preceptor with an excessively Public Health. School of Medicine, choose Id plagiarise from tae results oflengthy bibliography may set quantity of Yale University, others. On the other hand he may choose publication above quality of research New Haven, Connecticut 06510 to fabricate results and experiments. Byand may thus be a poor role model. In these means, he hopes to diminish the several of the recently publicized in- time normally consumed in honestre- stances of laboratory fraud, the trainee References search. which entails the planning and has been the prime target of criticism. 1 G B. Shaw, Doctor's Dilemma (Brentano's. design of experiments. the acquisition of New York, 1911). Act 1 while the preceptor has been treated 2 B Barber. 1. J. Lally, .1Makarushka. D. Sulli- the necessary technical skills, consider-sympathetically ..ndwith commisera- van, Research on Subjects (Russell ation of the relevant literature, and final- Sage Foundation. New York. 1973). tion. There may be instances in which 3 A S. Reiman. Re% Engl J. Afed 303. *3 ly the preparation of his own research this distribution of blame is not appropri- (1980). report. All of these steps consume time ate. Frequently, when one - number of a and energy. group produces many more publications One of the consequences of the selec- than do his contemporaries, this is taken tion of a very successful investigator as as an indication of unusual ability. It may preceptor is that he will have attracted 21 December 1984 be appropriate to view such exceptions the attention of other pre- and postdoc- as a basis for suspicion and an indication toral fellows. He is likely to have a large for scrutiny. number of trainees at some level of train- DF.Wirr STETTEN. JR. Reported Laboratory irauds ing who arc accountable to him. Some- National InstitutesofHealth. in Biomedical Sciences times this number exceeds 20. and this. Bethesda. Mar :and 20205 together with the fact that successful In recent years, we appear to have preceptors are likely to spend much time 13 131

projects in which they have infrequent contact with those doing the experiments. Final- ly, the competitive world of modem science fosters some entrepreneurs who are so intent on the next grant or the big success that they forget that every good experimenter must be his own devil's advocate. A principal investigator must not only devise critical tests for his findings, but must also generate an atmosphere that encourages co-workers to report the bad news as well as the good news. Fraud in scientific research is unaccept- recent examples of this unfortunate human The procedures recently established by the able and inevitable. It is unacceptable be- frailty have been revealed is an indication of National Institutes of Health and various uni- cause the entire procedure of publishing and the pace of modern science. Some news- versities to deal with fraud seem admirable advancing knowledge is based on trustthat paper reporters have used recent fraud cases and appropriate. The punishments for of- the literature reports accurate measurements to imply that the structure of science is fenders are severe: usually, total derailment of actual experiments. If each researcher had crumbling or that there is a cover-up, forget-of a career. Because the repercussions to go back and repeat the literature, the enor- ting that the extent of the scientific enterprise associated with fraud are so serious, some mously productive rush of modern science has grown a thousandfold since the 1800s. investigations of such charges take long peri- would slow to a snail's pace. Even good in- We would expect a greater number of cases ods of time, but fairness to the accused is tentions are not enough. Sloppy ex- of fraud today, but there is no evidence of an essential. Once guilt is ascertained, the loss perimentation and poor scholarship are con- increased percentage. And there in no mod-of a career in science seems appropriate in demned. Outright fraud is intolerable. em equivalent of Piltdown man, a fraud thatmany cases. Restitution in some form for the Nevertheless, some fraud will exist astook years to uncover. Still, it is important wasted time of those who based further ex- long as human beings are doing the ex- that scientists beevervigilant, and the rash periments on the false report might be con- periments. Any system in which advance- of recent frauds does suggest some dangers sidered appropriate as well. The larger the ment, fame, and fortune await a successful in modern science. group, the more interdisciplinary the re- practitioner will tempt a certain number of One danger arises from the nature of inter- search, the more competitive the area, the individuals to cut corners. That number may disciplinary research. Many papers have more is the need for watchful skepticism. well he smaller in science than in othernumerous aahors: investigators in a labora- Having acknowledged that, we must rec- fields, not because scientists are more moral tory that has cloning expertise collaborate ognize that 99.9999 percent of reports are than others, but because the cumulative na- with others in a laboratory that has expertise accurate and truthful, often in rapidly ture of science means inevitable exposure, in physical instrumentation and another lab- advancing frontiers where data are hard to usually in a rather short time. oratory that does animal tests to publish a collect. There is no evidence that the small An oversimplified admonition might be, joint paper. The results of this kind of col- number of cases that have surfaced require a "You may escape detection by falsifying an laboration have had spectacular success, in fundamental change in procedures that have insignificant finding, but there will be no re- the main, and no one would wish to limit produced so much good science. To continue ward. You may falsify an important finding, such joint efforts.Yetwhen no one person the great advances that are being made, we but then it will surely form the basis for sub- has expertise in all aspects of the research, must accept that perfect behavior is a desir- sequent experiments and become exposed." there can be dangers. A second problem able but unattainable goal. Vigilance? Yes. Therefore, there is little percentage in arises when busy scientists, who have tooTimidity? No. falsifying science, and the speed with which many projects and too little time, supervise

arc ethically 99.9999% pure is not only ridic- 5) Citation of work as supporting a ulous but also obviously self-serving. point, which it does not. Beside.; the actual falsifications of data, Scientists routinely try to make their work which probably pollute two orders of mag-look more significant than itis. This is nitude more reports than Koshland imag-natural aad human, but it does distort the ines,lessdirect deceits arc abundant.Ipublished product. Editors are certainly would estimate that over 10% and perhapsaware that this is so, and act to limit the even a majority of all published works con-distortion, although not effectively enough. 20 March 1987 tain one or more of these dec RAYMONDR.WHITE 1) Omission of negative results from cor- Department of Biology, ollary experiments. City College of San Francisco, 2) Presentationof statisticalanalyses San Francisco, CA 94112 Accuracy and Truth where mathematically required conditions arc not met, or discussed. Response:I did not state that scientists are Daniel E. Koshland, Jr.'s, assertion that no 3) Failure to mention equally simpleethically 99.9999% pure. What I stated was more than one in a million scientific papershypotheses that were untested or are untest-that I believe that proportion is not far off departs significantly from accuracy and truthable. with regard to the correct data placed in the (Editorial, 9 Jan., p. 141) might have been 4) Citation of work as proving a point,literature. Scientists are human and there made by Pollyanna. The idea that we scientistswhich it does not. will be both error and fraud, but it is as 1 7 132

irresponsible to exaggerate these deviationsadvancing frontiers. There is no error-freepected dishonesty to the individual whom as to ignore them. The errors listed byworld. Perfection is the goal, but if we v. ait we suspect, and then, if our doubts are not Whiteall occur, but I would disagreeuntil we achieve it, progress will be veryassuaged, to university officials. We must as strongly with regard to their frequency. ISlow. DANIEL E. KOSHLAND, JR. a community demand the most rigorous and looked at one journal, the Journal ofBiologi- correct behavior of ourselves and of our cal Chemistry, which published 17,000 pages peers; at no time should we hide behind a in 1986. Using a rough estimate of 50 27 March 1987 cloak of anonymitr, and in no way should pieces of data per page, one gets close to 1 NIH or the university encourage or con- million bits of information for one journal done such an action. in one year. There are hundreds of journalsNIH Fraud Guidelines Point (i) is equally troubling because it in biochemistry alone and hundreds more in implies that regardless of efforts to protect such diverse fields as physics, geology, psy- The editorial "Fraud in science" by Daniel an individual who has been accu ,ed, the chiatry, and so forth. Yet, only one or twoE. Koshland, Jr. (9 Jan., p. 141), states thatconduct of an investigation will become cases of fraud are exposed per year. My guessthe National Institutes of Health proceduresgeneral knowledge and will damage the is that very few of the data in all thesefor dealing with possible misconduct inindividual during its course. There should articles contain significant errors, let alonescience (1) "seem admirable and appropri-be no need to "restore the reputation" of deceitful ones. Reading that a value is 10.1ate." We take exception to two recommen-one who is unjustly accused, because in this in a table but that is the text it is 10.3 maydations made by NIH for awardee institu-nation we are innocent until proven guilty. be annoying, but anyoneho has written ations,first, to item (b), "protecting theIf an investigation is conducted correctly manuscript knows how easy it is to createprivacy of those who in good faith reportand responsibly, then this recommendation such an error by the usual rounding off ofapparent misconduct" (1, p. 24) and, sec-is superfluous. data. Omitting negative results is not neces-ond, to item (i), "if the possible misconduct The federal regulations make no recom- sarily either deceitful or incorrect. There areis not substantiated undertaking diligentmendations about how an institution is to standard procedures for omitting negativeefforts where appropriate to restore the rep-carry out its inquiries. If we accept the results, such as when subsequent positiveutation of those under investigation" (1, p.federal role model, the local institutions will results reveal the source of the initial error,24). appoint a "Misconduct Policy Officer" or or where statistically appropriate replica- Concerning item (b), we believe this poli-MPO. In considering this we note with tions indicate that an unexplained deviationcy is morally wrong and contravenes theamusement that the federal official designat- is beyond statistical significance. Statisticalrights a citizen of the United States mighted as chief MPO is the Deputy Director for analyses are also a source of error, and that isreasonably expect. We know of no civilExtramuralResearchandTraining,or why Science hires a consultant statistician.court in which an individual is preventedDDERT. We do not believe the university Scientists usually like to state alternativefrom knowing the identity of his accuser.should appoint a comparable official whose hypotheses, but lack of imagination or refer-This should not be the policy of universities,role will be to deal with "dedirt." Rather, we ees who say "don't speculate" can be reasonswhich are supposed to be centers of enlight-believe any alleged instance of misconduct for leaving them out as well as deliberateenment and education. The policy suggestsshould be considered by a panel of peers deceit. Poor citations are probably the mostthat anonymous informants should be con-who are impressed with the solemnity of prevalent of the illslisted, but the mostdoned and that, by providing the descriptortheir task and who have access, as does the important error in that regard is usually lack"in good faith," some university official willaccused individual, to all facts and all per- of scholarship, that is, a tendency to use ahave the wisdom and background to judgesons imoked in the process of accusation. conventional citation without rereading thewhether the individual is acting in good MICHAEL R. ROSEN work or to choose one citation to illustrate afaith. BRIAN F. HOFFMAN field when more than one paper is relevant. We believe the following. Those of us Department of Pharmacology, Failure to cite competitors can be deceitfulwho have made a career in science value our Columbia University, or an excess of self-delusion. integrity and that of our confreres above any New York, NY 10032 Despite these deviations, which I believeother single trait; we rigorously apply this will always be with us, the biological litera-trait to our own research and in evaluating REFERENCES ture does, to an incredibly high degree,that of our peers; we have a moral obliga- 1 NIII Gunk Grants Contracts, 15 t No 11(18 Juh reflect accurate data on incredibly rapidlytion to report any suspected errors or sus- 1986 The effects of technological change on existing legal, social, Two articles in this chapter focus on opportunities and problems and political structures and the consequences of new regula- presented by genetic engineering and genetic screening. Arno G. tory standards for the development and application of medical Motulsky notes that the manipulation of recombinant DNA in human knowledge are dominant themes in current discussions of rights and fertil zed eggs presents an unprecedented series of questions about duties in the health sciences. The health sciences are the source of the interventions that will affect future generations, including questions most visible and intense debates over questions of freedom and of confidentiality, private versus societal goals, and self- responsibility in science. As the miracles of modern medicine enter determination. Peter T. Rowley asks whether genetic screening is a the mainstream of daily life, new issues arise: the cost and quality of marvel that will free society from the scourge of genetic disease or a health care; the role of government and other institutions in establish- menace that will invade individual privacy and determine who may ing minimum standards of prevention and protections for the rights of reproduce and under what conditions. others; the meaning of concepts such as privacy, confidentiality, The authors in this chapter display a curious ambivalence about the dignity, and autonomy in a society increasingly concerned with cost promise and potential of science and technology in the health scien- effectiveness and efficiency in the delivery of advanced medical care. ces. In contrast to the optimistic confidence of the authors in earlier Leon R. Kass reflects on the ultimate goals of the new biology in chapters of this book, the contributors here reflect a more pragmatic his examination of the objectives of genetic engineering and biomedi- outlook in applying the fruits of technical progress through existing cal research. The implications of privacy and confidentiality laws and social, political, and economic institutions. The ineqL..ties and con- regulations for future medical and epidemiological research in the flicts among individual rights, social goals, and the conflicting objec- United States are reviewed by Leon Gordis and Ellen Gold, who tives of private and public institutions may create friction that tends to conclude that the rights of human subjects can be protected without escalate in the wake of each innovation or scientific change. hindering research advances, but that on occasion some individuals In the next chapter, the allocation of the risks associated with may need to yield certain rights for the benefit of society as a whole. technical change is examined. Are those who will eventually bear the John C. Burnham, noting the social esteem and prestige that the greatest risks from technical innovation able to participate in de- medical profession enjoyed in the first half of the twentieth century, cisions about the manner in which these changes should be introduced then traces the growing criticisms of the practice of American medi- into society? Once again, the need for greater involvement by scien- cine. By the late 1950s, a campaign to modify the elevated position of tists in educating the public at large is offered as a remedy for existing physicians in American society was firmly rooted, he concludes, deficiencies in the political and economic mechanisms that regulate eventually leading to criticism of the social applications of medical the pace and application of advances in science and technology. science and of the competence of the individual physician. RC

1r9 134

qualitatively from toilet training, education, and moral teachings .-ailof which are forms of so-called "socialen- gineering," which has manas its object, and is used by one generation to mold tles next. In reply, it must at least be said that the techniques which have hitherto been employed are feeble and inefficient when compared to thoseon the horizon. This quantitative difference rests in part on a qualitative difference in the means of intervention. The traditional influences operate by speechor by symbolic deeds. They Recent advances in biology and med-new technology of man requires an ex- pay tribute to icine suggest that we may be rapidlyploration of ends, values, standards.man as the animal who lives by speech acquiring the power to modify and con-What ends will or should the new tech-and who understands the meanings of actions. Also, their effects trol the capacities and activities of men niques serve? What values should guide are, in gen- by direct intervention and manipulationsociety's adjustments? By what stan-eral, reversible, or at least subject to of their bodies and minds. Certaindards should the assessment agenciesattempts at reversal. Each person has means are already in use or at hand, assess?Behindthese greater or lesser power to accept or questionsliereject or abandon them. In contrast, others await the solution of relativelyothers; what is a good man, what isa biomedical engineering circumvents the minor technical problems, while yetgood life for man, what is a goodcom- others, those offering perhaps the mostmunity? This article is an attempt tohuman context of speech and meaning, precise kind of control, depend uponprovoke discussion of these neglectedbypasses choice, and goes directly to further basic research. Biologists whoand important questions. work to modify the human material have considered these matters disagree itself. Moreover, the changes wrought While these questions about ends and may be irreversible. on the question of how much how soon,ultimate ends are never unimportantor In addition, there isan important but all agree that the power for "humanirrelevant, they have rarely beenmore practical reason for considering the bia- engineering," to borrow from the jar-important or more relevant. That this is gon, is coming and that it will probablyso can be seen once we recognize thatmedical technology apart from other have profound social consequences. we are dealing here with a group of technologies. The advances we shall examine are fruits of a large, humane These developments have been viewedtechnologies that are in a decisivere- both with enthusiasm and with el,rm;spect unique: the object 'von whichproject deeLeated to the conquestof disease and the relief of human suffer- they are only just beginning to receivethey operate is man himself. The tech- serious attention. Several biologists have ing. The biologist and physician, regard- nologies of energy or food peAuction, less er their private motives, undertaken to Worm the public aboutof communication, of reanufacture, and are seen, with justification, to be the well-wishers the technical possibilities, present, andof motion greatly alter the implements future. Practitioners of social science and benefactors of mankind. Thus, in available to man and the conditions in a time in which technological advance "futurology" are attemptiet; to predictwhich he uses :nem. In contrast, the and describerite likely social conse- is more carefully scrutinized end in- biomedical technology works to change creasiney criticized, biomedical devel- quences of aed public response; to thethe user himself. To be sure, the print- opments are still viewed by most people new technologies. Lawyers and legisla-ing press, the automobile, the television, tors are exn taring institutional innova- as benefits largely without qualification. and ey jet airplane have greatly altered The price we pay for these develop- tions for reessing aew technologies. Allthe conditions under which and the way ments is thus more likely to gounrec- of these activities are based upon thein which men live; but men as biolog- hope that we can harness the new tech- ognized. For this reason, I shallcon- ical beings have remained largelyun- sider only the dangers and costs of bio- nology of man for the betterment ofchanged. They have been, and remain, man'.tnd. medical advance. As the benefitsare able to accept or reject, to use andwell known, there is no need to dwell Yetthiscommendable aspirationabuse these technologies; they choose, upon them here. My discussion is de- points to another set of questirAS,whichwhether wisely or foolishly, the ends to are, in my view. liberately partial. sorely neglectedwhich these technologiesare means. I begin with a survey of the pertinent questions that inquire ato the meaningBiomedical technology may make it of phrases such as the "betterment of technologies. Next, I will considersome possible to change the inherent capacity of the basic ethical and social problems mankind." A full understanding of thefor choice itself. Indeed, both thosein the use of these technologies.Then, who welcome and those who fear the The author is executive secretary, Committee I will briefly raise some fundamental on the Life Sciences and Social Policy, National advent of "human engineer.ng" groundquestionstowhichtheseproblems Research Council, National Academy of Sciences, their hopes and fears in the same pros- Washington, D.C. 20418. Tht.Article is adapted point. Finally, I shall offersome very from a working paper prepared by the author for pect: that man can for the first time re-general reflections on what isto be the committee, as well as from lectures given atcreate himself. St. John's College In Annapc'is, Maryland; at Oak done. Ridge National Laboratory, biology division, Oak Engineering the engineer seems to Ridge, Tennessee: and at a meeting, in Washing. differinkind from engineering his ton, of the Council forthe Advancement of The Biomedical Technologies Science Writing. The views expressed are those engine. Some have argued, however, that of the author. biomedical engineering does not differ The biomedical technologies can be 140 135 usefully organized into three groups,greatly enhance our powers over con-missing or defective gene product. according to their major purpose: (I)ception and gestation. Problems of defi- Far less remote are technologies that control of death and life, (ii) control ofnition have been raised here as well.could serve eugenic ends. Their devel- human potentialities, and (iii) controlThe need to determine when individuals opment has been endorsed by those of human achievement. The corre-acquire enforceable legalrights givesconcerned about a general deteriora- sponding technologies are (i) medicine, society an interest in the definition oftion of the human gene pool and by especially the arts of prolonging life and human life and of the time when itothers who believe that even an unde- of controlling reproduction, (ii) genetic begins. These matters are too familiarteriorated human gene pool needs up- engineering, and (iii) neurological andto need elaboration. grading. Artificial insemination with se- psychologicalmanipulation.Ishall Technologies to conquer infertilitylected donors, the eugenic proposal of briefly summarize each group of tech-proceed alongside those to promote it.Herman Muller (3), has been possible niques. The first successful laboratory fertiliza- for several years because of the perfec- 1) Control o; death and life. Pre-tion of human egg by human spermtion of methods for long-term storage vious medical triumphs have greatly in-was reported in1969 (1). In 1970,of human spermatozoa. The successful creased averagelife expectancy. YetBritish scientists learned how to growmaturation of human oocytes in the other developments,suchasorgan human embryos in the laboratory up to laboratory and their subsequent fertil- transplantation or replacement and re-at least the blastocyst stage [that is, toization now make it possible to select search into aging, hold forth thc prom-the age of 1 week (2)1. We may soondonors of ova as well. Buta far more ise of increasing not just the average, hear about the next stage, the successfulsuitable technique for eugenic purposes but also the maximum life expectancy. reimplantati3n of such an embryo intowill soon be upon usnamely, nuclear Indeed, medicine seems to be sharpen-a woman previously infertile because oftransplantation, or cloning. Bypassing ing its tools to do battle with death it-oviduct disease. The development of an the lottery of sexual recombination, nu- self, as if death were just one more artificial placenta, now under investiga-clear transplantation permits the asexual disease. tion, will make possible full laboratory reproduction or copying of an already More immediately and concretely,control of fertilization and gestation. In developed individual. The nucleus ofa available techniques of prolonging lifeaddition, sophisticated biochemical andmature but unfertilized egg is replaced respirators, cardiac pacemakers, arti-cytological techniques of monitoring theby a nucleus obtained from a specialized ficial kidneysare already in the lists"quality" of the fetus have been and arecell of an adult organism or embryo (for against death. Ironically, the success ofbeing developed and used. These devel- example, a cell from the intestines or these devices in forestalling death hasopments not only give us more powerthe skin). The egg with its transplanted introduced confusionindeterminingover the generation of human life, but nucleus develops as if it had been fer- that death has, in fact, occurred. Themake it possible to manipulate and totilized and, barring complications, will traditional signs of lifeheartbeat andmodify the quality of the human ma-give rise to a normal adult organism. respirationcan now be maintained en-terial. Since almost all the hereditary material tirely by machines. Some physicians are 2) Control of human potentialities. (DNA) of a cell is contained within its now busily trying to devise so-calledGenetic engineering, when fully devel- nucleus, the renucleated egg and the in- "new definitions of death," while othersoped, will wield two powers not shared dividual into which it develops arege- maintain that the technical advancesby ordinary medical practice. Medicine netically identical to the adult organism show that death is not a concrete eventtreats existing individuals and seeks tothat was the source of the donor nu- at all, but rather a gradual process, like correctdeviations from a norm ofcleus. Cloning could be used to produce twilight, incapable of precise temporalhealth. Genetic engineering, in contrast, sets of unlimited numbers of genetical- localization. will be able to make changes that can ly identical individuals, each set derived The real challenge to death will come be transmitted to succeeding genera-from a single parent. Cloning has been from research into aging and senes-tions and will be able to create newsuccessful in amphibians and is now cence, afieldjust entering puberty.capacities, and hence to establish newbeing tried in mice; its extension to man Recent studies suggest that aging is anorms of health and fitness. merely requires the solution of certain genetically controlled process, distinct Nevertheless, one of the major inter- technical problems. from disease, but one that can be ma-ests in genetic manipulation isstrict**, Production of man-animal chimeras nipulated and altered by diet or drugs.medical: to develop treatments for in- by the introduction of selected nonhu- Extrapolating from animal studies, somedividuals with inherited diseases. Ge-man materialifit0 developing human scientists have suggested that a decreasenetic disease is prevalent and increasing, embryos is also expected. Fusion of hu- inthe rate of aging might also bethanks partly to medical advances thatman and nonhuman cells in tissue cul- achieved simply by effecting a veryenable those affectedto survive andture has already been achieved. small decree in human body temper-perpetuatethemutant genes. The Other, less direct means for influ- ature. Aczordi,,g to some estimates, by hope is that noiinal copies of the ap-encing the gene pool are a'ready avail- the year 2000 it may be technicallypropriate gene, obtained biologically or able, thanks to our increasing ability to possible to add from 20 to 40 usefulsynthesized chemically, can be intro-identify and diagnose genetic diseases. years to the period of middle life. duced into defective individuals to cor- Genetic counselors can now detect bio- Medicine's success in extending liferect their deficiencies. This therapeuticchemically and cytologically a variety is already a major cause of excessiveuse of genetic technology appears to be of severe genetic defects (for example, population growth: death control pointsfar in the future. Moreover, there isMongolism, Tay-Sachs disease) while to birth control. Although we are al-some doubt that it will ever be prac-the fetus is still in utero. since treat- ready technically competent, new tech-tical, since the same end could be more ments are at present largely unavailable, niques for lowering fertility and chem-easily achieved by transplanting cells or diagnosis is often followed by abortion ical agents for inducing abortion willorgans that could compensate for theof the affectedfetus. In the future, 141 136

more sensitive tests will also permit thediscrete regions of their brains, animals ments cannot be derived from biomed- detection of heterozygote carriers, thewouldrepeatedlyandindefatigablyical science. This is true even if scien- unaffected individuals who carry but apress levers to stimulatetheir owntists themselves make the decisions. single dose of a given deleterious gene.brains, with obvious resultant enjoy- These important points are often The eradication of a given genetic dis-ment. Even starving animals preferredoverlooked for at least three reasons. ease might then be attempted by abort-stimulatingtheseso-calledpleasure 2) They are obscured by those who ing all such carriers. In fact, it was re-centers to eating. Delgado comments onlike to speak of "the control of nature cently suggested that the fairly commonthe electrical stimulation of a similarby science." It is men who control, not disease cystic fibrosis could be com-center in a human subject (4, p. 185).that abstraction "science." Sciencemay pletely eliminated over the next 40 provide the means, but men choose the years by screening all pregnancies and [TN patient reported a pleasant ting- ling sensation in the left side of her bodyends; the choice of endscomes from aborting the 17,000,000 unaffected fe-`from my face down to the bottom of my beyond science. tuses that will carry a single gene forlegs.' She started giggling and making 2) Introduction of new technologies this disease. Such zealots need to befunny comments, stating that she enjoyed often appears to be the result ofno reminded of the consequences shouldthe sensation 'very much.' Repetition of decision whatsoever, or of the culmina- these stimulations made the patient more each geneticist be allowed an equal tion of decisions too small oruncon- assault on his favorite genetic disorder,communicative and flirtatious, and she ended by openly expressing her desire to scious to be recognized as such. What given that each human being is a car-marry the therapist. can be done is done. However, someone rier for some four to eight such reces- is deciding on the basis of some notions sive, lethal genetic diseases. And one further quotation from Del- gado (4, p. 88). of desirability, no matter how self- 3) Control of human achievement. serving or altruistic. Although human achievement depends Leaving wires inside of a thinking brain 3) Desires to gain or keep money at least in part upon genetic endow-may appear unpleasant or dangerous, lo,..i and power no doubt influence much of ment, heredity determines only the ma-actually the many patients who have what happens, but these desires can also terial upon which experience and edu-undergone this experience have not been be formulated as reasons and then dis- cation impose the form. The limits ofconcerned about the fact of being wired, nor have they felt any discomfort due to cussed and debated. many capacities and powers t.: an indi-the presence of conductors in their heads. Insofar as our society has tried to vidual are indeed geneticallydeter-Some women have shown their feminine deliberate about questions of use, how mined, but the nurturing and perfectionadaptability to circumstances by wearing has it done so? Pragmatists that we are, of these capacities depend upon otherattractive hats or wigs to conceal their electrical headgear, and many people have we prefer autilitariancalculus: we influences. Natio logical and psycholog-been able to enjoy a normal life as outweigh "benefits" against "risks," and we ical manipulation hold forth the prom- patients, returning to the clinic periodically weigh them for both the individual and ise of controlling the development of for examination and stimulation. In a few"society." We often ignore the fact that human capacities,particularlythosecases in which contacts were located inthe very definitions of "a benefit" and long considered most distinctively hu-pleasurable areas, patients have had the opportunity to stimulate their own brains "a risk" are themselves based upon man: speech, thought, choice, emotion,by pressing the button of a portable instru-judgments about value. In the biomed- memory, and imagination. ment, and this procedure is reported toical areas just reviewed, the benefits are These techniques are now in a rather have therapeutic benefits. considered to be self-evident: prolonga- primitive state because we understand It bears repeating that the sciences oftion of life, control of fertility and of so little about the brain and mind. Nev-neurophysiology and psychopharmacol- population size, treatment and preven- ertheless, we have already seen the useogy are in their infancy. The techniques tion of genetic disease, the reduction of of electrical stimulation of the humanthat are now available are crude, im-anxiety and aggressiveness, acid the en- brain to produce sensations of intenseprecise, weak, and unpredictable, com- hancement of memory, intelligence, and pleasure and to control rage, the use ofpared to those that may flow from apleasure. The assessment of risk is, in brain surgery (for example, frontal lo-more mature neurobiology. general,simply pragmaticwillthe botomy) for the relief of severe anxiety, technique work effectively and reliably, and the use of aversive conditioning how much will it cost, will it do detect- with electric shock totreatsexualBasic Ethical and Social Problems able bodily harm, and who will com- perversion. Operant-conditioning tech- In the Use of Biomedical Technology plain if we proceed with development? niques are widely used, apparently with As these questions are familiar and success, in schools and mental hospitals. After this cursory review of the pow-congenial, there is no need to belabor The use of so-called consciousness-ex-ers now and soon to be at our disposal, them. panding and hallucinogenic drugsis I turn to the questions concerning the The very pragmatism that makes us widespread, to say nothing of tranquil-use of these powers. First, we must rec-sensitive to considerations of economic izers and stimulants. We are promisedognize that questions of use of sciencecost often blinds us to the larger social drugs to modify memory, intelligence,and technology are always moral andcosts exacted by biomedical advances. libido, and aggressiveness. political questions, never simply tech-For one thing, we seem to be unaware The following passages from a recentnical ones. All private or public deci-that we may not be able to maximize book by Yale neurophysiologist Josesions to develop o; to use biomedical all the benefits, that several of the goals Delgadoa book instructively entitledtechnologyand decisions not to do sowe are promoting conflict with each Physical Control of the Mind: Towardinevitably contain judgments aboutother. On the one hand, we seek to a Psychocivilized Societyshould servevalue This is true even if the valuescontrol population growth by lowering to make this discussion more concrete.guiding those decisions are not articu-fertility; on the other hand, we develop In the early 1950's, it was discoveredlated or made clear, as indeed they techniquestoenable everyinfertile that, with electrodes placed in certainoften are not. Secondly, the value judg-woman to bear a child. On the one 142 137 hand, we try to extend the lives of inof mac against further basic research? While applicableto technology in dividuals with genetic disease; on theMore fundamentally, how should wegeneral, these reflections are especially other, we wish to eliminate deleterious balance efforts in biology and medicinepertinent to the technologies of human genes from the human population. I against efforts to eliminate poverty, pol-engineering, with which men deliber- am not urging that we resolve these lution, urban decay, discrimination, andately exercise power over future gener- conflicts in favor of one side or thepoor education? Thislastquestionations. An excellent discussion of this other, but simply that we recognize that about distribution is perhaps the mostquestion is found in The Abolition of such conflicts exist. Once we do, weprofound. We should reflect upon theMan, by C. S. Lewis (6). social consequences of seducing many are more likely to appreciate that most It is, of course, ii commonplace to com- "progress" is heavily paid for in termsof our brightest young people to spendplain that men have hitherto used badly, not generally included in the simple their lives locating the biochemical de-and against their fellows, the powers that utilitarian calculus. fects in rare genetic diseases, while ourscience has given them. But that is not To become sensitiveto thelargermore serious problems go begging. Thethe point I am trying to make. I am not speaking of particular corruptions and costs of biomedical progress, we mustcurrent squeeze on money for researchabuses which an increase of moral virtue attend to several serious ethical and so-provides us with an opportunity to re-would cure:I am considering what the cial questions. I will briefly discuss threethink and reorder our priorities. thing called "Man's power over Nature" of them:(i) questions of distributive Problems of distributive justice aremust always and essentially be. . .. justice, (ii)questions of the use andfrequently mentioned and discussed, but In reality, of course, if any one age abuse of power, and (iii) questions ofthey are hard to resolve in a rational really attains, by eugenics and scientific education, the power to make its descend- self-degradation and dehumanization. manner. We find them especially diffi-ants what itpieasee, all men who live cult because of the enormous range ofafter it are the patients of that power. conflictingvalues and intereststhat They are weaker, not stronger: for though Distributive Justice characterizes our pluralistic society. We we may have put wonderful machines in their hands, we have pre-ordained how cannot agreeunfortunately, we oftenthey are to use them.... The real picture do not even try to agreeon standards The introduction of any biomedical is that of one dominant age... which technology presents a new instance offor just distribution. Rather, decisions resists all previous ages most successfully anold problemhow todistributetend to be made largely out of a clashand dominates all subsequent ages most scarce resources justly. We should as-of competing interests. Thus, regeet- irresistibly, and thus is the real master of tably, the question of how to distributethe human species. But even within this sume that demand will usually exceed master generation (itself an infinitesimal supply. Which people should receive ajustly often gets reduced to who shallminority of the species) the power will be kidney transplant or an artificial heart?decide how to distribute. The question exercised by a minority smaller still. Man's Who should get the benefits of geneticabout justice has led us to the question conquest of Nature, if the dreams of some therapy or of brain stimulation? Isabout power. scientific planners are realized, means the "first-come, rule of a few hundreds of men over bil- first-served"thefairest lions upon billions of men. Them neither principle? Or are certain people "more is 'ior can be any simple increase of power worthy," and if so, on what grounds?Use and Abuse of Power on Man's side. Each new power won by It is unlikely that we will arrive at man is a power over man as well. Each answers to these questions in the form We have difficulty recognizing theadvance leaves him weaker as wellas of deliberate decisions. More likely, theproblems of the exercise of power instronger. In every victory, besides being the general who triumphs, he is also the problem of distribution will continue tothe biomedical enterprise because ofprisoner who follows the triumphal car. be decided ad hoc and locally. If so,our delight with the wondrous fruits it the consequencewill probably be ahas yielded. This is ironic because thePlease note that I am not yet speaking sharp increase in the already far toonotion of power is absolutely central toabout the problem of the misuse or great inequality of medical care. Thethe modern concertion of science. Theabuse of power. The point is rather that extreme case will be longevity, whichancients conceived of science as thethe power which grows is unavoidably will probably be, at first, obtainable onlyunderstanding of nature, pursued forthe power of only some men, and that at great expense. Who is likely to beits own sake. We moderns view sciencethe number of powerful men decreases able to buy it? Do conscience andas power, as control over nature; theas power increases. prudence permit us to enlarge the gapconquest of nature "for the relief of Specific problems of abuse and mis- between rich and poor, especially withman's estate" was the charge issued byuse of specific powers must not, how- respect to something as fundamental asFrancis Baum, one oftheleadingever, be overlooked. Some have voiced life itself? architects of the modern scientific proj-the fear that the technologies of ge- Questions of distributive justice alsoect (5). fietic engineering and behavior control, arise in the earlier decisions to acquire Another source of difficultyis ourthough developed for good purposes, new knowledge and to develop newfondness for speaking of the abstractionwill be put to evil uses. These fears are techniques. Personnel and facilities for"Man." Isuspect that we prefer toperhaps somewhat exaggerated, if only medical researchand treatment arespeak figuratively about "Man's powerbecause biomedical technologies would scarce resources. Is the development ofover Nature" becauseit obscures anadd very little to our highly developed a new technology the best use of theunpleasant reality about human affairs.arsenal for mischief, destruction, and limited resources, given current circum-It is in fact particular men who wieldstultification.Nevertheless,anypro- stances? How should we balance effortspower, not Man. What we really meanposal for large-scale human engineering aimed at prevention against those aimedby "Man's power over Nature" is ashould make us wary. Consider a pro- at cure, or either of these against effortspower exercised by some men overgram of positive eugenics based upon . redesign the species? How should weother men, with a knowledge of naturethe widespread practice of asexual re- balance the delivery of available levels as their instrument. 143 production. Who shall decide what con- 138

stitutes a superior individual worthy ofedge. The securing ofa voluntary and the same as those of the subjects experi- replication? Who shall decide which in- informed consent is an abiding problem mented on. Nevc:,lieless, basic sponsors dividuals may or must reproduce, andin the use of human subjects inex- and partisans of biomedical technology by which method? These are questions perimentation. Gross coercion and de-areprecisely those upon ,mthe easily answerA only fora tyrannicalception are now rarely a problem; thetechnology will operate. The regime. .il of the pressures aregenerallysubtle,oftenscientist and physician is happily mar- Concern about the use of power isrelated to an intrinsic power imbalance ried to (rather, is the offspring of) the equally necessary in the selection ofin favor of the experimentalist. desire of all of us for better health, means for desirableor agreed-upon A special problem arises in experi-longer life, and peace of mind. ends. Consider the desired end of limit-ments on or manipulations of the un- Most future biomedical technologies ing population growth. An effective born. Here it is impossible to obtain thewill probably be welcomed,as have program of fertility control is likely to consent of the human subject. If thethose of the past. Their use willre- be coercive. Who should decide thepurpose of the intervention is therapeu- quire little or no coercion. Some de- choice of means? Will theprogramticto correct a known genetic abnor-velopments, such as pills to improve penalize "conscientious objectors"? mality, for exampleconsentcan rea- memory,controlmood,orinduce Serious problems arise simply fromsonably be implied. But can anyone pleasure, are likely to need no promo- obtaining and disseminating informa-ethically consent to nontherapeutic in-tion. Thus, even if we should escape tion, as in the mass screening programsterventions in which parents or scientists from the dangers of coercive manipula- now being proposed for detection ofwork their wills or their eugenic visions tion, we shall still face large problems genetic disease. For what kinds of dis-on the child-to-be? Would not such ma- posed by the voluntary use of bio- orders is compulsory screening justi-nipulation represent in itself an abusemedical technology, problems to which fied? Who shall have access to the dataof power, independent of consequences?I now turn. obtained, and for what purposes? To There are many clinical situations whom does information about a per-which already permit, if not invite, the son's genotype belong?In ordinary manipulative or arbitrary use of powersVoluntary Self-Degradation medical practice, the patient's privacyprovided by biomedical technology: ob- is protected by the doctor's adherencetaining organs for transplantation, re-and Dehumanization to the principle of confidentiality. What fusing to let a person die with dignity, Modern opinion is sensitive to prob- will protect his privacy under condi-giving genetic counselling to a frightened tions of mass screening? lems ofrestrictionof freedom and couple, recommending eugenic steriliza- abuse of power. Indeed, many hold that More than privacyisat stakeif tion for a mental retardate, orderinga man can be injured only by violating screening is undertakentodetectelectric shock for a homosexual. In psychological or behavioral abnormal- his will. But this view is muchtoo each situation, there is an opportunitynarrow. It fails to recognize the great ities. A recent proposal, tendered andto violate the will of the patientor supported highin government, called dangers we shall face in theuse of bio- subject. Such opportunities havegen- medical technology, dangers that for the psychological testing of all 6-erally existed in medical practice, but stem year -olds to detect future criminals and from au excess of freedom, fromthe the dangers are becoming increasinglyuninhibited exercises of will. misfits. The proposal was rejected;cur- In my serious. With the growing complexityview, our greatest problem will increas- rent tests lack the requisite predictiveof the technologies, the technician gains powers. But will such a proposal be ingly be one of voluntary self-degrada- in authority, since he alonecan under-tion, or willing dehumanization. rejected if reliable tests become avail-stand what he is doing. The patient's able? What if certain genetic disorders, Certain desired and perfected medical lack of knowledge makes him deferen- technologies have already had diagnosable in childhood,can be showntial and often inhibits him from speak- some to correlate with subsequent antisocial dehumanizing consequences. Improved ing up when he feels threatened. Physi- methods of resuscitation have behavior? For what degree of made correla-cians are sometimes troubled by their possibleheroic efforts tion and for what kinds of behavior to "save" the canincreasing power, yet theyfeeltheyseverely ill and injured. Yet these mandatory screening be justified? What efforts cannot avoid its exercise. "Reluctantly,"are sometimes only partly successful; use should be made of the data? Might one commented to me, "we shall havethey may succeed in salvaging indivi- not the dissemination of the informa-to play God." With what guidance and duals with severe brain damage,capable tionitself undermine the individual'sto what ends I shall consider later. For of only a less-than-human,vegetating chance for a worthy life and contributethe moment, I merely ask: "By whose to his so-called existence. Such patients,increasingly antisocial tendencies?authority?" found inthe intensive care units of Consider the seemingly harmless ef- While these questions about power university hospitals, have been denieda fort to redefine clinical death. Ifthe are pertinent and important, they aredeath with dignity. Familiesare forced need for organs for transplantation isin one sense misleading. They imply the to suffer seeing their lovedones so stimulusforredefiningdeath, an inherent conflict of purpose betweenreduced, and are made to might not bear the this concern influence thephysician and patient, between scientistburdens of a protracted death definition at the watch. expense of the dying?and citizen. The discu'sion conjures Even the ordinary methods One physician, in fact, refers in writing of treat- up images of master and slave, of oping disease and prolonging lifehave im. to the revised criteria for declaringa pressor and oppressed. Yet it must bepoverished the context in whichmen patient dead as a "new definition ofren.embered that conflict of purpose is die. Fewer and fewer people die heart donor eiigibility" (7, p. 526). in the largely absent, especially with regard to familiar surroundings of homeor in the Problems of abuse of power arisegeneral goals. To be sure, the purposescompany of family and friends. At that even in the acquisition of basic knowl-of medical scientists are not alwaystime of life when there is per:lapsthe 144 139 greatest need for human warmth and become so vague for them as to be non- state, the schools, the mass media, and comfort, the dying patient is kept com- existent. the child-care centers. Some have ar- pany by cardiac pacemakers and de- Consider next the coming power over gued that the family, long the nursery fibrillators, respirators, aspirators, oxy- reproduction and genotype. We endorse of humanity, has outlived its usefulness. genators, catheters, and his intravenous the project that will enable us to con- To be sure, laboratory and govern- drip. trol numbers and to treat individuals mental alternatives might be designed But the loneliness is not confined to with genetic disease. But our desires for procreation and child-rearing, but the dying patient in the hospital bed. outrun these defensible goals. Many at what cost? Consider the increasing number of old would welcome the chance to become This is not the place to conduct a people who arestillalive, thanks to parents without the inconvenience of full evaluation of the biological family. medical progress. As a group, the elder- pregnancy; others would wish to know Nevertheless, some of its important vir- ly are the most alienated members of in advance the characteristics of their tues are, nowadays, too often over- oursociety.Not yetready forts,-. offspring (sex, height, eye color, intelli- looked. The family is rapidly becoming world of the dead, not deemed fl*for gence); still others would wish to design the only :nstitution in an increasingly the world of the living, they are shunted these characteristics to suit their tastes. impersonal world where each person is aside. More and more of them spend Some scientists have called for the use loved not for what he does or makes, the extra years medicine has given them of the new technologies to assure the but simply because he is. The family is in"homesforseniorcitizens,"in "quality" of all new babies (9). As one also the institution where most of us, chronic hospitalsin nursing homes obstetrician put it"The business of both as children and as parents, acquire waiting for the end. Ne have learned obstetrics is toproduceoptimum a sense of continuity with the past and how to increase their years, but we babies." But the price to be paid for a sense of commitment to the future. have not learned how to help them en- the "optimum baby" is the transfer of Without the family, we would have joy their days. And yet, we bravely and procreation from the home to the labo- little incentive to take an interest in relentlesslypushbackthefrontiers ratory and its coincident transformation anything after our own deaths. These against death. intomanufacture.Increasing control observations suggest that the elimina- Paradoxically, even the young and over the product is purchased by the tion of the family would weaken ties to vigorous may be suffering because of increasing depersonalization of the pro- past and future, and would throw us, medicine's success in removing death cess. The complete depersonalization of even more than we are now, to the from their personal experience. Those procreation (possible with the develop- mercy of an impersonal, lonely present. born since penicillin represent the first ment of an artificial placenta) shall be, Neurobiology and psychobiology generation ever to grow up without the initself,seriously dehumanizing, no probe most 4irectly into the distinc- experience or fear of probable un- matter how optimum the product. It tively human. The technological fruit expected death at an early age. They should not be forgotten that humanof these sciences is likely to be both look around and see that virtually all procreation not only issues new human more tempting than Eve's apple and of their friends are alive. A thoughtful beings, but is itself a human activity. more "catastrophic" in its result (10). physician, Eric Cassell, has remarked Procreation is not simply an activity One need only consider contemporary on this in "Death and the physician" of the rational will. It is a more com- drug use to see what people are willing (8, p. 76): plete human activity precisely because to risk or sacrifice for novel experi- [WJhile the gift of time must surely be it engages us bodily and spiritually, as ences, heightened perceptions, or just marked as a great blessing, the perception well asrationally.Isthere perhaps "kicks." The possibilityofdrug- of time, as stretching out endlessly before some wisdom in that mystery of nature induced, instant, and effortless gratifica- us, is somewhat threatening. Many of us which joins the pleasure of sc-.",the tion will be welcomed. Recall the possi- function best under deadlines, and tend to procrastinate when time limits are not set. communication of love, and the desirz: bilities of voluntary self-stimulation of ..Thus,this unquestioned boon, the for childrenin the very activity by the brain to reduce anxiety, to heighten extension of life, and the removal of the which we continue the chain of human pleasure, or to create visual and audi- threat of premature death, carries with it existence? Is not biological parenthood a tory sensations unavailable through the an unexpected ar.xiety: the anxiety of an built-in "mechanism," selected because unlimited future. peripheral senseort, ns. Once these In the young, the sense of limitless time it fosters and supports in parents an ad- techniques are perfected and safe,is has apparently imparted not a feeling of equate concern for and commitment to there much doubt that they will he limitless opportunity, but increased stress their children? Would not the labora- desired, demanded, and used? and anxiety, in addition to the anxiety tory production of human beings no What endswillthesetechniques which results from other modern freedoms: personal mobility, a wide range of longer be human procreation? Could it serve? Most likely, only the most ele- occupationalchoice,andindependence keep human parenthood human? mental, those most tied to the bodily from the limitations of class and familial The dehumanizing consequences of pleasures. What will happen to thought, patterns of work. ... A certain aimless- programmed reproduction extend be- to love, to friendship, to art, to judg- ness (often ringed around with great social yond the mere acts and processes of ment, to public-spiritedness in a society corsciousness)characterizes discussions about their own aspirations. The future is life-giving. Transfer of procreation to with a perfected technology of pleas- endless, andtheirinner demands seem the laboratory will no doubt weaken ure? What kinds of creatures will we minimal. Although it may appear unchari- what is presently for many people the become if we obtain our pleasure by table to say so, they seem to be acting in best remaining justification and support drug or electrical stimulation without a way best described as "childish"par- for the existence of marriage and the ticularly intheir lack of a time sense. the usual kind of human efforts and They behave as though there were no to- family. Sex is now comfortably at .home frustrations? What kind of society will morrow, or as though the time limits im- outside of marriage; child-rearingis we have? posed by the biological facts of life had progressively being given over to the We need only consult Aldous Hux- 145 ley's prophetic novel Brave New Worldpreviousfailurestofinda shortcut Socrates contended. What is new is that for a likely answer to these questions.around them have led me to believe these doctrines seem to be vindicated There we encounter a society dedicatedthat these questions must be faced if by scientific advance. Not only do the to homogeneity and stability, admin-we are to have any hope of under- scientific notions of nature and of man istered by means of instant gratificationsstanding where biologyis taking us. flower into verifiable predictions, but and peopled by creatures of humanTherefore, I shall try to show in outline they yield marvelous fruit. The techno- shape but of stunted humanity. Theyhow I think some of the larger ques-logical triumphs ate held to validate consume, fornicate, take "soma," andtions arise from my discussion of de- their scientific foundations. Here, per- operate the machinery that makes it allhumanization and self-degradation. haps, is the most pernicious result of possible. They do not read, write, think, My remarks on dehumanization can technological progressmore dehuman- love, or govern themselves. Creativityhardly fail to arouse argument. It might izing than any actual manipulation or and curiosity, reason and passion, existbe said, correctly, that to speak about technique, present or future. We are only in a rudimentary and multilateddehumanization presupposes a concept witnessing the erosion, perhaps the final form. In short, they are not men at all.of "the distinctively human." It might erosion, of the idea of man as some- True, our techniques, like theirs, mayalso be said, correctly, that to speakthing splendid or divine, and itsre- in fact enable us to treat schizophrenia,about wisdom concerning proper hu-placement with a view that sees man, to alleviate anxiety, to curb aggressive-man ends presupposes that such ends no less than nature, as simply more raw ness. We, like they, may indeed be abledo in fact exist and that they may be material for manipulation and homog- to save mankind from itself, but prob-more or less accessible to human under- enization. Hence, our peculiar moral ably only at the cost of its humanness.standing, or at least to rational inquiry. crisis. We are in turbulent seas without In the end, the price of relieving man'sIt is true that neither presupposition isa landmark precisely because we ad- estate might well be the abolition ofat home in modern thought. here more and more to a view of nature man (11). The notion of the "distinctively hu-and of man which both gives us enor- There are, of course, many otherman" has been seriously challenged by mous power and, at the same time, routes leading to the abolition of man.modern scientists. Darwinists hold that denies allpossibility of standards to There arc many other and better knownman is,at least in origin, tied to the gt,;(1Pitsuse. Though well-equipped, causesofdehumanization.Disease,subhuidan; his seeming distinctiveness wenow not who we are nor where starvation, mental retardation, slavery,is an illusion or, at most, not very im-we are going. We are left to the acci- and brutalityto name just a fewportant.Biochemistsandmolecular dents of our hasty, bia,ed, and ephem- have long prevented many, if not most,biologists extend the challenge by blur-eral judgments. people from living a fully human life. -!ng the distinction between the living Let us not failto note a painful We should work to reduce and even-and the nonliving. The laws of physics irony: our conquest of nature has made tually to eliminate these evils. But theand chemistry are found to be valid us the slaves of blind chance. We tri- existence of these evils should not pre-and are held to be sufficient for explain- umph over nature's unpredictabilities vent us from appreciating that the useing biological systems. Man is a collec- only to subject ourselves to the still of the technology of man, uninformedtion of molecules, an accident on the greater unpredictability of our capri- by wisdom concerning proper humanstage of evolution, endowed by chance ciouswills and our fickleopinions. ends, and untempered by an appropri-with the power to change himself, but That we have a method is no proof ate humility and awe, can unwittinglyonly along determined lines. against our madness. Thus, engineering renderusallirreversiblylessthan Psychoanalysts have also debunked the engineer as well as the engine, we human. For, unlike the man reduced bythe "distinctly human." The essence of race our train we know not where disease or slavery, the people dehuman-man is seen to be located in those drives (12). ized a la Brave New World are nothe shares with other animalspursuit While the disastrous consequences of miserable, do not know that they areof pleasure and avoidance of pain. The ethical nihilism are insufficient to refute dehumanized, and, what is worse, wouldso-called "higher functions" are under- it, they invite and make urgent a re- not careif they knew. They are, in-stood to be servants of the more e - investigation of the ancient and endur- deud, happy slaves, with a slavish hap-mentary, the more base. Any distinc. ing questions of what is a proper life piness. tivenessor "dignity"that man hasfor a human being, what is a good consists of his superior capacity for community, and how are they achieved gratifying his animal needs. (13). We must not be deterred from Some Fundamental Questions The idea of "human good" fares no these questions simply because the best better. In the social sciences, historicists minds in human history have failed to The practical problems of distribut-and existentialists have helped drive settle them. Should we not rather be ing scarce resources, of curbing the this question underground. The former encouraged by the fact that they con- abuses of power, and of preventing hold all notions of human good to he sidered them to be the most important voluntary dehumanization point beyond culturally and historically bound, and questions? themselves to some large, enduring, and hence mutable. The latter hold that As I have hinted before, our ethical most difficult questions: the nature of values are subjective: each man makes dilemma is caused by the victory of justice and the good community, the his own, and ethics becomes simply the modern natural science withits non- nature ofan and the good for man. cataloging of personal tastes. teleological view of man. We ought My appreciation of the profundity of Such appear to be the prevailing therefore to reexamine with great care these questions and my own ignoranceopinions. Yet thereis nothing novel the modern notions of natt're and of before them makes me hesitant to say about reductionism, hedonism, and rela- man, which undermine those earlier any more about them. Nevertheless, tivism; these are doctrines with which notionc that provide a basis for ethics. .146 141

If we consult our common experience, tions. Yet while pursuing these ques- at present in the biomedical area few we are likely to discover some grounds tions, we cannot afford to neglect thelarge industries that influence public for believing that the questions about practical problems as such. Let us not policy. Once these appear, the voice of man and human good are far from forget Delgado and the "psychocivilized"the public interest" will have to shout closed. Our common experience sug- society."Thephilosophicalinquiry very loudly to be heard above their gests many difficulties for the modern could be rendered moot by our blind,whisperings in the halls of Congress. "scientific view of man." For example, confident efforts to dissect and redesignThe.:e reflections point to the need for this view fails to account for the con- ourselves. While awaiting a reconstruc-institutional controls. cern for justice and freedom that ap- tion of theory, we must act as best we Scientists understandably balk at the pears to be characteristic of all human can. notion of the regulation of science and societies (14). It also fails to account technology. Censorshipisugly and for or to explain the fact that men have often based upon ignorant fear; bureau- speech and not merely voice, that menWhat Is To Be Done? cratic regulationis often stupid and can choose and act and not merely inefficient. Yet there is something dis- move or react. It fails to explain why First, we sorely need to recover someingenuous about a scientist who pro- men engage in moral discourse, or, for humility in the face of our awesomefesses concern about the social conse- that matter, why they speak atall. powers. The arguments I have pre-quences of science; but who responds Finally, the "scientific view of man" sented should make apparent the follyto every suggestion of regulation with cannot account for scientific inquiry of arrogance, of the presumption that:me or both of the following: "No itself, for why men seek to know. Might we are wise enough to remake our-restrictions on scientific research," and there not be something the matter with selves. Because we lack wisdom, cau-"Technological progress should not be a knowledge of man that does not ex- tion is our urgent need. Or to put itcurtailed." Surely, to suggest that cer- plain or take account of his most dis- another way, in the absence of thattain technologies ought to be regulated tinctive activities, aspirations, and con- "ultimate wisdom," we can be wiseor forestalled is not to call for the halt cerns (15)? enough to know that we are not wise of all technological progress (and says Having gone this far, let me offer enough. When we lack sufficient wis-nothing at all about basic research). one suggestion as to where the difficulty dom to do, wisdom consistsin notEach development should be considered might lie: in the modern understanding doing. Caution, restraint, delay, absten-on its own merits. Although the dan- of knowledge. Since Bacon, as I have tion are what this second-best (and,gers of regulation cannot be dismissed, mentioned earlier, technology has in- perhaps, only)wis".urndictates withwho, for example, would still object to creasingly come to be the basic justifi-respect to the technology for humanefforts to obtain an effective, complete, cation for scientific inquiry. The end engineering. global prohibition on the development, is power, not knowledge for its own If we can recognize that biomedicaltesting, and use of biological and nucle- sake. But power is not only the end.advances carry significant social costs, ar weapons? Itis also an important validation ofwe may be willing to adopt a less per- The proponents of laissez-faire ignore knowledge. One definitely knows thatmissive, more criticalstance towardtwo fundamental points. They ignore one knows only if one can make. Syn-new developments. We need to reex-the fact that not to regulate is as much thesis is held to be the ultimate proofamine our prejudice not only that alla policy decision as the opposite, and of understanding (16). A more radicalbiomedical innovation is progress, butthatit merely postpones the time of formula` In holds that one knows onlyalso that it is inevitable. Precedent cer- regulation. Controls will eventually be what one makes: knowing equals mak- tainly favo--, the view that what can be called foras they are now being de- ing. done will be done, but this necessarily manded to end environmental pollution. Yet therein lies a difficulty. If truthso? Ought we not to be suspicious whenIf attempts are not made early to de- be the power to change or to make the technologists speak of coming develop-tect and diminish the social costs of object studied, then of what do we have ments asautomatic,not subjectto biomedicaladvancesbyintelligent knowledge? If there are no fixed reali-human control? Is there not somethinginstitutional regulation, the society is ties, but only material upon which we contradictory in the notion that we likely to react later with more sweeping, may work our wills, will not "science" have the power to control all the un-immoderate, and throttling controls. be merely the "knowledge" of the tran- toward consequences of a technology, The proponents of laissez-faire also sient and the manipulatable? We might butlackthepowertodetermine ignore the fact that much of technology indeed have knowledge of the laws bywhether it shuuld be developed in theis already regulated. The federal gov- which things change and the rules for first place? ernment is already deep in research and their manipulation, but no knowledge What will be the likely consequences development (for example, space, elec- of the thir,s themselves. Can such aof the perpetuation of our permissive tronics, and weapons) and is the princi- view of "science" yield any knowledge andfatalisticattitude toward humanpal sponsor of biomedical research. One about the nature of man, or indeed, engineering? How will the large deci- may well question the wisdom of the about the nature of anything? Oursions be made? Technocratically and direction given, but one would be wrong questions appear to lead back to the self-servingly,if our experience with in arguing that technology cannot sur- most basic of questions: What does itprevioustechnologiesisany guide.vive social control. Clearly, the ques- mean to know? What isitthat is Under conditions of laissez-faire, most tion is not control versus no control, kr awable (I7)? technologistswillpursue techniques,but rather what kind of control, when, We have seen that the practical prob-and most private industries will pursue by whom, and for what purpose. lems point toward and make urgentprofits. We are fortunate that, apart Means forachievinginternational certain enduring, fundamentalques- from the drug manufacturers, there are regulation and control need to be de-

. 147 142

vised. Biomedical technology can beno Curiously,as Aldous Huxley's Brave New cal ground. One cannot speak of "human nation's monopoly. The need for inter- World ((Harper A Row, New York, 1969)1 betterment" without considering what is meant suggests, the implit'it goal of the biomedical by the human and by the related notion of the national agreements and supervision technology could well be said to be the re- good tor man. These questionscan be avoided can readily be understood if we con- versal of the Fall and a return of man to only by asserting that practical matters reduce the hedonic and immortal existence of the to tastes and power, and by confessing that sider the likely American response, to Garden of Eden. Yet I can point to at least the use of the phrase "human betterment" is the successful asexual reproduction of two problems. First, the new Garden of Eden a deception to cloak one's own will to power. will probably have no gardens; the received, In other words, these questions can be avoided 10,000 Mao Tse-tungs. splendid world of nature will be buried be- only by ceasing to discuss. To repeat, the basic short-term need neathasphalt,concrete, and other human 14. Consider,for example, the widespread ac- fabrications, a transformation that is already ceptance, in the legal systems of very differ- is caution. Practically, this means that far along. (Recall that in Brate New World ent societies and cultures, of the principle we should shift the burden of proof to elaborateconsumption-oriented,mechanical and the practice of third-party adjudication of amusement parksfeaturing,forexample, disputes. And consider why, although many theproponentsof a new biomedical centrifugal bumblepuppyhad supplanted societies have practicedslavery, no slave- wilderness and even ordinary gardens.) Sec- holder has preferred his own enslavementto technology. Concepts of "risk" and ond, the new inhabitant of the new "Garden" his own freedom. It would seem thatsome "cost" need to be broadened to include will have to be a creature for whom we have notions of justice and freedom, as well as no precede's'a creature as difficult to imag- right and truthfulness, are constitutive forany some of the social and ethical conse- ine as to bring into existence. He will have society, and that a concern for these values quences discussed earlier. The probable to be simulaneously an innocent like Adam may t..!a fundamentalcharacteristicof and a technological wizard who keeps the or possible harmful effects of the wide- "human naturr..' "Garden" running. (I am indebted to Dean IS. Scientists may, of rourse, continue to believe spread use of a new technique should Robert Goldwin, St. John's College, for this in righteousness or justice or truth, but these last insight.) beliefs are not grounded intheir "scientific be anticipated and introduced as "costs" Some scientists naively believe that an engi- knowledge" of man. They rest instead upon to be weighed in deciding about the neered increase in human Intelligencewill the receding wisdom of an earlier age. first steer us in the right direction. Surely we have 16. This belief, silently shared by many contem- use. The regulatory institutions learned by now that intelligence, whatever it porary biologists, has recently been given the should be encouraged to exercisere- is and however measured, is not synonymous following clear expression: "One of the acid with wisdom and that, if harnessed to the tests of understanding an object is the ability straint and to formulate the grounds wrong ends,it can cleverly perpetrate great to put it together from Its component parts. for saying "no." We must all get used folly and evil. Given the activities in which Ultimately, molecular biologists will attempt to many, if not most, of our best minds are now subject their understanding of all structure and to the idea that biomedical technology engaged, we should not simply rejoice in the function to this sort of test by trying to syn makes possible many things we should Prospect of enhancing IQ. On what would this thesize a cell.Itis of some interest to see increased intelligence operate? At best, the how close we are to this goel." (P. Handler, never do. programming of further Increases in IQ. It Ed, Biology and the Future 01 Man (Oxford But caution is not enough. Norare would design and operate techniques for pro- Univ. Press, New York, 1970), p. longing life, for engineering reproduction, for 17. When anearlierversionofthisarticle clever institutional arrangements. Insti- delivering gratifications. With no gain in wis- waspresentedpublicly,itwascriticized tutions can be little better than the dom, our gain in intelligence can only en- by one questioner as being "antiscientific." hance the rate of our dehumanization. He suggestedthat my remarks "were the people who make them work. However 12.The philosopher Hans Jonas has made the kindthat gave science a bad name." He worthy our intentions, identical pointy "Thus the slow-working acci- went on to argue that, far from being the we are deficient dents of nature, which by the very patience of enemy of morality, the pursuit of truth was in understanding. In thelongrun, our their small increments, large numbers, and itselfa highly moral activity, perhaps the gradual decisions, may well cease to be 'acci- highest. The relation of science and morals is hope ran only lie in education: ina dent' in outcome, are to be replaced by the a long and difficult question with an illustri- public educated about the meanings and fast-workingaccidents of man's hastyAnd ous history, and it deserves a more extensive hiased decisions, not exposed to the long test discussion than space permits. However, be- limits of science and enlightened in its of the ages. His uncertain ideas arc to set the cause some readers may share the questioner's use of techno!ogy; in scientists better go.ils of generations,with a certainty bor- response,I offer a brief reply. First, on the rowed from the presumptive certainty of the matter of reputation, we should recall that the educated to understand the relation- means. Thelatterpresumptionis doubtful pursuit of truth may be in tension with keep- ships between science and technology enough, but this doubtfulness becomes second- ing a good name (witness Oedipus, Socrates, ary to the prime question that arises when Galileo, Spinoza, Solzhenitsyn). For most of on the one hand, and ethics and poli- man indeed undertakes to 'make himself': in human hIaory, the pursuit of truth (including tics on the other;inhuman beings who what image of his own devising shall he do "science") was not a reputable activity among the many, and was, infact, highly suspect. as so, even granted that he can be sure of the arc wise in the latter as theyare n.ealis? In fact, of course, he can be sure of Even today, it ix doubtful whether more than clever in the former. neither, not of the end, nor of the means, a few appreciate knowledge as an end in it- once he enters the realm where he plays with self. Science has acquired a "good name" in the roots of life. Of one thing only can h: be recent times largely because of its technologi- References and Notes sure: of his power to move the foundations cal fruit: it is therefore to be expected thata and to :ause incalculable and irreversible con- disenchantment with technologywillreflect I. R. G. Edwards, B. D. Bavister, P. C. Steptoe, sequences. Never was so much power cou- badly upon science. Second, my own attack Nature 221,632 (1969). pledwith solittleguidanceforitsuse." has not been directed against science, but 2. R. G. Ed.vards, P. C. Steptoe, J. M. Purdy. I/. Cent. Con/. Alum Rabbis (January 1968), egainst the use of some technologies and, ibid. 227. 1307 (1970). P. 27.1 Theseremarksdemonstratethat, even more, against the unexamined belief 3. H. J. Muller, Science 134. 643 (1961). contrary to popular belief, we are not even indeed,Iwouldsay, superstitionthatall 4. 3. M. R. Delgado, Physical Control ol the on the right road toward a rational under- biomedical technology is an unmixed blessing. Mind:Toward aPschoctsllizedSociety standing of and rational control over human I share the questioner's belief that the pursuit (Harper & Row, New York, 1969). nature and human life. It is indeed the height of truth is a highly moral activity, In fact, I 5. F. Bacon, The Advancement 01 Learning, of irrationalitytriumphantly topursuera- am inviting him and others to loin in a pur- Book I, H. G. Dick, Ed. (Random House, tionalized technique, while at thesame time suit of the truth about whether all thesenew New York, 1955), p. 193. insisting that questions of ends, values,and techno'ogies are really good for us. This isa 6. C. S. Lewis, The Abolition o/ Man (Macmil- purposes lie beyond rational discourse. question that merits and is susceptible of seri- lan, New York, 1965), pp. 69-71. 13.It is encouraging to note that these questions ous Intellectual inquiry. Finally, we must ask 7. D. D. Rutstein, Deedahis (Spring 1969), p. 523. are seriously being raised in other quarters whether what we call "science" has a monop- 8. E. J.Cassell, Commentary (June1969),p. for example, by persons concerned with the oly on the pursuit of truth. What is "truth"? 73. decay of cities or the pollution of nature. What Is knowable, and what does it mean to 9. B. Glass, Science 171. 23 (1971). There is a growing dissatisfaction with ethical know? Surely, these are also questions that W. It is, of course, a long-debated question as nihilism.Infact,itstenets are unwittingly can be examined. Unless we do so, we shall to whether the fall of Adam and Eve ought abandoned, by even its staunchest adherents, remain Ignorant about what "science" is and to beconsidered "catastrophic,"or more in any discussion of "what to do." Forex- about what it discovers. Yet "science"that precisely, whether the Hebrew tradition con- ample, in the biomedical area, everyone, in- is. modern natural sciencecannot begin to sidered it .,o. I do not mean here to be taking cluding the most unreconstructed and techno- answer them; the, are philosophical questions, sides in this quarrel by my use of the term craticreduct'onist,findshimselfspeaking the very ones I am trying to raise at this "catastrophic," and, in fact, tend to line up on about the use of powers for "human better- point in the text. the negative side of the questions, as put above. ment." He has wandered unawares onto chi- 143

evaluating the efficacy of new preventive and therapeutic measures and any possible harmful side effects they may have. For example, the possible harmful effects of immunization against swine flu requiredepidemiologicinvestigations which, indeed, were responsiblefor demonstrating the relation between immunization and development of the Guil- lain-Barre syndrome (2).

Mtklor Health Studies That Required Use of Medical Re..ords In recent years widespread public con-safeguards that are in effect for pro- cern has developed in the United Statestecting the rights to privacy of human re- The major contributions of epidemiol- over encroachments on privacy and con-search subjects. ogy to the understanding of disease have fidentiality in many areas of American The Society for Epidemiologic Re- been based on studies in which medical life. This concern has led to a proliferationsearch and the Association of American and other vital records of many people of regulations and legislative proposals atMedical Colleges are committed to pro-were used, both for their data and for local, state, and federal levels. Althoughtecting the confidentiality of the medical identifying those individuals appropriate the medical and epidemiologic researchand personal data obtained in the coursefor subsequent study. The studies were community has been highly successful inof research activities. We believe thatoften conducted many years after the in- protecting the confidentiality of personalprivacy protection can best be accom-formation was recorded. Their impor- information obtained for research pur-plished through the regulations of the tance can be demonstrated by the follow- poses, attention has nonetheless focusedDepartment of Health, Education, and ing examples. on possible threats to privacy that mayWelfare that are now inforce and 1) Cancer.Studieswhich demon- be associated with research involving hu-through new legislation based largely on strated (i) the relationship of cigarette man subjects. The Privacy Act of 1974the recommendations made by the Pri- smoking to lung cancer, coronary heart (P.L. 93-579) was designed to ensure thatvacy Protection Study Commission in its disease, bladder cancer, and other condi- personal information about individualsreport to Congress. tions (3-6); tii) an increased cancer risk collected by federal agencies would be associated with occupational exposure limited to that which is legally authorized to substances such .s asbestos and vinyl and necessary and that the informationPopulation-Based Health Research chloride (7-14); (iii) the increased risk of would be maintained in a manner that several types of cancer after exposure to would preclude unwarranted intrusions Epidemiology is the study of the distri-radiation (15-24); (iv) that the ughters upon individual privacy. In addition, thebution and dynamics of disease in humanof women who received the hormone act provided for creation of the Privacypopulations. Its purpose is to identifydiethylstilbestrol(DES) duringpreg- Protection Study Commission, whichspecific agents or factors, related tonancy have an increased risk of devel- subsequently made recommendations topeople and their environment, that mayoping vaginal cancer (25); and (v) that Congress and to the President regardingcause disease or identify people who art women taking estrogens for menopausal various record-keeping practices in theat high risk for developing a disease. htsymptoms have an increased risk of de- private sector and the use of such rec-so doing, epidemiology provides theveloping endometrial or uterine cancer ords for research purposes (/). basis for public health programs de-(26-28). In this article, we present an overviewsigned to prevent and control disease. 2) Cardiovascular diseases.Studies of the implications of the privacy andPrevention can be effected by reducingwhich demonstrated (i) that high blood confidentiality issue for future medicalor eliminating exposure to a specific fac- lipids, high blood pressure, and smoking and epidemiologic research in the Unitedtor once its importance in producing dis-shortenlifeexpectancy,particularly States. We first describe briefly the im-ease has been demonstrated. There arethrough coronary heart disease (29-34); portance of population-based biomedicalat least two important reasons why iden-(ii) that women taking oral contracep- research; second, show how essentialtification of people at high risk for dis-tives have an i, :ceased risk of develop- the use of medical records with individ-ease is desirable: (i) measures can being thrombslembolism o:- stroke (35 -39); ually identifiable information has been inadopted to prevent such people from de-and(iii)thatadministration of anti- the past; third, describe some of theveloping disease and (ii) medical super-coagulants to patients with myocardial health problems for which knowledgevision and screening tests can be pro-infarctions is associated with lower pbst- based on use of medical records is des-vided when appropriate, so that if theyinfarction mortality rates (40,41). perately needed; and finally, describe thedo develop disease, their illnesses can be 3) htfetious diseases. Studies which identified at an early stage. led to the development of vaccines for Leon Gordis is professor and chairman of the De- partment of Epidemiology and Ellen Gold is assist. Among the public health programspoliomyelitis, measles, and other infec- ant professor of Epidemiology at the Johns Hopkins aided 1,1 knowledge resulting from epi-tious diseases (42-45). and studies which School of Hygiene and Public Health, Baltimore. Maryland 21203. This article is based on testimony demiologic investigations are those di-showed that cases of polio subsequent to presented before the Government Information and rected at preventing and controlling con-polio immunization in 1955 resulted front Individual Rights Subcommittee of the Committee on Government Operations of the U.S. House of ditions such as infectious and cardiovas-a vaccine lot contaminated with live vi- Representatives on 9 April 1979 on behalf of the So- ciety for Epidemic logic Research and the Associa cular diseases, cancer, and stroke. Epi-rus (46). Lion of American Medical Colleges. demiologic methods are also essential for 4) Child health. Studies which demon- 149 144

strated (i) that the administration of high of the etiologic characteristics, risk fac- A second example of the importance concentrations of oxygen to premature tors, natural history, and prognosis of a of rere;ease concerns a large-scale study infants results in blindness (47-49); (ii) disease. Nor could studies be conductedof women who had been exposed to x- hat rubella (German measles) or other in which new approaches to prevention,rays during pregnancy. The study ad- viral infection of the mother during preg- early detection, treatment, and deliverydressed the question of whether children nancy can produce congenital malforma-of health services are developed. from such pregnancies had an increased tions in the infant (50-55); (iii) that radia- risk of developing cancer. Some years tion exposure of the mother during preg- later, an investigator who had not been Patient Consent nancy is associated with an increased part of the original study team became risk of congenital malformations and interested in the reproductive histories Much population-based research childhood cancer in her offspring (/5- of the children (who were by then fully would be very difficult to carry out if pri- 17);(iv) that Rh disease (erythroblastosis grown) an,' :n the status of their chil- or patient consent were required in order fetalis) in newborns can be prevented dre-'s health. The children of the first (56,57): and (v) that comprehensive care for the investigator to have access to medical records. The studies we de- sti dy were contacted and asked a varie- programs for inner-city children and ty of medical and social questions. This scribed earlier were frequentlycon- youth are effective in reducing rates of was possible only because the data from ducted many years after the medical in- rheumatic fever 58). the original study, including identifying formation was originally recorded, since These are but a handful of the studies information about individual subjects, the state of knowledge at the time the inwhich have produced important direct wererereleasedtotheinvestigator. benefits for human health by identifying formation was obtained may not even have permitted the study to be con-Throughout, rigid safeguards were main- the factors associated with increased risk tained to protect the confidentiality of all ceived. Thus patients' consents could of disease, facilitating the development data. of preventive methods, and evaluating not possibly have been obtained. In addi- new ways of providing medical care and tion, reviewing medical records is often the first step used to identify patients organizing health care delivery. (Some of Research Use of Medical Records: these studies are considered in greaterwith a given disease so that they may Further Examples detail later.) It would be tragic if the po- subsequently be traced, contacted, and, tential benefits to society of such re- with their permission, studied further. Diethylstilbestrol and vaginal cancer. Any requirement that patient consent be search were lost as a result Of restric- A few years ago, investigators in Boston obtained before any medical record is re- tions placed on the information available demonstrated through an epidemiologic viewed would, therefore, be extremely to researchers. study that when mothers had been given destructive to medical and epidemiologic DES during pregnancy to prevent mis- research. carriage, female offspringfi m these Information That Identifies Individuals pregnancies had an increased risk of de- Redisclosure veloping a rare type of vaginal cancer In order to carry out epidemiologic re- when they reached adolescence (25). search, it is often necessary to identify Provisions that allow redisclosure or(This finding has important implications, individuals with specific diseases or dis- rerelease of information for research orsince for many years DES was added to abilities, or individuals who share some health statistics purposes (while main-livestock feedin the United States.) common environmes.:al exposure Medi- taining saksuards of confidentiality andThree features Are particularly notewor- cal records ar: essential for identifying privacy) are extremely important, as thethy: (i) the cancer did not appear in the populations with specific dit,e; .es and following example willillustrate.Be- person taking the medication but only in for obtaining detailed historic..,, clinical, cause of the increasing importance of the her female offspring: (ii) the cancer ap- and laboratory information about indi- problem of cancer, many cities andpeared some IS to 20 years afterex- vidual patients. Access to these records states are establishing cancer registries.posure to DES, so it was necessary to go is only a first step in identifying and These are lists of newly identified cancerback many years to determine exposures evaluating patients with the particular patients, and they are designed to facili-and to identify the drugs taken inpreg- disease under study so that they can sub- tate the long-term care of cancer pa- nancy: and (iii) the girls and young wom- sequently be contacted and, with their tients, to alert health officials quickly toen who had this cancer were first identi- informed consent, interviewed and stud- clusters of new types of cancer (whichfied through their medical recordsonly ied further. Identification of individuals may reflect a new exposure to a carcino- then could their mother, be contacted during the time the research is conducted gen), and to permit investigators to iden- and studied further. If such use of medi- is also essential to link records from dif- tify all patients with a particular cancercal records had been prohibited,or had ferent sources for a given personrec- so that the cause of that cancer can be been permitted only with the consent of ords such as those kept by physicians. investigated through well-designed epi-the patient. this studyperhaps the first hospitals, and employers as well as birth demiologic studies. demonstration in human beings oftrans- and death certificates when appropriate. Cancer regiAries generally obtain their placentalcarcinogenesis would have Identifying information about healthy data from hospitals aad pathology labo-been extremely difficult or impossibleto persons (nonpatients) must also be made ratories. A registry would be of very lim-cr ry out. available for making comparisons when ited use, however.:. ere it not possible There may be other carcinogens that determining the cause of a disease. With- for the registry to go ti.next step andmothers should avoid duringpregnancy out individually identifying information. make its data available to legitimate can- because of the hazard to their children. which is essential for follow-up andrec- cer investigators. Thus rerelease of in-To identify these agents. rigorous epi- or' linkage, it would by virtually impos- formation with appropriate safeguard, isdenuologic investigations in which medi- sible to carry out epidemiologic studies essential. cal records are used are needed topro- 150 145

tect the health of women and their chil- vulation that was exposed to low-level key, and must specify who will have ac- dren. radiation. If such a population were iden- cess to the data, how and at what point in Occupational cancers.Workersintified, we would attempt to trace its the research personal information will be certain industries are often subjected tomembers and obtain any relevant physi- effectively separated from other data, high concentrations of potentially toxiccian records, hospital records, or death and whether or not the data will be re- substances. For example, workers ex-certificates. For comparison purposes, it tained at the close of the study, and if so, posed to vinyl chloride were shown towould be necessary to identify a similarwhy. The IRB thoroughly reviews inter- have an increased risk for liver cancerbut unexposed population and obtain view instruments and questionnaires, the (12-14). This finding, which has nowsimilar records for its members to deter- consent statement,and any accom- b been confirmed, was obtained by review-mine the rate of disease in that popu-panying materialall of which must be ing and correlating the medical, work,lation. Only in this way could we deter- sufficientlyinformative and under- and death records of large groups of em- mine whether the exposed group nas standable to enable the subjects to make ployees in specific industries. Withoutmore disease than the group that was notan informed decision about participating. access to these records it would haveexposed. For the conclusions to be valid, If the subjects are patients, they are reg- been impossible to identify and confirmcomplete records must be available for ularly assured that their care will not be vinyl chloride as a cause of cancer. Also,both groups. It would be necessary tojeopardized in any way by their failure to had there been a requirement that patientknow names and addresses, to have ac- participate. All subjects are assured that consent be obtained before the recordscess to their medical and vital records they are free to withdraw from a study at were made available, these studies couldwith personal identifiers included, and to any time. Many of these provisions are not have been carried out because manyestablish procedures for tracing, recon- spelled out in current regulations of the prlients had died by the time the studytacting, and following up the members of Department of Health, Education, and was d' ne or had moved and could not beboth populations to determine all epi- Welfare. traced. sodes of serious illness and de-th. If ac- We have only begun to scratch the sur- cess to these records is restricted, Amer- face with respect to the toxic and cancer-icans will be denied information on the Immunity from Subpoena producing potentials of substances tohazards of low-level radiation.Itis, which workers are exposed during theirtherefore, essential that Congress ensure It should be apparent that epidemio- daily labor. Any restriction that wouldthat legitimate medical and epidemiolog- logists and other medical investiPtors preclude the identification of harmfulic researchers have unhindered access to are keenly sensitive to the chalL ge of substances and the documentation ofmedical records. Such access, naturally. ensuring confidentiality of data and pro- their effects would be a major setback. must be conditional on the demonstra-tection of the privacy of research sub- Oral contraceptives (the "pill"). Al-tion by the investigator to his institution-jects. However, one important issue re- though the pill has been demonstrated toal review board (IRB) that he has pro- mains to be resolved, namely, the probe a highly effective and convenient formvided adequately for protection of the tection from subpoena of data gathered of birth control and has been adopted byprivacy of the subjects in his study, as for research purposes. At present, no many women, many epidemiologic stud-described below. such protection is guaranteed in most re- ies have demonstrated that women who search areas. Although an investigator take the pill for long periods of time in- may make the maximum effort to safe- crease their risk for blood clots, strokes.Existing Safeguards for guard the confidentiality of information heart attacks, high blood pressure. liverProtecting Confidentiality he obtains, such information remains tumors, gallbladder disease, congenital subject to subpoena by a court of law. malformations in their offspring. and oth- All epidemiologists and medical re- Therefore absolute assurance of con- er conditions (35-39). These importantsearchers have a major professional and fidentiality cannot be made to research findings were primarily the resultofpersonal responsibility to minimize in- subjects. Provision must be made for large-scale studies in which hospital andvasion of privacy as much as possible data obtained for research purposes to medicalrecordswere usedstudiesand toprotectvigorousi,thecon- be immune from subpoena except under which, again, would have been impos-fidentiality of the data in their posses- precisely stated extreme circumstances. sible to carry out had patient consentsion. The provisions of the National Re- been required. Epidemiologic studies ofsearch Act (P.L. 93-348) (especially its the effects of 'drugs like the pill are criti-implementing regulations on protection Current Challenges cal for protecting the health and well-of human subjects) codify an elaborate being of the public. system of safeguards, currently in opera- Among the major public health prob- Radiation. One of the questions posedtion within the scientific community, to lems in the United States are cancer, car- by the accident at Three Mile Island inprevent violations of the rights of pa- diovascular disease, and infectious dis- Pennsylvania has been. How serious istients for pm-poses of research. Each in- eases such as hepatitis, venereal disease, the potential risk to residents of the areavestigator must justify to the IRB the ra- and influenza. Many cancers today are who may have been exposed to radiationtionale for subjecting any human re- probably environmentally determined. from the reactor? We know that high lev-search subject to any riskincluding in- In an interviev, some time ago. Dr. Ar- els of radiation are extremely hazardousvasion of privacyand must demon- thur C. Upton. director of the National to human beings, but what is not knownstrate the measures he or she is taking Cancer Institute, responded to a ques- with any certainty is the extent of theto ensure the confidentiality of all per- tion about research needs in the cancer hazard posed by low levels of radiation.sona! and medical data obtained in the field by saying, "We need a lot more In order to generate data on the hazardscourse of the research (59-63). Inves- good epidemiology. It can tell us not on- presented by low levels of radiation, it is tigators must assure the IRB that rely about environmental factors but also necessary to collect information on asearch data will be kept under lock and about genetic influences, and we really 146

do need to know about both." Upton's References and Notes 33 J. Stamler. in Diet and Atherascerlosis. C. Sir- comments could also apply to research Pnvacy Protection Study Commission. "Per- tori. G. Ricci. S. Gorini. Eds. (Plenum. New sonal privacy in an information society" (Gov- York. 1973). p. 125. in cardiovascular diseases, high blood ernrnent Printing Office. Washington. D.C.. 34. W. Winkelstein, Jr., A. Kagan. H. Kato. S. T. pressure, stroke, neurological diseases 1977). Sacks. Am. J. Epidermal. 102, 502 (1975). 2.L. B. Schonberger, D. J. Bregman. J. Z. Sulk- 35. Collaborative Group for the Study of Stroke in (including epilepsy), diabetes, arthritis, vartBolyai, R. A. Keinlyside, D. W. Ziegler. H. Young Women, J. Am. Med. Assoc. 231. 718 S. Retailliau, D. L. Eddins. J. A. Bryan. Am. J. (1975). %iiw,stive diseases- indeed, to virtually Epidemiol. 1110. 105 (1979). 36. J. I. Mann and W. H. W. Inman. Br. Med. J. 2. aN chronic and many infectious condi- 3 H. A. Kahn. Ed., in Natl. Cancer Inst. Monogr. 245 (1975). 19 (1%6). p. I. 37 Royal College of General Practitioners. An In- ti3ns. 4.E. C. Hammond. ibid.. p. 127. tenm Report from the Oral Contraception Study The effects on human health of new 5.R. Doll and A. B. Hill. Br. Med. J. 1. 1399 of the Royal College of General Practitioners (1964). (Pitman Medical. New York, 1974). thugs and other chemicals the envi- 6. in Natl. Cancer Inst. Monogr. 19 (1966).38. P. E. Sartwell. A. T. Mast. F. G. Arthes. G. R. roament can only be identified through p. 205. Greene, H. E. Smith, Am. J. Epidemiol. 90. 365 7.P. Enterline, P. Decoufle, V. Henderson. Br. J. (1969). epidemiologic and other investigations. Ind. Med. 30, 162 (1973). 39. M. Vessey, R. Doll, R. Peto, B. Johnson. B. 8.P. M. Steil and T. McGill. Lancet 1973-1. 678 Wiggins, J. Biosocial Sci. 8, 373 (1976). most of which depend on the availability (1973). 40. M. Szklo, J. A. Tonascia. R. Goldberg, H. L. of medical records. The maintenance of 9.J. Peto, R. Doll, S. V. Howard. L. J. Kinlen, H. Kennedy. J. Am. Med. Assoc. 242. 1261 (1979). C. Lewinsohn, Br. J. Ind. Med. 34. 169 (1977). 41. J. Tonascia, L. Gordis. H. Schmerler, N. Engl. health and improvement of protection 10.G. Theriault and L. GrandBois. Arch. Environ. J. Med. 292. 1362 (1975). from environmental hazards requires the Health 35, 15 (1978). 42. R. E. Weibel, E. B. Buynak, J. Stokes, M. Hill- II.N. J. Vianna and A. K. Polan. Lancet 1978.1. eman, Pediatrics 49. 334 (1972). facilitation of epidemiologicresearch 1061 (1978). 43. E. Abtutyn, K. L. Herrmann, A. W. Karchmer. and the continued availability of medical 12.R. J. Waxweiler, W. Stringer. J. K. Wagoner. J. J. P. Friedman. E. Page, J. J. Witte, Am. J. Dis. Jones, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sr. 271. 40 (1976). Child. 120, 129 (1970). records. 13.J. L. Creech, Jr.. and M. N. Johnson. J. Occup. 44. M. G. Grand, S. A. WO. S. H. Gehlbach, P. J. Society has a vital stake in epidemio- Med. 16, 150 (1974). Landrigan, R. J. Judelsohn, S. A. Zendel, J. J. 14.R. H. Wyatt, J. M. Kotchen, D. L. Hochstras- Witte, J. Am. Med. Assoc. 220. 1569 (1972). logic and other medical research. We ser, J. W. Buchanan, B. R. Campbell, J. C. 45. T. Francis. Jr., et al., Final Rep,..it. Evaluation Slaughter, A. H. Doll. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 246. of the 1954 Field Trial of Polionyelitis Vaccine must elisure that the dignity and privacy 80 (1975). (Poliomyelitis Vaccine Evaluation Center, Ann of subjects will be protected without 15.A. Stewart, J. Webb. B. Hewitt. Br. Med. J. 2. Arbor, Mich., 1957). 1495 (1958). 46. N. Nathanson and A.13. Langmuir, Am. J. Hyg. hindering the advancement of knowledge 16.A. Stewart and G. W. Kneale, Lancet 1%8-1. 78, 16 (1963). of disease. The social contract that facili- 104 (19681. 47. K. Campbell, Med. J. Aust. 2, 48 (1951). 17.B. MacMahon. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 28, 1173 48. A. Patz, L. E. Hoeck, E. DelaCruz, Am. J. tates the existence of individuals within (1962). Ophthalmol. 35, 1248 (1952). social groups requires that each individ- 18.B. MacMahon and G. B. Hutchison. Acta Unto 49. V. E. Kinsey, J. T. Jacobus, F. M. Hemphill. Int. Contra Cancrum 20. 1172 (1964). Arch. Ophthalmol. Sf, 481 (1956). ual occasionally yield some of his rights. 19.B. Modan. D. Baidatz, H. Mart. R. Steinitz. S. 50. W. P. D. Logan, Med. Illustr. 8. 502 (1954). 51. B. A. Hill. R. Doll, T. M. Galloway. J. P. including privacy and freedom of action. G. Levin, Lancet 1974 -I. 277 (1974). 20.S. Graham, M. 1. Levin. A. M. Ldienfeld. L. Hughes, Br. J. Prey. Soc. Med. 12. 1 (1958). for the benefit of society as a whole. N. Schuman, R. Gibron, J. E. nowd. L. Hemp- 52. R. Lundstrom, Acta Perham Scand. 41. 583 elmann. in Natl. Cancer Inst. Monogr. At (1952). Compliance with trafhi. regulations and (1966). p. 347. 53. M. Siegal and M. Greenberg. Am. J. Obstet. with income tax laws are but two ex- 21.R. E. Albert and A. R. Omran, Arch. Environ. Gynecol. 77, 620 (1959). Health 17. 899 (1968). 54. M. Greenberg. 0. Pellitteri, J. Barton. J. Am. amples of the interactive workings of the 22.R. E. Shore. R. E. Albert. B. S. Pastemack. Med. Assoc. 165, 675 (1957). social contract. Each society must de- ibid. 31. 17 (1976). 55. M. Siegal. H. T. Fuerst, V. F. Guinee, Am. J. 23.L. H. Hempelmann, W. J. Hall. M. Phillips. R. Dis. Child. 121, 469 (1971). cide when a limited compromise of indi- A. Cooper. W. R. Ames. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 56. P. Levine, E. M. Katzin, L. Burnham. J. Am. vidual rights is justified by the potential S5. 519 (1975). Med. Assoc. 116, 825 (1941). 24.M. J. Favus et alN. Engl. J. Med. 294. 1019 57. P. Levine, L. Burnham. E. M. Katz.m, P. Vogel. benefits to be derived by the community (1976). Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 42. 925 (1941). 25.A. L. Herbst, H. Ulfelder, B. C. Poskanzer. 58. L. Gordis, N. Engl. J. Med. 289, 331 (1973). as a whole. Investigations of the etiology ibid. 284, 878 (1971). 59. J. H. U. Brown, Fed. Proc. Fed. Am. Soc. Esp. and natural history of disease and of the 26.D. C. Smith. R. Prentice. D. J. Thompson. W. Biol. 38, 2049 (1979). L. Herrmann, ibid. 293, 1164 (1975). (A). National Commission for the Protection of Hu- effectiveness of preventive and thera- 27.T. M. Mack, M. C. Pike, B. E. Henderson. R. I. man Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Re- peutic interventions are of great poten- Pfeffer. V. R. Gerkins, M. Author. S. E. Brown. search, Repot. and Recommendations Institu- ibid. 294. 1262 (1976). tional Review Board; (Government Printing Of- tial benefit to society, but the conduct of 28.C. M. F. Antunes et al., ibid. 300, 9 (1979). itce, Washington, D.C. 1978), Publ. (OS) 78- such studies requires that, with proper 29.W. B. Kannel and T. Gordon. Bull. N.Y. Acad. 0008, pp. 39-54. Med. 54. 573 (In). 61. U.S. Department of Health, Education. and safeguards,individuallyindentifiable 30.J Truett. J. Cornfield. Kannel. J. Chronic Welfare. The Institutional Guide to DHEW Pol- Dis. 20, 511 (1967) icy on Protection of Human Subjects. Publ. data from medical records continue to be 31.L Kuller and S. Tonascia. ibid. 24. I I I (1971). (NIH) 72-102 (1972). made accessible for medical and epi- 32.J. 0. Humphnes, L Kulier, R S. Ross. J. C 62 U.S. Department of Health. Education. and Freisingt c,E. E. Page. Circulation 49. 489 demiologic research. Welfare, Fed. Reg.. p. 18917 (1974) (1974). 63. ibid.. p. 11854 11975). 147 So effective was favorable publicity about both science and doctors that Americans in general began to view extensive medical care as a life necessity. Expansion of hospital care at the beginning of the century was an important indication of the change. After some years, publications of the Committee on the Costs of Medical Care (1928-1933) and other surveys generated much criticism of the medical profes- sionnot for members' inferior technical performance or misbehavior but for their failing to make physician services During the first half of the 20th centu- ims" in this tradition included, for exam- of any kind available to more people ry, up until the late 1950's, American ple (7): farough economic and organizational physicians enjoyed social esteem and Diagnose for the rich neurasthenia, brain- means (13). By the late 1930's the mod- prestige along with an admiration forstorm, gout and appendicitis; for the poor ern campaign for "socialized medicine" their work that was unprecedented in 'nsanitV, delirium tremens, rheumatism and or compulsory health insurance had be- any age. Medicine was the model profes- gall-stones ... fatten the thin, thin the fat; stimulate the depressed, depress the stimulat- gun, and for many decades organized sion. and public opinion polls from the ed; cure the sick, sicken the cured; but above medical groups opposed any change in 1930's to the 1950's consistently con- all, keep them alive or you won't get your the structuring and financing of health firmed that physicians were among the money. care delivery (14). All parties to the most highly admired individuals, compa- But in those same early years of the 20thcontroversy,however,contu.3edto rable to or better than Supreme Court century, the tradition of doctor baitingagree that medical care was highly desir- justices (1). Highbrow and mass media tended to die out as the golden age ofable, commentators alike associated medical medicine dawned. Whereas the post- While many public figures attackeu practice with the "miracles" of science 1950's resurgence of criticism that culmi-theAmericanMedicalAssociation and mate few adverse comments on the nated in Ivan Illich's Medical Nemesis(AMA) and state and local medical profession (2). By the 1970's, however, (8) recalled traditional themes such as groups for their political activities, the statesmen of medicine were writing un- physician greed, pretension,?ridimposi-public image of scientific medicine im- happily about being "deprofessiona- tion, the later critics were also respond-proved constantly (15). By the 1940's lized" in the wake of attacks by articu- ing to new and untraditional characteris- virtually everyone had heard of miracle late and knowledgeable critics, attacks tics of both medical practice and Ameri- drugs and many people knew that they that by 1981 were reflected specifically can society (9). Moreover, the few par- owed their lives to them. As writer Eve- in substantial mistrust of the profession ticular criticisms that survived in the lyn Barkins (16) observed in 1952, "Most among the public at large (3, 4). One can golden age helped shape and define the patients are as completely under the sup- conduct a historical postmortem of this new deluge. posedly scientific yoke of modern medi- unexpected turn of events by examining cine as any primitive savage is under the changes in direct public depreciations of superstitious serfdom of the tribal witch the medical profession, using the differ- Evolution of the Medical Image doctor." ent kinds and levels of criticism of Ultimately, however, the socialized M.D.'s as indicators of what happened. During the 19th century, physiciansmedicine debates undermined public The attitudes of leaders and shapers of seeking to professionalize their callingconfidence in medicine as a profession. opinion and of the public toward physi- were fair game for hostile comment, withThe heavily financed publicity cam- cians did not translate directly into the quacks and sectarians on one side andpaigns undertaken in the name of the behavior of patients. For economic and the practitioners' actual therapeutic im-AMA generated political statements that social reasons, amounts of money spent potence on the other. Some aristocratsfew people could takseriously and by Amcricans on medicine continued toof medicine and the medical ideal theyraised questions about the claims of increase dramatically even when atti- represented did enjoy high prestige, but members of the profession acting in sci- tudes changed. But, as was revealed most (often deservedly) did not. Occa-entific and clinical roles (17, 18). Even both by polls and by a resurgence ofsionally, antimedical diatribes based on before World War II the evident social alternativesto conventionalmedical these earlier struggles persisted after the insensitivity of physician groups suctras practice, over time the critics not only 1890's, along with other anachronisms the AMA tended to tarnish the doctor as affected doctors' sensibilities but also like attacks on the germ theory of dis- a public figure, and many people began demonstrably damaged the social credi- ease. But by and large, in the wake ofto associate the physician with another bility of the profession as a whole (4, 5). medical, and particularly surgical, suc-familiar stereotype, the small business- Since public acceptance is necessary for cesses, publicity about the professionman, who was presumably not only a profession to function, the criticism was favorable, and leaders of the Ameri-grasping but slightly dishonest (19). As had tangible effects. can medical profession succeeded by the one writer of the early 1940's observed A long and honorable tradition of deni- early 20th century in their campaign toof organized medicine, its "social out- grating doctors was known to Aristopha- persuade the public to want and expect nes and Mo litre and continued to flour- uniformly well-trained, well-paid physi- ish in 19th-century America (6). As late The author is professor of history and lecturer in cians who themselves set standards of psychiatry. The Ohio State University. Columbt:F as 1908 a set of satirical "Medical inax- practice (10-12). 43210. .153 148

look turns out to be... scarcely distin- sion. An early and exemplary effort was shove came is not certain. In the third guishable from that of a plumber's that of the California Medical Associa- quarter of the 20th century there were no union"(20).Indeed, the actions of phy- tion, which conducted a double program. fewer than 20 investigations of the New sician groups caused the Supreme Court First, California M.D.'s made medical York City health system, and in 1966, in 1943 officially to refuse to recognize care available (but on their own terms; to after it was clear that the medical profes- doctors' professional claims and instead answer complaints about access to it. sion was in trouble, journalist Martin to find physician groups, including theSecond, and more important, they car- Gross(31)traced the new criticism to the AMA, guilty of restraint of "trade"(21) ried out a campaign to protect the public first of these investigations in the cultur- Beginning in the 1940's, a number ofby hearing complaints against four types al center of the country(32).In 1%5 an reformers within the medical profession of abuses: (i) malprz.ctice; (ii) "unneces- anonymous writer inConsumer Reports worked to expose inferior medicalprac- sary or incompetent procedures"; (iii) (33)dated modern criticism from the tice and upgrade medicine toa level excessive fees; and (iv) unethical acts of publication of a study conducted in 1956 appropriate for the age of penicillin andphysicians. All over the United States in which investigators actually rated high technology. Some of the self-criti- grievance committees of local medical physicianperformance.Perhapsthe cism revealed through these efforts was societies tried to adjust physician-patient most important date was 1958, when repeated by the general press. The com-disputes and effect some of the profes- Richard Carter'sThe Doctor Business bination of internal criticism and exter- sional self-policing so notoriously absent (25), the first of a number of muckraking nal distrust eventually had a negative theretofore(24-26). books, appeared. Carter's exposé and effect, just as the social environment for Grievance committees were, in fact, others that followed it drew heavily on all professions turned from favorable tobut one facet of a major attempt ofboth public investigations and exposés unfavorable. reformer physicians to get each practi- that members of the profession had writ- tioner to emphasize and upgrade his or ten for internal professional purposes. her personal relationships with patients. Whatever the source, clearly adverse The End of the Golden Age The doctors set out to fight bad public criticism had entered a novel phase by relations as one did syphilis, one case at the end of the 1950's, reflecting and also The rare public doubters of the medi- a time but with a cumulative effect(27). creating new axial circumstances within cal profession in the late 1940's and early California M.D.'s in 1951 employed the which physicians practiced. 1950's gradually increased in number.psychologist Ernest Dichter to suggest Indignant lay writers and reforme* By 1954, Herrymon Maurer, writing inhow each practitioner should manage his M.D.'s shared an elevated opinion about Fortune,could cite a series of sensation-or her patients. Every encounter be- what physicians ought to be. They were, al articles in mass media magazines at-tween a physician and patient is, of wrote a journalist in 1954 (34), supposed tacking no ottiymoneymaking butcourse, an intensely and unabashedly to be part of a double picture:on the incompetence in medicalpractice. narcissistic experience for the patient one hand, a group of dedicated and Maurer's article was entitled, "The and therefore eminently suitable for psy- white-coated scientists, bending over M.D.'s are off their pedestal"(22).A chologicalmanipulation. A patient's testtubes and producing marvelous few more years had to pass, however, -ipes about high fees, for example, may cures for various ailments, and, on the before the number of recriminationsmask a real grievance related to some other, equally dedicated practitioners of reached the threshold that marked thepersonal slight inflicted by the doctor. medicine and surgery, devoting them- end of an era. Psychological studies and systematic re- selves to easing pain and prolonging hu- Despite the ineptitude of the cam-search on patients, analogous to con- man life, without thought of personal paigns against socialized medicine, the sumer surveys, both gave specificity to gain and at considerable self-sacrifice." public image of the physician per se was concerns about the individual doctor-Both the public and the profession, he very favorable in the proscientific postpatient relationship and helped inspire noted, were beginning to notice substan- World War II period. This image was and shape programs to improve such tial deviations from this widely held ideal reflected, for example, in the activities of relationships(26, 28).As an osteopath and to become filled with "disillusion- Dr. Kildare (a stereotype later known asconcluded in 1955, the trust of every ment ... tinged with a bitterness which Marcus Welby, M.D.) wha moved from patient had to be gained in order to breeds public hostility" (34). Other ob- the novel and motion picture to the tele- overcome the belief that medicine was servers traced the rising level of adverse vision screen. Physicians showed up inemphasizing business and quantity rath- comment to unrealistic hopes. As the over half of 800 Hollywood films sur-er than service or quality (29). The popu- 1950's ended, columnist Dorothy veyed in 1949 and 1950. But in only 25 lar press also soon reflected the medicalThompson summarized for readers of instances was the doctor portrayed as a campaigns, elements of which were fa-the Ladies' Home Journal this growing bad person, and when he was bad there miliar from earlier AMA publicity favor- public criticism of American physicians. were often extenuating circumstances. ing the old family doctor as opposed toThere was bad hospital care, there were He was almost never a humorous char- the cold, impersonal specialist. By 1959 bad doctors, and there were excessive acter, either(23). an article inLifewas popularizing this medical costs. But she went on to note Around 1950 many physician organi- idea, portraying physicians favorably but dr.: cause (35): zations across the country began system- stillstrongly emphasizing how mvch atic campaigns to reduce the number ofthey needed to add sympathy to their In a rather profound sense the current attacks legitimate complaintsofthepublic science(30). on the medical profession compliment it. Peo- against physicians. Leaders in the pro- At the same time that physicians were ple, it seems. expect more of physicians than fession had concluded that actual experi- work; ; on their public relations in the they do of other professional men with the ences of everyday Americans with medi- 1950's, overt popular indictments were possible exception of the clergy. The medical cal care were the source of much of the profession has invited that expectation. and in pushing the profession off the "pedes- the opinion of this writer. and with exceptions antipathy directed toward the profes- tal." Exactly where and when the final that only prove the rule. has deserved it. 154 149

In later decades, as America's.; came to medical care they are getting" (37). in the patient and his family," "Inability expect the medical profession to furnish What eventually transformed the criti- to get a doctor in cases of emergency," comfort, happiness, and well-behaved cism was the addition of another ingredi-"Waiting time in doctors' offices," and children as well as health, the disillusion- ent from society as a whole: widespreadother such items reflecting the continu- ment grew. anti-institutional sentiment along with a ing demand for personal attention (41). general disillusionment with many as- The only other conspicuous categories of pects of American life (38). Among the complaint had to do with fees and failure Adapting to Change target institutions were the profess,. s, to communicate with the patient. Only particularly professions based on exper- in later decades did the demand for com- Since ancient times, criticsand thetise. In the mid-I950's writers in the petence become very conspicuous (4, public at large--have usually discrimi- highbrow and mass began to paint 42). nated sharply between their own person- negative or at least ambivalent images of It is against this background of empha- al physicians, who command profession- many American institutions that in the sis on the sacerdotal function of medical al trust, and the medical profession as a 1940's ha" been beyond reproach: the personnel that the great constant of criti- whole, which does not and which iscity, the automobile, the large family cism, greed, has to be viewed. Greed on susceptible to harsh judgments (36). In and the doctor. In making their unfavor-the part of a physician violated a sacer- the mid-20th century, however, doubtsable remarks about doctors, varioisdotal stereotype because most Amon- about medicine in general or "the doc- kinds of public commentators drew from cans expected that under ideal circum- tor" intensified so much that even per-both past and then current concerns to stances a physician was a dedicated pro- sonal professional trust was often im- focus on three aspects of the physician'sfessional who provided a service be- paired, especially when a patient could function: the priest!! , or sacerdotal role;cause theservice was needed, not not get the attention that he or she want- the technical role; and the role of thebecause it was profitable (43). Greed ed. Critics at all levels who started by physician as a member of the health care showed up earlier as a concern in attacks blaming the system, particularly the clin- system. on quackery, fee-splitting, and then, to a ic and hospital,inadvertently raised small .extent, physician financial interest questions about the M.D.'s who collabo- in laboratory and drug store enterprises rated in the faulty operation of the insti- The Sacerdotal Role (44). But it was only after physicians had tutions. in general substantially increased their As professionals, physicians always In the first half of the 20th century,incomes that critics fastened on the evi- functioned in part on the social level.when medical intervention was becom-dent wealth rather than specific fees of When, inthe20thcentury,major ing increasingly effective, such critics as M.D.'s ac evidence of unseemly grasp- changes occurred in the immediate social there were tended to concentrate not on ing. This recent phase had to wait for the context within which medicine operated, the technical role of physicians but ondevelopment of what David Horrobin the profession did not adapt quickly in their priestly functioning as they wenthas called "the politics of envy" in the either the formalities of practice or the through medical ceremonies and acted as late 20th century (45, 46). self image it produced. One of the major wise and trusted personages. In this pre- That physician greed was a constant in new forces was the startling increase ofoccupation, commentators reflected ba-criticism meant that even in the recent chronic (as opposed to acute) diseases assic popular attitudes. In novels, for ex- period, when technical as well as priestly the dominant concern in prac:ice. A sec- ample, despite the shift of physicianperformance in medicine was again sub- ond new force was the growt1- of huge characters from priest!y and scholarlyject to question, the motive that critics bureaucraticinstitutions.pal tkuiar ly roles to scientific, their most ;inpoitant identified in errant physicians was avari- hospitals, in the regular health care sys-dutiesstillcentered on nonphysicalciousness. Why else would a rational tem. A third force was the greatly in- problems and relationships (39). Regard- M.D. commit undesirable acts and re- creased sophistication of consumers. less of the passing of the old-fashionedduce the quality of the medical care that And a fourth was the rise of psychologi-family doctor, there was a well-under- he was delivering? And in the continuing cal explanations for illness, leaving thestood public demand for a sympathetic socialized medicine controversy, when physician dealing with the uncertainties personal relationship such as that fur-the physician as entrepreneur was an of psychosomatics. All of these changes nished by the idealized country practi-issue, greed was, again, imputed to med- were well under way before the 1950's, tioner. "His successors have much to ical advocates of laissez-faire (47). and each helps to explain what happened learn from hiln," observed an editorial One area in which the public could and to the golden age of medicine. writer in a typical comment as early asdid react to physicians in their non- Critics and reformers outside the pro- 1908. "At all events they must learn totechnical roles was indifference to pa- fession were also slow to respond to the be men, not merely scientists" (40). Andtients, epitomized in the contrast be- changed situation. Carter's The Doctoreven as the socializer, medicine debatetween house calls and clinic or hospital Business (25), for instance, was targeted heated up, the impersonal system ratherpractice.Personal attention was the chiefly on the fee-for-service organiza- than individual M.D. performance wastheme of the solo practice advocates tion of medicine, and at most only a the subject of adverse comment. both inside and outside the profession. It quarter of the volume was devoted to In all of the criticism during the goldenwas the chief complaint of detractors of actual faults in health care. Even in 1960age, the emphasis on priestly personal specialization, before and after the late in perhaps the most crucial of the new functions of the physician, as opposed to 1950's.It was the object of the local critical publications, The Crisis in Ameri- effectiveness or even competence, isgrievance coma, tees set up after World can Medicine, the authors still ten led to striking. As late as the 1950's, lists ofWar II. And it was the ubject of studies emphasize the economics of medicine common criticisms to which physiciansafter mid-century by members of a new even while recognizing that "Millions of were sensitive included most prominent-subspecialty, medical sociologists. people are bitterly dissatisfied with the "A :allure to take a persona, interest In an era of high technology, when the 1.i5 150

secrets of medicine became increasingly intoxication, acidosisall are forgotten., an' trot. Such developments grew out of the gall bladder is now the undisputed belle of inaccessible and incomprehensible to the distrust of the intentions and andcus- public, responsiveness to the patient re- the body. For a medical man it has all the lure an' emotional appeal of a Swinburne poem, a toms of the medical profession. mained the one aspect of practice by Ziegfeld chorus or a moonlight party in Holly- Attention to thesocialaspects of which most people could judge the M.D. wood. medicine was the qualitative characteris- By the 1960's, cai,e histories of patient tic that most clearly differentiated de- mistreatment on a social, not technical, By the 1960's and 1970's critics weretractor;, of medicine before and after the saying that, rs one of them put it, medi- level were standard in the growing litera- 1950's. More recent critics not only de- ture of criticism. But the critics whocal faddism reflected "the underlyingcried the monopoly and maldistribution wanted atttention and care from the phy- bias of the technological mindset and itsof medical care but also loaded physi- activity orientation. sician still did not usually specify what . that newer mustcians with responsibility for any number be better and that doing more must be the care consisted of until well into the of social transgressions: expl''ing me- age of malpractice suits (43). better than doing less; hence the possi-nials, failing to provide locives for bilityof harmisalways a secondimproving health care delivery, encour- thought .." (51). By this time, then, aging unnecessary bLreaucracies,in- The Technical Role deliberate risk had been added to lack ofcreasingly setting arbitrary boundaries to knowledge and skill. Moreover, the pub-illness, ignoring "positive" health, and Although the technical performance of lic ultimately developed a very high levelin general, to use the term of the leading the physician called forth little adverse of distrust of what critics had been char-critic, Mich, "medicalizing" the whole comment before the1950's, both theacterizing as excessive use of drugs andsociety to the detriment of individual application of medical science and the surgery (4). dignity and well being (8). individual competence of the M.D. in applying it had earlier been traditional and continuing subjects of recrimination.The Social Role Kept alive for a time in the campaign The Erosion of Professional Status against obviously incompetent nonphysi- Beyond the priestly and technical re- clan quacks, the theme of pretension andquirements of medical practice, one of Physicians have always been sensitive ineffective treatment continued to be anthe well-understood demands society to criticism (53). For half a century they issue in occasional attacks on unneces-makes of any professionals in granting were relatively free from public censure sary surgery. Remarkable, however, wasthem special status has been that theiror actual interference in clinical and pro- the fact that one type of criticism, that activities be harmless to society (this isfessional activities, and they enjoyed directed toward the laziness, negligence, one reason that advertising, for example,great public and personal admiration. and incompetence of M.D.'s, remainedcannot qualify as a profession). The tra-Few people other than doctors knew largely undeveloped for over half a cen-ditional issue of whether the monopolyabout iatrogenic disease or the placebo tury. There were a few stories about granted physicians was or was not anti-effect. Criticismand lack of itreflect- outright malpractice, and there were sug-social became a crucial one in the 20th ed both the impression conveyed in pub- gestions (usually made by M.D.'s tryingcentury. The reorganizers of American lic about the miracles of medicine and to upgrade the profession, that manymedicine at the turn of the century took the persistence of the sacerdotal role of physicians were not keeping up withpains to show that the newly licensed the physician, demanded by the public at scientific literature (49). But no rash ofmonopoly, "the medical trust," as early all levels. But the physician as priest was damaging exposés appeared until aftercritics characterizedit, that outlawed already in some trouble by the 1930's. the 1950's. quacks and sectanans and vested licen- Attacks on impersonal specialism and on One dark side of the physician as sure in the profession, was in the publicwell-meaning social reformers' attempts technologist was the fear that practition-interest (52). to spread the technical benefits of medi- ers would impose too much medicine, Medical leaders succeeded in winning cine through prepayment (that is, insur- not only forcing inoculations and surgery the public's trust and approval (11). Not ance) and institutionalreorganization on unwilling persons but, indeed, using even the failure of the self-policing that laid a basis for doubts about the whole patients for experimental purposes. Inwas a direct (though not essential) con- profession. Demand fc r a priest was still the 1920's, Sinclair Lewis's Arrowsmith comitant of the monopoly elicited much intense, as surveys even in the 1950's helped keep this traditional fear alive, comment before the 1960's. Only insofar showed, but the profession in general but the physician as scientist who im-as physicians as a group failed to take was by then set in place to be the object posed on patients in the nail., of tech- positive action to provide medical careof a more general social attack. This nique remained largely a literary figure.for all who wanted it, or as medicalattack portended the end of generous For decades, serious critics restrictedgroups opposed institutional arrange-funding for medical research and the end themselves to the impersonality of the ments designed to improve and extend of such extremes of freedom of action as specialist, not his mania for medical in-medical care, did criticism fall on the professionals might aspire to (54). tervention and innovation. Lay commen- monopoly. Then, attribution of greed to Commentators with a sense of the tators, in fact, tended to write about fads physicians was one aspect of the accusa-tragic, or even just of the ironic, can find in medicine in terms of progress and totion, but so also was conservatism, in the 20th-century physician ample jus- ignore the discarded fashions. Publicistswhich was a characteristic of other mo-tification for their views. As sociologist who did discuss faddism did so gently,nopolies that consistently drew criticism Eliot Freidson pointed out at the begin- like the 1928 humorist in Collier's whoin modern America. It was not until thening of the 1960's, conflict between pa- commented (50), 1960's and 1970's that new, well-educat- tient and physician was inevitable be- ed groups tried to break the monopoly by cause the function of the physician was An' now it's the gall bladder. Doctors are mad developing new kinds of "health careto apply general knowledge to a particu- over it. 'The appendix, tonsils, teeth, auto- deliverers" and by introdecing lay con-lar individual, the patient (55. p.175).

1?? 151 Applying knowledge involved trying to imperfect, but by the traditional family Sociol. 70, 286 (1964); A. Tyree and B. G. Smith, Soc. Forces 56, 881 (1978). control the patient, and the patient in doctor. By the 1960's and 1970's physi- 6. R. H. Shryock, Ann. Med. Hist., n.s. 2, 308 turn was interested in controlling his or (1930). cians were complaining not only of lack 7. Anonymous, Life 52, 196 (1908). her destiny(26).In attempting to maxi- of deference but of lay interference and 8. 1. Mich, Medical Nemesis: The Expropriation of Health (Random House. New York, 1976). mize the client-professional trust that assaults on professional privileges. The 9. The most delightful example is E. Berman, The would permit patients to yield control, politics of envy were building in new Solid Gold Stethoscope (Macmillan, New York, 1976). physicians emphasized the validity ofways upon traditions of criticism that 10. J. Duffy, The Healers: The Rise of the Medical their scienceand in so doing created a had been muted in the first half of the Establishment (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1976); J. Am. Med. Assoc. 260, 136 (1967); M. R. sophisticated public. That public in turn 20th century but had not died. Kaufman, Mt. SinaLl. Med. N. Y. 43, 76 k.)76); became increasingly competent to ex- G. H. Brieger, New Physician 19, 845 (1970); B. Rosenkiantz, Proc. Int. Congr. Hist. Sci. 14, pose shortcomings of the profession and 113 (1974); J. S. Haller, American Medicine in Transition. 1840- 1910 (Univ. of Illinois Press, to react when physician reformers spoke Conclusion Urbana, 1981). out about their colleagues' failures(56). II. J. G. Burrow, Organized Medicine in the Pro- gressive Era: The Move Toward Monopoly "I wrote about ... abuses and asked for The golden days of the medical profes- (Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1974). changes," wrote District of Columbia sion car L.; defined by the -mount and 12. Med. Rev. Rev. 23, I (1917); B. Sicherman, in Nourishing the Humanistic in Medicine, W. R. internist Michael J. Halberstam in the the content of criticism that the profes- Rogers and D. Barnard, Eds. (Univ. of Pitts- mid-1970's. "And now changes are com-sion receivedwhat little adverse com- burgh Press, Pittsburgh, 1979), p. 95. The famous criticismsintheFlexner Report [A. ing, but alas ... they willprobably be ment there was, was often to the effect Flexner, Medical Educationin the United the wrong ones"(2). States and Canada (Carnegie Foundation, New that highly desirable professional ser- York, 1910)) were aimed at diploma mills, not One of the major results of the new vices were insufficiently available or that well-trained M.D.'s; the report spoke for, not against, the profession. criticism of the 1960's and 1970's, inphysicians had lapsed from their sacer- 13. F. A. Walker, Bull. Hist. Med. 53, 489 (1979). which the technical as well as the sacerdotal roles. In both cases the critics 14. The group practice and socialized medicine controversy has been widely researched and is not dotal function of the physician came into tended to fasten on the old theme of the covered in the present article. Standard sources question, was therefore a series of de-doctor whose greed overcame his more include S. Kelley, Jr., Professional Public Rela- tions and Political Power (Johns Hopkins Press, mands for greater patient participation in professionallydisinterestedconcern. Baltimore, 1956), pp. 67-1)6; J. G. Burrow, the medical relationship, demands exac- AMA: Voice of American I ledicine (Johns Hop- The practice of medicine always in- kins Press, Baltimore, 1963); E. Rayack, Profes- erbated by a resurgence of romantic indi- volved M.D.'s in ambivalent relation- sional Power and American Medicine: The Eco- (57, nomics of the American Medical Association vidualism in the culture as a whole ships with both individual patients and (World, Cleveland, 1967); D. S. Hirshfield, The 58).By 1972 one analyst(59)could addsociety, and high-status professionals Lost Reform: The Campaign for Compulsory Health Insurance in the United States from 1932 to the "engineering" and "priestly"who could not or would not respond to to1943 (Harvard Univ. Press, Ca.-nbridge, models of health care and delivery twopatients' personal and selfish concerns Mass., 1970); R. Harris, A Sacred Trust (New American Library, New York, 1966), R. Num- more, the "collegial" and the "contrac-of course generated complaints and bers, Almost Persuaded: American Physicians tual." Both of these last models involvedcould even become both personal and and Compulsory Health Insurance, 1912-1920 (Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1978). patient participation and were flourish-social scapegoats (63). But it was the 15. D. W. Blumhagen, Ann. Intern. Med. 91, III ing in various settings(59). continuing (1979). politicsof thesocialized 16. E. Harkins, Are These Our Doctors? (Fell, New Insofar astheentiresociety wasmedicine debate that first planted the York, 1952), pp. 171-172. See also a popular work, D. G. Cooley, The Science Book of Won. moving toward social leveling, the high seeds of major and pervasive mistrust. der Drugs (Franklin Watts, New York, 1954). status necessary for professional author-When, after World War II, physicians 17. M. J.Gaughan, thesis, Boston University (1977). ity was being eroded throughout most ofthemselves spoke out to increase the 18. For a famous contemporary comment, see B the century (55, p.187).By the 1960'sbeneficent results of medicine and up- DeVoto, Harper's Mag. 202, 56 (1951). 19. A. M. Lee, Psychiatry 7, 371 (1944). even the popular image of the physiciangrade the profession in the direction of 20. W. Kaempffert, Am. Mercury 5i, 557 (1943). as portrayed on television reflected a 21. American Medical Association v United States, the professional ideal, they unwittingly 317 U.S. Reports 519; P. S. Ward, unpublished change from a charismatic figure, whoopened the door for the latter-day critics paper read at American Association for the History of Medical Meetings, Pittsburgh, May used mysterious powers to resolve prob-who attacked not only priestly preten- 1978. lems, to a new type of hero, one withsion but technical performance. The in- 22. H. Maurer, Fortune (FebruaN 1954), p. 138. 23. R. R. Malmsheimer, thesis. University of Min- only ordinary endowments and who po-fluence of these critics combined with nesota (1978); "Doctors as Hollywood sees tentially could behave unheroically(60) them," Sci. Digest (October 1953), p. 60; J other social forces in movements that in Spears, Films Rev. 6, 437 (1955); E. H. Vincent, But as early as the 1930's the sociolo-the 1960's and 1970's tended to impair Q. Bull. Northwest. Univ. Med. Sch. 24, 305 gists, who surveyed Muncie, Indiana, as (1950). the trust and freedom that had once 24. J. Hunton, GP 4, 110 (1951). "Middletown" had commentedthat marked medical practice(64). 25. R. Carter, The Doctor Business (Doubleday, New York, 1958), pp. 235-238. physicians, and lawyers, too, were in- 26. L3. Risse, in Responsibility in Health Care, G. creasingly less visible as independent Ref tones and Notes J. Agich, Ed (Reidel, Dordrecht, in press). 27. R. W. Elwell,)hro State Med. J. 46, 581 (1950). community leaders. Older physicians I. G. H. Gallup, The Gallup Poll: Public Opinion, 28. R. Waterson and W. Tibbits, GP 4, 93 (October continued to be aware of a change, but 1935-1971 (Random House, New York, 1972), 1951); M. Amrine, Am. Psychol. 13, 248 (1958). pp. 1152 and 1779-1780. For a summary of the research, see S. Green- few could cite convincing detail as did J. 2. M. J. Halberstam, Prism (JulyAugust 1975), p berg, The Troubled Calling. Crisis in the Medi- A. Lundy of Worcester, Massachusetts, 15. Halberstam's is a casual observation; the cal Establishment (Macmillan. New York, literature contains no general surveys of the 1965), chap. 4. who in 1952 recalled the time when changing fortune of the physician in American 29. New York Times (16 October 1955), p. 72. townspeople customarily tippedtheir organs of information and opinion in the last 30. Life (12 October 1959), p. 144, M. Austin, Look century, and not even the Reader's Guide has (15 March 1949), p. 34. hats to the physician(61).Another per- been systematically exploited for information 31. M. L. Gross, The Doctors (Random House, about the place of physicians in American socie- New York, 1966), 7. ceived sign of erosion of the physician's ty. Sociologists' work on their medical contem- 32. R. R. Alford, Health Care Politics: Ideological place was the fact that patients felt in- poraries dates only from mid-century. and Interest Group Barriers to Reform (Univ of 3. F. J. Ingelfinger, N. Engl. J. Med. 294, 335 Chicago Press, Chicago, 1975), p. 22. R. Bayer creasingly free to shop around for an (1976). [Homosexuality and Amt.:can Psychiatry The M.D. who suited them(62).The loss was 4. American Osteopathic Association, A Survey of Politics of Diagnosis (Basic Books, New York, Public Attitudes Toward Medical Care and 1981), p. 101 maintains that the public attack on felt not by the technically oriented spe- Medical Professionals (American Osteopathic psychiatry prefigured the attacks on medicine as cialist whose bedside manner might be Associatwn, Chicago. 1981). an institution. 5. R. W. Hodge, P. M. Siegel, P. H. Rossi, Am J. 33. Consumer Reports (March 1965), p. 146

1Fi7e. 152

34. B. McKelway,Med. Ann. D.C.23, 457 (1954). 44. For a particularly good example of the restricted 55. E. Freidson,Patients' Views of Medical Prac- 35. D. Thompson,Ladies' Home Journal(April criticism, see an anonymous editorial, "Unpro- ticeA Study of Subscribers to a Prepaid Medi- 1959), p. 11, Later, television productions great- fessional conduct,"J. Med. Soc. N.J.26, 326 cal Plan in the Bronx(Russell Sage Foundation, lyy unrealisticexpectations;G. (1929). In the present discussion I treat the New York, 1961). et al., N. Engl. J. Med.315, 901 explicit content of the criticism and do not 56. T. H. Stubbs,Emory Univ.Q. 3, 137 (1947). (1981). utilize the suggestion that complaints about fees 57. D. Nelkin,Daedaius117, 191 (1978). 36. A striking modern survey, showing the general- were substituted for expressing other griev- 58. E. Dichter (N.Y.State J. Med.54, 222 (1954)] is ity of the phenomenon in all segments of the ances. an important example. population, is Ben Galin & Associates,What 45. 1). F. Horrobin,Medical Hubris: A Reply to59. R. M. Veatch,Hastings Cent. Rep.2, 5 (June, AmericansThink of the Medical Profes- Ivan Mich(Eden, Montreal, 1977), p. 27. Ironi- 1972). sion ... , Report on a Public Opinion Survey cally, high income was or.e of the factors that 60. B. Myerhoff and W. R. Larson,Hum. Organ. (American Medical Association, Chicago, 1955). contributed to physicians' high prestige (5). Cigh. Bull.24, 188 (1964). 37. M. K. Sanders, Ed., TheCrisis in American 46. P. Starr(Daedalus WI,175 (1978)) suggests that 61. J. A. Lundy,N. Engl. J. Med.246, 446 (1952). Medicine(Harper, New York, 1961), p. vii. this type of criti-ism did not appear conspicu- 62. R. S. Lynd and H. M. Lynd,Middletown in 38. R. C. Maulitz, unpublished paper. ously untilafter publicity about Medicaid Transition: A Study in Cultural Conflicts(Har- 39. A. J. Cameron, thesis, University of Notre abuses. court, Brace, New York, 1937), p. 427n; J. Dome (1713). especially p. 157. 47. Stupidity was also an issue, being part of the Kasteler, R. L. Kane, D. M. Olsen, C. Thetford, 40.NetrYorkTimes(21 August 1908), p. 6. An early argument that a reorganized, socialized physi- J. Health Soc. Behay.17, 328 (1976); F. W. survey of patients (E. L. Koos, Am. cian would be better off economically. Mann, J.Maine Med. Assoc.16, 137 (1925). .11,g(btlafealth45, 1551 (1955)] showed that 48. For example, D. B. Smith and A. D. Kaluzny,63. N. Y. Hoffman,J. Am. Med. Assoc.225, 58 the young modem ts as well as the old The White Labyrinth: Understanding the Orga- (1972). Another dimensionunchanging pop who had, for , actually seen house calls, nization of Health Care(McCutchan, Berkeley, culture and the dangerous remoteness of the responded negatively to impersonality in prac- 1975). scientistis not explored in this present article; tice. There were probably also changes in the 49. R. S. Halle, in an article entitled "Unfit doctors see G. Basalla, inScience and Its Public: The social expectations for the "sick" role; see, for must go"(Scribner's Mag. 98,514 (1931)), dealt Changing Relations*,G. Holton and W. H. example, E. Kendall,Harper's Mag.219, 29 entirely with clear cases of malpractice; and H. Blanmed, Eds. (Reidel, Dordrecht, 1976), p. (1959). M. Robinson(Am. Mercury38, 321 (1936)] 261. 41. J. T. T. Hundley,Va. Med. Mon. 79,540 (1952); blamed lawyers, patients, and unrealistic expec-64. R. Branson,Hastings Cent. Stud.1 (No. 17 E. Stanton, J.Maine Med. Assoc.45, 56 (1054). tations for a rash of lawsuits. (1973). 42. By 1957 patients were almost evenly divided in 50.Collier's(4 August 1928), p. 27. 65. A draft on this subject vas originally prepared in wanting most kindly attention or technical skills 51. L. Lander,Defective Medicine: Risk. Anger connection with National Endowment for the and results (getting better): G. G. Reader. L. and the Malpractice Crisis(Farrar, Straus & Humanities grant FP-0013-79-54 (Semin^r for Pratt, M. C. Mudd,Mod. Hosp.89, 88 (1957). Giroux, New York, 1978), p. 41. the Professions); the writing was supported in 43. No attempt is made in this article to deal directly 52. A. D. Bevan,Am. Med. Assoc. Bull.5, 243 part by a Special Research Assignment from with the issue of professionalization and profes- (1910). The Ohio State University. For suggestions, sional status; there is already a large special 53. 0. W. Anderson,Mich. Med.67, 455 (1968). thanks are due to members of the NEH seminar literature on the subject. 54. P. B. Hutt,Daedalus187, 157 (1978). and to K. J. Andrien and J. R. Bartholomew. for intelligenceprobably occurs frequently. Marital partners resemble each other in intelligence (at least as measured by IQ tests) because of assortative mating for this trait (/). While the exact contribution of heredit; to IQ remains unknown, most informed observers accept that genes contribute to the variabil- ity of IQ. Therefore, the elevated IQ levels observed on the average among offspring of intelligent parents are an example of genetic selection based on social customs. Such an assertion does not deny that there is a significant envi- The rapid Jevelopment of molecular Genetic Manipulation in the Past ronmental component under these cir- genetics and particularly the introduc- cumstances. However, even if the genet- tion of recombinant DNA technology Genetic manipulation is not a newic contribution to intelligence is relative- have elicited much interest among scien- development.Forseveralthousand small, assortative mating for IQ would tists, physicians, and the public in gener- years, human beings have attempted tobe expected to concentrate high IQ al. The realization that scientists might control their environment by infmencini.genes among the offspring of gifted cou- be able to manipulate the heredity notthe genetic characteristics of other spe ples. only of lower organisms but also of ourcies. The domestication of wild plants Human breeding by design for high own species has led to much soil search- and animals is an example of geneticintelligence was recently suggested by a ing. Some observers maintain that man- manipulation with the aim of producingCalifornia millionaire who arranged to kind is at the threshold of new powersbetter and more food. Other examples that are unlike any innovations ever use sperm from Nobel Prize winners in include the improvement of egg and milkthe sciences for artificial insemination of faced before. yields from domestic animals. The do-self-selectedvolunteer women. One Where do we stand? Scientists and mestication of dogs shows that even be- physicians need to be well informed would expect statistically that the off- havior has been manipulated genetically.spring of such a procedure would be about the current status of genetic ma- Hunting dogs, herding dogs, and watchmore intelligent than the average. No nipulation so as to be able to inform thedogs are only a few of the many kinds otherpredictionsregardingfuture publicregarding thescientificfacts thatwere produced purposefully by Sometimes incomplete knowledge and breeding for specific behavioral charac- The author is professor of medicine and gen lack of understanding of various issues interisticsa form of genetic manipula- and director of the Center for Inherited Diseases at this rapidly evolving subject have led totion. the "Jniversity of Washington. Seattle 98195. This article is based on a paper pub shed in German in unwarranted emotional reactions and ill- Genetic manipulation by design has Medtztn und GesellschaftEthic( he Verantortung advised resolutions designed to block therarely been practiced in our own species. und Arztlahes Handeln, G AMartini. Ed (Um- welt und Medizin. Frankfurt. 1982. ISBN 3-92 -i324- progress of investig2 ive activity. However, unplanned genetic selection 01 -51

158 153 achievements could be made. Presum-not particularly harmful except in limited The technology necessary to deter- ably. such voluntary private undertak- occupationalsettings.Therelativelymine the sequence of the component ings on a small scale would cause few high frequency of myopia and the needbases of DNA molecules has developed social problems and would have no sig- to wear eyeglasses represents loss of an rapidly(6).Other methodologicad- nificant effects on the human gene pool. adaptive biologic trait among civilized vances have made itpossible to se- However, attempts by governments to populations. Yet, in the absence of aquence the amino acids in proteins with control human breeding must be viewed nuclear holocaust that would relegatevery small quantities of material (7). with alarmparticularly since such ef- humans to a hunting and gathering exis-"Gene machines" that synthesize por- forts would interfere with civil liberties tence, myopia is a trait that can be welltions of genes or even whole genes al- and democratic ideals. The attempt by supported by modern societies. Indeed, ready exist(8).Such synthesized partial the Nazi government in Germany to in- the existence of myopia and other refrac- genes can be used as probes to isolate stitute breeding centers for selected Ar-tive errors has created an industry ofgenes of biologic interest (9). yan men and women illustrates an ill-ophthalmologists, opticians, and specta- What are the applications of the new conceived undertaking based on pseudo- cle frame makers. Analogously, in the biology and what problems do they scientific standards of race ideology anddistant future human beings might re- raise? retrogressive notions about individual quire injections and pills for a variety of rights and dignity. genetic infirmitiesa development that we currently view as unhealthy. Howev- Production of Enzymes and er, our descendants might consider this Protein by DNA Technology Indirect Manipulation of Human Genes state of affairs to be as "normal" as we consider the wearing of clothing or eye- Human genes that specify the synthe- Medical therapy and certain publicglasses today. Thus, the characterizationsis of biologically important substances health measures affect the human geneof human genetic traits as beneficial orcan be inserted 'ntr the DNA of micro- pool indirectly by preserving deleterious harmful depends entirely on the environ- biologic vectors, such as the intestinal genes that would otherwise be eliminat- ment in which the trait or traits operate. bacteriumEscherichia coli,where the ed. Thus, successful treatment of certain human DNA ! Aes integrated. The genetic diseases such as diabetes, hemo- small quantities l.i genetic material thus philia, immune deficiency, certain types The "New" Genetics introduced can be amplified by growing of congenital heart disorders, and others, the "engineered" microorganisms in cul- allows the bearers of defective genes to DNA has come to be recognized as the ture(10).The gene products manufac- have children. Some biologists and ge-genetic material in organisms as far apart tured by the manipulated human genes in neticists have warned about the "dys- as viruses and humans. The basis of life the microorganism can be collected. Hu- genic" effects of these practices, fearingon this planet is unitary and founded on man insulin already has been produced serious contamination of the human gene the DNA genetic code. The "dictio- in this manner and has been safely used pool with harmful genes that might ne- nary" of this genetic code is well worked in diabetes therapy. Other polypeptides cessitate a major expenditure by future out. Human hemoglobins have been use-such as human growth hormone and in- societies on treatment of the genetically ful for showing the effect of DNA muta- terferon are under production. Various infirm. tions on gene function(3).Study of vari- laboratories and companies plan to use While there is some formal merit inous genes has shown that the codingDNA technology to manufacture vac- such arguments, it is important to distin- sequences in the DNA (exons) are inter- cines and many other therapeutic and guish the human from other species(2). rupted by intervening sequences (in- diagnostic agents. In principle, any poly- Human beings have a unique brain thattrons) with yet unknown function. Be-peptide gene product could be synthe- allows "cultural inheritance," which,fore gene tr9nscripts consisting of RNA sized by the:' new methods. with the rapid dissemination of ideas, can be translated into proteins according What are the ethical problems? has facilitated our adaptation to a varietyto the genetic specification laid down by There was anxiety initially that genetic of environments. From a strictly biologic DNA, these introns need to be spliced manipulation ofE. colicould result in the viewpoint, the necessity for humans toout. Mutations affecting the coding se-creation of pathogenic bacterial strains wear clothes is a deleterious trait, in thatquences as well as the splicing mecha- that might cause mass epidemics( //, we lost the genes for hairiness that pro-nism can give rise to genetic diseases (3, 12).Similarly, it was feared that genetic tected us against the elements. Develop- 4). manipulation of certain human cell lines ment of the human brain enabled our The discovery of restriction enzymes might cause the spread of cancer (//, ancestors to devise the necessary protec- that cut DNA at specific base sequences 12).Scientists shared these fears with tion by the fabrication of clothes fromhas been a major development (5). Many the public and there was much alarm. It animal skins first, from agricultural prod- different restrictionenzymeseach was soon shown, however, that genetic uctslater,and fro...synthetic fiberssplitting DNA at different specific sites exchange between microorganisms was more recently. CIrdt making and clothhave been discovered. DNA that hasnot new and had occurred all along in wearing is a val cable part of humanbeen split by a given restriction enzyme evolution. Furthermore, it was demon- culture in all but the most primitive hu- can combine with any other DNA mole- strated that theE. colistrains created by man societies and therefore cannot becule cut by the same enzyme. It is there- the genetic engineers are so enfeebled considered a harmful trait in the humanfore possible to join DNA moleculesthat they represent no danger in out- context. from different sources to produce so- growingE. coilorganisms. Much addi- What about wearing eyeglasses? Incalled "recombinant DNA" consisting tional experimentation over the last few developed countries the wearing of eye- of parts of DNA from different species. years has suggested no unusual dangers glasses because of genetically condi- Speciesbarrierscanthereforebe of the new DNA technology. The initial tioned myopia or other refractive error isr:ossed. anxiety regarding the safety of genetic 1 Fi 9 154

manipulation has therefore receded, but sale because of their effect on commonthese innovations in DNA technology as itis important to understand that thediseases such as cancer and hyperten-well as by other advances in biochemical rather remote potential dangers were sion.Profitsderivedfromvaccines genetics. to detect susceptibility to and first described by highly reputable scien-against tropical diseases prevalentin provide early diagnoses of a variety of tists. Third World countries are likely to be hereditary diseases that currently cannot When the potential dangers of recom-much smaller than those obtained from be detected until they are clinically mani- binant DNA were first discussed, medi-widely sold products In developed coun- fest. Certain hemoglobinopathies can al- cal microbiologists who were experi- tries. Developing countries cannot afford ready be diagnosed prenatally by using enced in working with highly lethal hu-expensive biologicals. Such financial is-amniotic fluid cells aspirated by amnio- man microorganisms had not been fully sues distort the priorities of product de-centesis 1/9). Parents have the choice of consulted by the molecular biologists velopment in the commercial sector andabortion of fetuses affected with the ge- who were not accustomed to strict mi-require enlightened governmental finan-netic disease and may thus avoid the crobial containment in their work. It is cial aid. birth of an affected child. Although this unlikely thatmedicalmicrobiologists option is favored by many couples, it is would have raised the kind of fears sug- not acceptable to others for religious or gested by the molecular biologists. Simi- Genetic Techniques in Diagnosis of other reasons. larly,cancer epidemiologists had not Hereditary Disease If a predictive test is available. should been fully consulted in the early stages of it be applied to detect all family members safetydiscussions about recombinant The new DNA technology has shown that might be affected by a hereditary DNA. Some scientists now question that differences in DNA sequences af-disease? For example. an appropriate whether hypothetical, frightening sce-fecting the noncoding areas as well astest mig1d be developed for detecting narios that appear farfetched in retro-differences in the intervening sequences individuals at risk for Huntington's dis- spect should have been shared publicly. (introns) are common among individualsease. This neurologic disease does not Most observers agreethatscientists (/3).DNA variants of either type have usually become manifest until middle should not make important decisionsno known functional consequences in age. If a test were available, it would be that affect the public without full disclo-the expressed phenotype of the orga-possible to assure one-half of the chil- sure. Although the DNA safety issue, nism. but affect the length of DNA frag-dren of an affected parent that they because it dealt with the "stuff of life."' ments defined by a given restriction en- would never be affected. My general was alarming to many people, it stimulat- zyme. These variants are inherited by philosophyinsuchsituationsisto ed the inttrest of the public who there- Mendelian segregation and can be traced strongly urge patients to be tested if the fore became better informed. through families. Their laboratory deter- condition can be prevented or treated, In The new genetic technology has raised mination is not excessively difficult (13 situations where a positive test would problems of corporate control. The in- /5). If such a DNA variant is locatedonly provide knowledge but no further volvement by un versity scientists in in-close to a defective gene and if theoptions for medical or reproductive man- dustry may lead to less open exchange as defective gene cannot be tested for di-agement it may not be appropriate to scientists try to capitalize financially on rectly, the DNA variant may be used as a insist on testing. Huntington's disease is their findings. Secrecy may be necessary marker to infer the presence of the linked such an example. Some medical geneti- to allow a company a commercial advan- gene that causes disease.It has been cists, however, feel that if a reliable test tage in bringing a certain product to calculated that the visualization of 150 to is available it should be used to identify market, but in basic science departments 300 different DNA markers of this type all members of a kindred who are at risk this could throttle the open communica- randomly distributed over the 23 pairs offor developing the disease. Thus. indi- tion that led to those very developments human chromosomes would yield a suffi- viduals destined to get sick at a later date that can now be commercially exploited. cient number of specific landmarks on can order their lives and make appropri- The availability of ready money for com-each chromosome to allow detection ofate reproductive decisions, while those mercially valuable research also may dis- any disease-producing gene 03. 16). Di- free of the disease can continue thc:r tort research objectives. leading to possi- agnosis by DNA markers usually re-lives without undue anxiety. Rationally. ble neglect of basic research Universityquires study of the parents and of othersuch an approach mikes good sense, but administrators are eager to attract funds affected and unaffected family members. not every person wants to know. Should from industry at a time of decline in With this information itis possible to we not respect the right of the people to governmental grant support Such prob- assign the relationship of the DNA mark- privacy and their desire to remain uncer- lems are not entirely new, having been er gene to the disease gene by using thetain about their future health? If a testing faced by faculties of chemistry. pharma principles of conventional genetic link- program has been recommended. does a cy, engineering, and electronics in theage analysis. In a few cases. such as in family member have the right to stop the past. However. the engagement of basic sickle cell anemia, where the specific' program and thus prevent someone else biologists inindustrial applications IN mutation in the DNA IN already known. in the kindred from knowing his or her rather novel, since previously appliedcertain restriction enzymes that recog- susceptibility? scientists usually had been involved with nize the abnormal DNA sequence at the The clinical investigator and a;fected industry. mutant site can be used to demonstrate families might face a dilemma if a test for An ethical issue faced in relation to the the mutation directlywithout familyan untreatable, late-manifesting disease pharmaceutical industry is the under- study1171 Gene deletionsthat occur in appeared promising.If.additionally, standableinterestin manufacturing some wher hemoglobnopathies maypreventive management of such a dis- products with a potentially large market. also be. recognized directly by using theease became feasible. investigations of Drugs or biologicals for treating rare appropriate probes without family studythose who might later be affected would diseases are less likely to be developed 1/8). be required. The selection of such per- than those agents that will have a wide It may thus be possible. by means ofsons for study would then require the 100 155

disclosure of information about which at But when we learn more about the genet- have to be taken up by the abnormal least some individuals might rather have ics of personality and mental traits (21, target cell and integrated into its nucleus, remained ignorant. 24), new pronlems could arise. At pres- where it would have to remain and func- "Labeling" of individuals as carriers ent. there are few clearcut genetic data in tion normally. The expression of the for genetic disease occurred in the Unit- human behavioral gat-tics and there is introduced gene would have to be regu- ed States v hen genetic scree ling for the no way to apply this knowledge in the lated to produce appropriate amounts of sickling trait was introduced (20). Carri- foreseeable future. However, the recent gene product. The engineered cells as ers of the trait who never develop any claim that cognitive intelligence might be well as the total organisms would have to clinical problems were considered as predicted by evoked auditory or visual be unharmed by the procedure (26, 27). mildly affected by the public or even by responses (25) (that is. by presenting This scenario for gene replacement physicians who were unaware of the auditory or visual stimuli to an individual represents a new approach to somatic harmlessness of the carrier state for sit.k- and measuring certain brainwave re-therapy in that the procedure will not le hemcglobin. "Labeling" may be par- sponses) suggests that advances in thisaffect genes in the germ cells of the ticularly serious if a given genetic trait area may soon bring new problems. ovaries or testes of the patient, but will sometimes, but not always, has undesir- affect only the somatic cells that have able consequences. Acrimonious discus- been manipulated. Patients whose cells sions took place when studies of new- Gene Therapy have been engineered in this manner still borns were initiated to follow the devel- will carry the abnormal gene in their opmental and psychologic consequences The replacement of a defective genegonads and, if they are able to repro- of sex chromosome aberrations such as with its normal counterpart, if it were duce, will transmit the defective gene to XYY [for references, see (2I)]. Critics ofpossible, would be applicable only in some of their descendants according to these studies raised the specter of "self- monogenicdiseases where abnormal Mendelian principles. fulfilling prophecies" in view of earlyfunction of a major single gene is the Gene therapy of this type is therefore suggestions that the XYY state might principal cause of the disease. These conceptually no different from any thera- always be associated with criminal be- diseases, while numerous, are individ-py in medicine that attempts to improve havi'r a concept that turned out to be ually quite rare.It should be empha-the health of a sick patient. The only false. sized, however, that the technical prob- difference is that bNA, rather than other Occupational restriction might be in- lems allowing the practical use of gene biologicals, drugs, or surgery is used as stituted for genetic reasons. Certain indi- therapy have not yet oeen overcome.the therapeutic modality. This point is viduals may be at higher risk to toxic Gene therapyor genemanipulation important because some critics claim damage from specific chemicals because could probably not be carried out in that gene replacement represents a revo- of inherited enzyme variations. Genetic complex traits where many genes are lutionarydepartureinmedical treat- testing in industry has already been dis- involved in phenotypic determination. ment. In fact, gene therapy for diseased cussed (see (22)]. Trade unions have Thus, genetic manipulation would not be tissues is no different from any other criticized the introduction of such testing possible for traits such as skin color, hair therapy. Ni change in the genes of the because management might use the test- shape, personality, or intelligence. How-reproductive: organs is attempted. ing as pretext to avoid cleaning up ever, if one or several major genes were What 1s the current status of gene unhealthy industrialconditions.Itis the principal contributors to the varia- therapy? cheaper to exclude workers than to pro- tion of these traits, it might theoretically The best understoc-J. genetic system in vide healthy working conditions for ev- be feasible to manipulate them genetical- humans is the hemoglobin gene complex, eryone. In a related problem, an execu- ly. Currently, the nature and location ofand the most common monogenic genet- tive might be passed up for promotion if most genes affecting normal variation ofic disorders affect hemoglobin structure it became known that he carried the gene body structure and function are un- and function (3, 4). Sickle cell anemia for familial hypercholesterolemia with its known. and the various thalassemias cause se- high risk of premature heart attacks. The procedure used to replace a defec- vere anemia (3).Itis now technically Could one blame an industrial company tive gene is likely to be as follows. The feasible to produce normal or abnormal for such action? Do individuals who normal gene to be used for gene therapy human hemoglobin genes in the labora- know they carry such a gene have the will first be Isolated. After a small por- tory. Since hemoglobin is produced by right to withhold such information from tion of the diseased tissue; such as bone certain bone marrow cells (that can easi- employers? marrow cells, are removed from the pa- ly be aspirated in a routine manner), "Predictive medicine," thatis,the tient, the normal gene will be introduced normal isolated hemoglobin genes in the early detection of individuals at risk for a into the patient's cells containing theform of DNA can be added to the pa- specific disease, will become increasing- defective genes. The nuclei of the target tient's abnormal erythropoietic marrow ly possible with the new developments in marrow cells will be induced to take up cells. After the normal hemoglobin DNA DNA and genetic marker technology (22, the normal gene by means of a variety of has been taken up, the manipulated mar- 23) As public bodies assume a more techniques. The genetically manipulated row cells can be returned to the patient direct role in the health system in many cells will then be reintroduced into the where they are expected to proliferate countries, confidentiality may become patient. It is postulated that the manipu- and produce normal hemoglobin. A cure, eroded and genetic information may be lated cells would have an advantage over or at least a partial cure; by DNA thera- used by social and health planners to the genetically defective cells which they py might therefore ensue. assign individuals their niche in society. would perhaps ultimately replace, there- How does this mode of therapy con- As long as such knowledge only con- by curing the patient. Before any suchceptually compare with other new and cerns genes affecting variables of physi- the-apy could be successful, however, old treatments of the hemoglobinopa- cal health and as long as testing remains several conditions would have to be ful- tines? voluntary, society might be able to cope. filled t26). The trrnsplanted gene would Treatment of anemia by transfusion of 161 156

red cells is a well-recognized form of The timing of the introduction of a new perimenters. our current system of safe- therapy. Transfusion historically was the therapeutic modality depends on many guarding human subjects is clearly desir- first successful type of transplantation in factors. Observers with different medical able. But let us hope that this system will medicine, and few ethical arguments or scientific backgrounds might have dif- not inhibit imaginative new approaches have been raised against blood transfu- ferent views. The recent controversy in the prevention or treatment of human sions. A nt:w type of experimental thera- about the use of DNA therapy for two disease. py is bone marrow transplantation (28). patients with thalassemia major in Italy When the hemoglobin-producing cells of and Israel is illustrative (30). Ma iy sci- the bone marrow are genetically defec- entists felt that these attempts were pre- Genetic Manipulation of Fertilized Eggs tive, marrow of appropriate tissue type mature in the absence of full animal (so as to minimize cell rejection) from a experimentation. The U.S. investigator Some recent technical developments normal sib can be transplanted into the who attempted the therapy was a medi-may allow genetic manipulation of germ patient with hemoglobinopathy.Itis cally qualified scientist who maintained cells (32-38). In several experiments, hoped that the transplanted marrow cells that the patients had a life-threateningisolated genes were introduced into will proliferate normally and synthesize disease and that no meaningful alterna- mouse eggs shortly after fertilization the hemoglobin that the patient is not tive treatment was available. This inci- when the male's genetic contribution making properly. At least one case ofdent was further beclouded by long de-was still present as a distinctive pronu- thalassemia has already been successful- lays in decision-making by a human ex- cleus. When rabbit or human DNA cod- ly treated in this way (29). perimentation committee in the United ing for hemoglobin or some other protein No specialethicalargumentsare States that was considering the appropri- from a different speciesas injected into raised against bone marrow transplanta- ateness of the planned treatment. Before the mouse pronucleii, the foreign DNA tion except those that apply to all ofobtaining a ruling from this committee, could in some instances be detected in human therapeutic experimentation. A the investigator decided to carry out thethe mouse offspring that developed from further logical step in the treatment ofexperimental treatment in other coun-the fusion of the manipulated pronucleus hmoglobinopathies, that is, the use oftries. Permission by ethics committees and the egg's pronucleus. Some mice isolated normal hemoglobin genes rather abroad was obtained more rapidly, but,actually synthesized the protein coded than of entire donor cells to improvesince recombinant DNA (rather than aby the DNA of the donor species. In function of a patient's abnormal marrow nonrecombinant DNA technique as these cases. the transferred DNA func- cells, is conceptually no different fromspecified in the application) was used, tioned actively in cells that had differen- bone marrow transplantation. Gene ther-further problems arose (31). The investi- tiated after genetic manipulation of the apy therefore a natural therapeuticgator lost grant support from the Nation- fertilized egg. Furthermore. in some cas- development that evolves from increas- al Institutes of Health for transgressing es, the foreign genes had become incor- ing understanding of disease mecha-the relevant regulations. The patients porated into germ cells. since the specif- nisms. Public unease about gene therapy apparentlywereneitherhelpednor ic protein synthesized under the signal of can therefore be lessened by explaining harmed by the procedure, but a full the transferred gene could be detected in that the nature of such therapy is not aaccount has not yet been published. The offspring of the next generation and was radical departure from previous medical case attracted much public attention be- again transmitted to the third generation. intervention. Gene therapy can be con- cause it represented the first attempted Means of overcc.ning the low efficiency sidered as a form of "euphenics" ratheruse of gene therapy in humans. of integrating foreign DNA are still need- than the practice of "eugenics." The Medical pioneers in the past. such as ed, and ways must be found to target phenotype may be altered but not theJenner and Pasteur, performed their re- genes to the appropriate chromo:,omes. genotype. Medicine has been proceedingspective studies on smallpox and rabies Reliable, time-specific expression is like- in this manner since its beginnings. prevention on a single human subject lyto depend on correct integration. Although the use of DNA in suchwithout the safeguards we demand to- While much remains to be done, these projected therapy causes no new ethical day. They were successful and estab-experiments shov that genetic manipula- problems, many prohlems are raised as lished immunization schemes that wiped tion of germ cells is a distinct possibility. with other types of ;nnovative therapy. out dangerous and iethal diseases and Techniques for the manipulation of First, extensive animal experimentation saved many lives. In retrospect we hon- germ cells are currently used by investi- is required to work out the details and to or their achievements, but there was nogators studying gene regulation who at- ensure safety of the proposed treatment. assurance at the time that the first vacci tempt to understand how genes are The severity of a disease is an important nated subjects would not suffer serious turned "on" and "off." Practical appli- criterion in deciding when to introduce a side effects or even contract the fatal cations for such techniques may come in new therapy. With mildly affected pa- diseases meant to be prevented. Current agriculture, since commercially useful tients one would hesitate to initiate a attitudes regarding human experimenta- traits. such as faster growth and higher completely new therapy that might havetion are more in keeping with our respect milk yields, might be introduced into unanticipatedsideeffects.However,for human autonomy and dignity. It is animal s:ocks by genetic manipulation of with life-threatening diseases, one mightconceivable, however, that the ethics fertilized eggs. However, most of the be less hesitant to use new treatments, committees that are now required to valuable traits in livestock are polygenic. particularly if the patient is in the end approve proposed experimentaltreat- so that conventional breeding techniques stages of the disease and no alternative ments in humans might be unduly cau- would have the same end result. If genes treatments are available. For example,tiouor conservative and might defer or such as those for growth hormone or for a patient with a terminal malignancy prevent the introduction of innovative prolactin have a major effect on normal a new treatment based on rational princi- treatments with great potential impact. growth or milk yield, respectively,it ples that has not been worked out in all Since human subjects in the past have might be possible to obtain the desired details in animals might be acceptable. sometimes been abused by medical ex- results by injection of the appropriate 1 E 2 157 genes into fertilized eggs rather than byed nucleus was obtained. Recent devel- RIferetiers and Notts the usual breeding techniques. It is diffi- opments suggest that a similar approach, 1 T. 3. Bouchard, Jr., and M. McGue. Science 212. 1055 (1981). cult to visualize human applications ofwith nuclei being transplanted from em- 2. A. G. Motulsky. J. Hered. S9. 329 (1968). such techniques, since the genetic ma-bryonic mouse cells, might be used to 3. T. Maniatis. E. F. Fritsch. 3. Lauer. R. M. Lawn. Annu Rev. Genet. 14. 145 (1980). nipulation of human eggs would require clone mice (43). Even if cloning of hu- 4. D. 3. Weatherall and 3. B. Clegg. Cell 29. 7 prior knowledge of the genotypes of both mans with nuclei from adult cells ever (1982). 5. R. 3. Rober . Methods Emma'. VI. 152 (1979). the egg and the pronucleus of the sperm. became possible it is unlikely that the 6 A. M. Maxam and W. Gilbert. ibid65. 499 (1980). Such genetic typing of germ cells is notprocedure would be widely used. The 7. L. Hood et al.. J. Supramol. Strum Cell Bio- possible with current technology. Never-occasional utilization of cloning of hu- chem. 17. 27 (1981). 8 G Alvarodo-Urbina. G M. Sathe. W.-C. Liu. theless, the animal studies raise the pos- mans would be both startling and of M. F. Gillen. P. D. Duck. R. Bender. K. K. sibility of future genetic manipulation insome scientific interest since pairs of Ogilvie. &knee 214. 270 (1981). 9 R. B. Wallace. 3. Shatter. R. F. Murphy. 3. humans. Unlike the somatic therapy"identical twins" of different ages could Bonner. T. Hirose. K. Itakura. Nucleic Acids with DNA discussed earlier, use of such be produced. While this procedure has Res. 16. 3543 (1979). 10. Office of Technology Assessment. Impacts of technology would constitute a definitiveoccasionally raised emotionally charged Applied Genetics. Microorganisms..Plants. and Animals (Publication No. 81. 600046. Govern. qualitative departure from other thera-reactions I do not believe that cloning in ment Printing Officx. Washington. D.C.. 1981). pies since it would affect future genera-humans will cause grave societal prob- 11 3. D. Watson and 3. Toone. The DNA Story. A Documentary History of Gene Cloning (Free- tions. Extensive safeguards and public lems in the future. man. San Francisco. 1981). discussion would therefore be needed 12. D. A. Jackson and S.P. Stich. Eds.. The Recombinant DNA Debate (Prentice-Hall. En before these techniques were ever ap- glewood Cliffs. N.J.. 1979). plied in humans. General Comments 13. D. Botstein. R. L. White. M. Skolnick. R. W. Davis. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 32. 314 (1980). 14. S. E. Antonarakis. 3. A. Phillips. III. H. H. There is agreement in most societies Kazazian. Jr.. J. Pediatr. 100. 845 (1982). 15. K. E. Davies. Hum. Genet. 58. 351 (1981). Other Forms of Reproductive that medical practices that depart from 16 W. F. Bodmer. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 33. 664 (1981). Engineering current therapeutic modes or that intro- 17. 3. C. Chang and Y. W. Kan. Lancet 1981-11. duce completely novel reproductive pro- 1127 (1981). 18E. 3. Benz. Jr.. and B G. Forget. Amur. Rev. Sex selection by physicochemical or cedures require public discussion. Scien- Med. 33. 363 (1982). immunologic separation of sperm carry-tists should be accountable to the public 19. H Hams. Prenatal Diagnosis and Sete( tire Abortion (Harvard Univ. Press. Cambndge. ing X or Y chromoson.es has been dis- before they utilize such innovations. To Mass.. 1975). cussed for many years but has not yet be able to make wise and informed deci- 20. A.G. Motulsky. !sr J. Med Sci 9 1341 (1973). 21. F. Vogel and A. G. Motulsky. Human Genetics. been achieved. When such techniquessions in these matters, people must have Problems and Approa hes (Spnnger-Verlag. Berlin. 1979). pp. 502-505. do become successful. they will be used some knowledge of human biology, in- 22. Z. Harsanyi and R Hutton. Genera Prophecy. initially for sex choice in anima' oreed- cluding ,enetics. This means that sci- Beyond the Double Helix (Rawson. Wade. New York. 1981). pp. 104-211. ing. Application to humans might also in e:.ce education at all levels from elemen- 23 C. R. Striver. In Neonatal Si reening for Inborn relatively simple, and the possibility that tary schools through college needs to be Errors of Metabolism. H Bickel. R Guthne. G Hammersen.Eds.(SpnngerVerlag.Berlin. the sex ratio of the population might strengthen% 1 Teachers must be trained 1980). pp. 317-333. become distorted has been discussed to offer exciting and attractive courses in 24 F Vogel. Alin. Wm hensi hr S9. 1009 (1981) 25. S. F. BlInkhorn and D. E. Hendnckson. Nature (39). human genetics and biology. Nontechni- (London) 295. 596 (1982). 26 K E Mercola and M 3 Cline. N. Engl J Med Human fertilization in vitro to bypass cal science courses in colleges need to be 303. 1297 (1980). blockedFallopiantubeshas been emphasized. The media can play an im- 27 W F. Anderson and 3 C Fletcher. :bid p 1293. achieved several times but is technically portant part in this endeavor by explain- 28. R. Storb. in Cetd Tertbooi of Medu me. .1. B. difficult (40). When the procedure was ing and reporting responsibly on new t'-'1.npardenand L H Smith.Jr..Eds (Saunders. Philadelphia. 1982). pp 977-979 first introduced, there was much discus- developments.Uninformeddecision- 29 E D. Thomas. C D. Buckner. J. Sanders. T. sion about possible misuse of the tech-making can lead io prohibition of laud- Papayannopoulou. C Borgna-Pratti. P De Stefano. K. M Sullivan. R. A. Chits. R. Storb. nique since any sperm and any egg might able but not particP.larly dangerous inno- Lancet. 1982-11. 227 (1982) 30 G B. Kotula aid N. Wade, Sarni e 210. 407 be used for fertilization. it was feared vations. (1980). that some women might hire themselves The new biologic revolution based on 31 N Wade. dud 212. 24 (1981) 32 T A Stewart. E. F Wagner. B Mintz. dud out as host mothers to bear embryosDNA has been with us for only one 217. 1046 (1982) from other couples, that is, they would generation and genetic manipulation by 331 W Gordon and F H Ruddle. 'bid 214. 1244 (1981) provide "wombs for rent" (41). 1 consid- gene splicing was developed less than 10 34 T E Wagner. P. C Hoppe. J. D Jollick. D. R er it unlikely that widespread abuse will years ago. Neither scientists nor the pub- Scholl, R L Hodinka. 3 B Gault. Prot Notl At ad. SiU.S.A. 78. 6376(1981) develop and the metho& does permit licin general have absorbed the full 35R. L Brinster. H. Y. Chen. M Trumbauer. A W Senear. R Warren. R D Palmier. Cell 27. infertile couples to have their own chil-impact of these developments. As more 223 (1981). dren. is learned about DNA and human genet- 36 K. Harbors. D Jahner. R henisch. Nature (London) 293. 540 (1981) 'Cloning" has been wid,ly discussed ics more problems are certain to arise. 37 R D. Palmier. H. Y. Chen. R L. Brinster. Cell in the past (4:1 and was achieved in frogs Nevertheless, well-informed human be- 29. 701 (1982). 38J. L. Mars. .5: ience 213. 9% (1981) some time ago. in this procedurethe ings in enlightened democratic societies 39 A Futon'. dud 161. 1107 (1968) nucleus of a somatic cell is transplanted should foster the use of the new DNA 401 D Biggers. N Engl J Med 304. 336 (1981) 41 A. G Motulsky. Si ience 185. 653 (1974) into an enucleated egg thereby allowing technology in a responsible manner that 42 B D Davis, ibid. 170. 1279 (19701 43 K Illmensee and P C Hoppe. Cell 23.9 (1981) the exact reproduction of the genes ofwill lead to better health and welfare for 44. Aided by NIH grant GM15253 the individual from whom the transplant- all.

le3 ous are some variant forms of PKU due to either a deficiency of dihydropteridine reductase or a defect in dihydrobiopterin synthesis (2. 7). These disorders requi: e specia: procedures for diagnosis. Mental retardation is not prevented by phenylalanine restriction alone: a deficiency of monoamine neurotransmitters is also present. The efficacy of drug treatment for this deficientis under sttu'y. At least cll. it causes for hyperphenylalaninemia in the newborn have been discovered (7),largely through newborn screening. In fact, any given clinical syn- Is genetic screening a marvel about to gotes for genes for serious recessive dis- drome may have multiple genetic causes, free us from the scourge of genetic disease. The three types have. respective- each with its individual requirements ease, or a menace about to invade our ly, a long established, a recently estab-for recognition and management. Such privacy and determine who may repro- lished. and a yet to be established place genetic heterogeneity, while providing duce? in health care. valuable scientific insights into metabol- Genetic screening may be defined as a ic vagaries, makes genuine comprehen- systematic search in a population for siveness of genetic screening programs persons of certain genotypes. The usual Newborn acreening an elusive goal. purpose is to detect persons who them- With regard to classical PKU, ques- selves are at risk or whose offspring are Newborn screening has focused large- tions remain. Must the diet be conenued at risk for genetic diseases or genetically ly on the detection of inborn errors of into adult life? A woman with undetected determined susceptibilities to environ- metabolism. An inborn error of metabo- PKU and with unrestricted phenylala- sr ental agents (I). When an individual is lism is an inherited biochemical defect,nine intake has a risk of producing chil- diagnosed as having a genetic condition. classically a deficiency of an intracellulardren with severe mental and physical the testing of relatives may be recom- enzyme. Such deficiencic, cause disease defects caused by high phenylalanine mended. This "retrospective screening" due either to the accumulation of the levelsin the maternal blood (8).Al- diffe, s from the screening of individuals enzyme's reactant or its metabolites or though such women can hi-ve normal without known affected relatives (pro- to a deficiency of the enzyme's product. children if phenylalanine restriction is spective screening). Genetic screening Phenylketonuria (PKU) was the first reinstituted prior to conception. their may be undertaken also for research condition for which newborn screeningPKU may remain unknown to them or purposes unrelated to disease or the im- was widely adopted (2). Mass screening their physician. The Quebec Network of provementofhealth.Retrospective was feasible, despite the disease's low Genetic Medicine has instituted a regis- screening and screening for research incidence by public health standards (1 ter for all persons in Quebec Province purposes will not be further considered in 11.500) (3). because of the discovery. known to have PKU (9). It contacts them here. by Guthrie in1961 (4), of a bacterialon their 12th birthday to pros le coun- Genetic screening differs from nonge- growth inhibition assay for measuringseling about their reproductive options, netic health screening in at least three blood phenylalanine. Before a newborn that is. planned pregnancy with phenyl- important ways. First. whereas in both is discharged from the hospital, a sample alanine restriction. termination of an un- types of screening, identification of per-of its blood is spotted onto filter paperplanned or untreated pregnancy, reliable sons at risk may lead to the identification and mailed to a regional laboratory (5). birth control, sterilization. or adoption. of others at risk. in the case of ordinary Despite the fact that most states madeThis program illustrates how euvern- health screening the connection is often newborn screening for PKU mandatory ment can fulfill a need for long-term by physical proximity (contact) whereas before methods for diagnosis and treat- tracking that is difficult for private in.:w- in genetic screening it is by genetic prox- ment of the disease were firmly estab-ane because of the multiplicity\ Ipro- imity (kinship). Second. whereas in oth- lished, newborn screening for PKU re- viders of care for one individual. er forms of health screening the concern mains a major triumph of lenctic screen- Other inborn errors frequen;ty is about the subject being screened, ining (6). A low phenylalanine diet begun screened for at birth are galactosemia, genetic screening the concern is oftenin the first few weeks of life preventsbranched-chain ketonuria (maple syrup about the subject's offspring. Third, ge- marked mental retardation in affectedurine disease), and homocystinuria. Like netic screening carries an inherent risk of children. PM' these inborn errors may cause imdairing self-image and perceived suit- Phenylketonuria, initially thought to severe mental retardation or death which ability as a marriage partner or parent. be a single disease, illustrates the phe- may be preventable by promptly Institut- nomenon of genetic heterogeneity. High ed dietary treatment. However. the ben- concentrations of phenylalanine in theefit of screening is less clear-cut h'cause Types of Genetic Screening blood of a newborn may have multiple of other"eatures. such as rapidity of genetic and developmental causes. Inonset of symptoms, comp. xity of treat- There are three principal types of ge- addition to classical PKU mie to phenyl- ment, or rarity of the condition (10). netic screening.Newbornscreening alanine hydroxylase deficiency, the is A major recent addition to newborn seeks disease in the newborn. Fetal (pre- a transient hyperphenylalaninemia lue natal) screening seeks disease in the fe- to hepatic immaturity. This abnormality The author is professor of medicine. pediatrivs. genetics. and micrnbiolonv atthe University of tus. Carrier screening seeks heterozy-disappears without .reatment. More seri- Rochester. Rochester. Neu York 14642

1 6 4 159 screening is testing for hypothyroidism laboratories which do the testing in some abort any male fetus even though there is (11). In most cases this is due to astates be more effectively monitored?only a 50 percent chance that a given multifactorial deficiency of thyroid tis-Fifth, should newborn screening be le- male fetus has inherited the X chromo- sue, rather than to an inborn metabolicgally mandated o. should informed con- some bearing the Duchenne gene. error. Mental and physical retardationsent be sought prior to testing. as in Recently, analysis of DNA from cells can be prevented by treatment, consist- Maryland (20)? in the amniotic fluid has permitted prena- ing of thyroid hormone replacement. No taldiagnosisof hemoglobinopathies. special diet is required. It is significant- Sickle cell anemia in the fetus can be ly more frequent (one in 4000) (12) than Fetal Screening and Prenatal Diagnosis diagnosed by restriction enzymes Dde I other conditions usually screened for at (22) and Mst II (24) because the nucleo- birth. Prenatal diagnosis of birth defects rep- tide substitution in the sickle gene elimi- Of the various types of genetic screen- resents one of the most important practi- nates a restriction site for each enzyme. ing, newborn screening is the most wide- cal advances in medical genetics in re-Various forms of thalassemia may be ly practiced. The great majority of in- cent years. In most cases the. fetal cellsdiagnosed by detection of the change in fants born in the United States are testedanalyzed are obtained by amniocentesis, DNA that is causing the disease, for for the above conditions resulting in athe removal of amniotic fluid containingexample, a deletion (25). Because of the marked decease in the number of symp- sloughed fetal skin cells at 14 to 20 weeksmultiplicity of mutations that cause thal- tomatic children. The costof PKU of pregnancy. The commonest indication assemia, however, analysis of genetic screeningis more than offset by thefor fetal screening is a maternal age of 35 linkage between globin gene loci and savings in health care required (usually or greater because of the increased riskpolymorphic restrictionsitesisoften institutionalization)withoutscreening for an offspring with a chromosomalnecessary (26). Synthetic oligonucleo- (13). Testing for other inborn errors 'in anomaly. The most common of these istide probes specific for normal or mutant the same blood sample entails little ad-Down's syndrome; the abnormality isnucleotide sequenccs have also been ditional cost. Newborn screening repre- paternal in origin in 30 percent of casesused (27). Prenatal diagnosis based on sents one form of genetic screening in (21). Prospective parents exposed to mu-linkage to polymorphic restriction sites which government has effectively partic-tagenic agents such as chemicals and x-is expected to become possible for any ipated. State health departments, whichrays often seek prenatal diagnosis but single-gene disorder (28). are responsible for the supervision ofare difficult to aid because most birth Amniocentesis cannot be performed newbornscreening,haveeffectively defects are not detectable by chromo-before the second trmester of pregnan- pooled resources on a regional basis forsomal analysis. cy, and by the time results are available greater efficiency (for example, New Er- Prenatal diagnosis may also be indicat- fetal movement may have been felt. Di- gland states Northwes :n states-Alas- ed if a previous child has had a chromo- agnosis during the first trimester would ka). some abnormality, if either parent is abe preferable, both because of greater Nevertheless, important issues remain carrier of a chromosomal anomaly (most patient acceptance and because pregnan- (14).First, what additionaldiseases commonly a balanced translocation), if acy termination would then be safer. An should be screened for? Several diseases previous child or a close relative has had alternative method of diagnosis is to ob- proposed and some arguments madea neural tube defect, if the mother is atain, travaginally at 6 to 10 weeks of against them are adenosine deaminaseknown or a presumed carrier of a seriouspregnanc,, samples of chorionic deficiency (rare), tyrosinemia/tyrosino-X chromosome-linked recessive disor-These villi are of fetal origin and may be sis (rare except in certain populations),der (for example, hemophilia or Du- used for the prenatal diagnosis of hemo- histidinemia (symptoms variable, treat-chenne muscular dystrophy), or if both globinopathies (29) and chromosome ab- ment unproven), chromosomal disordersparents are known carriers of a gene for normalities. (15) (no intervention proposed), familiala significant autosomal recessive disor- Prenatal diagnostic methods have en- hypercho!esterolemia (,6) (treatment ofder detectable in utero (for example,abled many couples with a known genet- unproven benefit), cystic fibrosis (treat-Tay-Sachs disease). ic risk to have h-. lthy children. As a ment unsatisfactory), sickle cell disease Cytogenetic, biochemical, and devel- result, the incidence of certain genetic (treatment unsatisfactory) (17), and Du- opmentaldisordersinvolvedifferent diseases, for example, Tay-Sachs dis- chenne muscular dystrophy (treatmentmethods of analysis of the amniotic fluid ease (30), Down's synorome (31), and, in unsatisfactory) (18). cells obtained. In the case of neural tube some regions, thalassemia major (Coo- In the case of diseases for which treat-defects, the commonly used biochemical ley's anemia) (32) has been mar.sedly ment isineffective, the argument hasmarker is an increased concentration ofreduced. Fetal screening in cases of ad- been made that neonatal diagnosis givesa- fetoprctein, found where the fetus' vanced maternal age has been widely parents the opportunity to avoid thespinal canal is in direct contact with the adopted. An important factor has been birth of a second affected child. Howev-amniotic fluid ("open" cases) extensive media coverage leading to a er, the resulting decrease in incidence is The gene product can be directly mea- demand for services. Lawsuits, brought small: assuming two-child families andsured in a large number of conditions against obstetricians by parents of chil- abstinence fromchildbearingbyall(22), usually by assay of enzymatic activ- dren with birth defects detectable but not counseled couples, the reduction in inci- ity(foi example, in mucopolysaccha- detected by prenatal diagnosis because it dence is only 1/8 (19). Second. should aridoses; Less satisfactory is the prenatal was no offered, have educated obstc second sample be obtained after hospitaldiagnosis of X chromosome-linked con- clans beyond the plaintiff. discharge because some cases may b_ditions in which the biochemical defect is Many issues remain to be resolved. missed by early discharge? Third, shouldnot known. In the case of Duchenne Some of these are technical, for exam- 'tato. appropriate knds, not only formuscular dystrophy, a devastating disor- ple, the need for safer methods to sample diagnosis but to ensure adequate treat-der uniformly fatal in young adult life,fetal blood, required at present for the ment? Fourth, how can nongovernmentparents at risk must decioe whether todiagnosis of hemophilia Ind currently 15 carrying a 4 to 5 percent fetal mortality. and sensitive enough not to miss positiveadverse result of the U.S. screening pro- One approach under investigation is the individuals. If the test itself is not specif-gram was the exposure nonpaternity, detection and sorting of fetal blood cells ic, then a backup test of adequate speci-that is, the fathering .a child by somefrom the maternal circulation by meansficity should be available. Third, theone other than the presumed father. of flow cytometric methods. Other issuesindividual identified as positive shouldMany states passed laws requiring sickle require more information to be resolved, have some options. For example, mar-testing at birth, at school entry, or prior forexample, what should a physician tellried couples identified as tieing at risk iceto marriage, laws leading to charges by parents about the phenotype of theira recessive disease for which there is no blacks of attempted genocide. child when fetal chromosome analysisprenatal diagnosis might choose to 'ake In theory. it should be easy to avert reveals a previously undescribed karyo-the risk, undergo artificial insemination,some of these unfortunate results by type? A major controversy is whetheror adopt a child and forgo pregnancy.providingaccuratetesting,adequate everypregnantwomanshouldbeBut providing such information mightcounseling, andstrictconfidentiality. screened for elevated concentrations ofnot be a service since all of the optionsThese goals are difficult to achieve in serum a-fetoprotein which can signal anmight be unattractive. Fourth, the costspublic programs. A major reason is the increased risk of a neural tube defect inavoided should exceed the costsin- regrettable fact that the average citizen her fetus. Among the issues are the abili-curred. A major determinant of the costlacks the background in biology and ge- ty of providers to follow a complex se-is the frequency of the disorder in thenetics to comprehend the significance of quence of diagnostic steps in followingpopulation screened. the carrier state. up elevated a-fetoprotein values, gov- Tay-Sachs disease was the first disor- Few diseases are common enough in ernment regulation of reagent use, andder for which large-scale carrier screen-the general population to merit carrier whether benefits will outweigh costs [ining was done in the United States. Tay-screening. Many genetic diseases have view of the incidence of the defect in theSachs disease meets most of the criteriaan especially high incidence in a particu- United States (one in 590 births)](33). above. It is serious, being characterizedlar ethnic. racial, or religious group(40). The overriding issue in the promulga-by developmental delay. blindness, sei-Screening only members of such a group tion of prenatal diagnosis for birth de-zures, and paralysis: It is usually fatal byinvolves difficulty in determining who is fects is, of course, the controversy overage 3: and itis without specific treat-a member of that group and risks charg,-s abortion. Many parents who find abor-ment. There is a satisfactory test for theofdiscrimination.A grouptobe tion unacceptable in other circumstances carrier state. Prenatal diagnosis is avail-screened should have a partm-rship role do choose tc, terminate a pregnancy inable for the enzyme (hexosaminidase A)it planning any screening effort. The which the fetus is proved to have ain amniotic fluid cells. The disease oc-tost common serious autosomal reces- serious birth defect. In fact, prenatalcurs predominantly in the Ashkenazisive disease in Caucasians is cystic fibro- diagnosis has had a "pro-life" effect forJewish population. Kaback directed asis, but at present there is no satisfactory couples who previously avoided preg-program inthe Washington/Baltimoretest for the hete-ozygote. nancy because of a genetic risk but nowarea in the early 1970's with excellent The best age for carrier screening is willingly .t.nceive(34).Further, some results(37),and since then similar pro- arguable. The. newborn identified hav- couples choose prenatal diagnosis withgrams have been initiated in most largeing sickle traitis not likely to benefit no thought of termination but rather toU.S. cities and many cities abroad. Thedirectly sine; reproduction is remote. prepare for the birth of a child withrelative incidence of Tay-Sachs diseaseHowever, if the parents are screened and special needs. has been significantly reduced by such found to be at risk for a child with sickle The lower socioeconomic groups areprograms (as well as by exogamy) andcell anemia, the Information may be a still underserved by this new technology. couples at risk have been able to havesignificant benefit to the family unit. At least part of this underuti;ization isonly healthy children. particularly now that prenatal diagnosis inadequate access to these services and In contrast to this generally successfulof sickle cell anemia by DNA analysis is insufficient understanding of their bene-experience with Tay-Sachs screening safeand accurate. fits(35). was tne experience withsicklecell A major Issue in genetic screening is screening in the early 1970's. Some ofwhether it should be legally mandated or the screening programs were politicallyvoluntary. Arguments made for manda- Carrier Screening motivated and lacked sufficient exper-tory screening are higher compliance tise, confidentiality, and provision forrates, lower unit cost, timely execution, Carrier screening is the identificationthe counseling of subjects identified asand facilitation of record keeping of inci- of heterozygotes for an autosomal reces-positive. Positive indmduals often suf-dence and outcome. However. voluntary sive or X-linked recessive disease. Tofered a decreased self-image(38).Posi- screening is more irs. keeping with the many people,"geneticscreening"tive children were often overprotectedAmerican tradition.Itrecognizes the brings to mind chiefly carrier screeningby parents. Individuals were sometimes factthat notallcitizenswillbenefit because it is this form of screening thatdiscriminated against for purposes ofequally. for example. those who do not has frequently been carried out throughmarriage, employment, or insurance. Acondone termination of pregnancy may public appeals, whereas newborn andrevealing study of a sickle screening pro- not view prenatal diagnosis as a benefit. prenatal screening have been carried outgram was conducted in Orchomenos. aVoluntary screening may also reduce the in the course of regular health care. Greek village where marriages were fre-likelihood of adverse psychological ef- Manyconsiderations should be quently arranged by parents, a conceiv-fectsif the screening is preceded by weighed in establishing carrier screeningably ideal arrangement to take into ac-appropriate education about the benefits programs(36).First, the disease in ques-count genetic knowledge. Neverthelessand risks of testing and if consent for tion should be serious. Second, the testcarriers were stigmatized as undesirabletesting istruly informed. Whereas in to be performed on the population at risk marriage partners, not ..nly for othermost states newborn screening is legally should be simple, relatively inexpensive,carriers, but for everyone(39).Anothermandated, carrier screening is generally 114 161 voluntary. A National Academy of Sci- hold on the practice of medicine thancomplicatemaritalandreproductive ences Committee has condemned man- might be desired. For the most part,plans. Nevertheless. itis common for datory carrier screening(41). adult medical care still waits for the parents of a child born with a prevent- A quiie separate issue is whether ge-individual to appear with a "chief com-able birth defect to ask. "Why didn't you netic carrier screening should be a public plaint." doctors tells us this could happen? We or private matter. Tt.Tay-Sachs and Genetic knowledge among medicalwould never willingly have had a dud sickle cell screening p ograms described practitioners is deficient(47).A survey like this!" The problem with requiring above were condu^:ed publicly and inof pediatricians, obstetricians, and fam- informed consent in the primary health volved temples, churches, fraternal or- ily practitioners in 1974 found that nearly care setting is the fact thatit can be ganizations, andin some cases an- three-quarters reported that no course in argued that as much time must be spent nouncement by the media. Advantages genetics had been available during their in obtaining informed consent as in edu- of such sponsorship include the assist-medical training and that. as a whole. cating the individual found to be positive ance of the voluntary organization inthese physicians were not ready to ac- about the significance of the result. Con- enlisting screenees in a group education- cept genetic screening(48).Although the sequently. a case can be made for includ- al program prior to screening and volun-percentage of medical schools with a ing appropriate genetic screening as a tary personnel who may donate time and formal course in genetics increased from part of multiphasic health screening. The provide support for those found to be 8.6 percent in 1955 to 75 percent in 1978, person to be screened could be informed positive. However, an equally good case teaching is still primarily in the first 2 as to purpose by means of fact sheets can be made for incorporation of certain years of medical school and lacks ade- provided in advance and giving the per- types of screening into primary health quate integration into clinical training son the opportunity to decline. Such a care(42).For all its success the Tay- (49). procedure is feasible only if adequate Sachs programs have screened only 10 Just as laymen have played a role in provision is made for counseling subjects percent of the adult target population in educating obstetricians about the bene- found to be positive. Videotapes supple- 10 years(43).Public screening effortsfits of prenatal diagnosis, so laymen mented by tt ritten material to take home may involve subtle forms of coercion;must ultimately educate physicians as a may 'educe the total professional time for example. among me nbers of an ex- whole about their desires for genetic required. A medical genetic paraprofes- tended family, and may risk stigmatizingscreening. An important contribution to- sional, or "genetic associate." can be of carriers(44).A regular health setting isward this end has been made by Scriver enormous value in answering the many more likely to provide confidentiality and his colleagues who developed a ge- questions that genetic screening pro- and needed follow-up and to avoid dupli- neticscurriculumforMontrealhigh grams elicit (52). cation of testing. Voluntary groups mayschool students. In the context of learn- The National Genetic Diseases Act of operate only intermittently and for some ing about genetic differences among nor- 1976 has provided federal money to 34 populations there may be no suitable mal individuals. high school students had states to support genetictesting and organization. The success of the Tay-a 75 percent acceptance rate of carrier counseling services, much of which has Sachs effort has been due in nG small (Tay-Sachs) testing compared to a 10 pros idea salary support for genetic asso- part to the high educational attainment of percent acceptance rate among adults ciates (53). Since 1981. howev -r, federal this population group and, to the exent (501. Conducting genetic screening in administrative changes and funding cuts that this characteristic does not apply to public schools requires parental permis- hatethreatenedthecontinuation of other population groups, other screening sion in most U.S. communities and can these programs. efforts may be less successful. Rosen- be criticized as risking coercion through In many cases reluctance to undergo stock(45)has observed that "systematic peer pressure. However. public schools gen :lc screening is the result of consid- efforts to develop rational screening pro- are ideal for educating the public about ering only the short-term risk of anxiety grams on a regional level are likely to genetics. If -itizens learn simple genetic related to the testing procedure rather pay greater health dividends than a principles as part of their high .,chool than the long-term risk of anxiety associ- series of unrelated opportune ;tic pro- education. they can better understand ated with the birth of a child with a grams." the significance of genetic tests offered serious genetic defect. In so far as this To claim that genetic screening is ide- later and help health care policy-makers reluctance represents a lack of aware- ally provided by the primary health care decide what information will he useful ness, more attention might be devoted to sector is not to claim that this sector is Childs and Hickman 1511 hate outlined persuading individuals to find out what now ideally equipped to shoulder the how genetics cot id sere as a focal point they need to know about their genetic task. First of all, the poor integration fortheteaching of human biology constitution. Such educational programs among health care providers in the Unit- throughout elementary and secondary desert e as much effort and imagination ed States compared to most Western school years. as are now invested in persuading people countries causes duplication of effort and Informed consent is generally stated to to choose a given antacid. lack of follow-up(46).Second, most be a requirement for genetic screening. medical practitioners, excepting family This is abrogated by most states in the practitioners, are oriented to the care ofcase of newborn screening where itis Occupational Screening the individual rather than to the care ofgenerally felt that the stakes are too high the family as a unit. Much primary medi- and time too short to make it voluntary Genetic screening in industry has two cal a re today is rendered by the special- (20). In favor of informed consent for different rationales. The first is the iden- ist. The pediatrician may make a genetic most types of genetic screening is thetification of individuals at greater risk diagnosis but leave reproductive coun- recognition that genetic information isthan the average worker for suffering seling to the obstetrician who may fall to psychologicallydifferentfromother adverse effects from industrial expo- take a family history. Preventive medi- health information in that it refers to an sures. The second is the use of genetic cine as a whole has taken a lathe- .ewer immutable part of oneself which may tests (for example, chromosome anaiy- 1I sis) to detect actual or potential genetic ly, but rather due to an interaction be-malformation, two to four will have idio- damage to the genetically normal work- tween specific genetic and specific envi- pathic mental retardation. and nine will er. ronmental factors. Childs (57) has de- have a multifactorial (partly genetic) dis- Omenn (54) has listed criteria for traitsplored the tendency to categorize a disorder of later onset (for examnle, diabe- for which occupational testing might be ease as due exclusively to heredity ar to tes, coronary heart disease, psychoses) justifiable: (i) a sufficiently high preva-the environment. He has emphasized(60). Genetic screening can identify the lence of the trait in the worker popula that each patient presentation calls for risk of many monogenic disorders by tion: (ii) a significant increase in the risk assessing the separate contributions of study of the prospective par :nts and can of morbidity in workers with the trait genetic and environme ital factors. identify chromosomal disorders and ad- compared to those without it:(iii) the ditional monogenic disorders f:om study availability of a test to detect the trait of the fetus. But such screening prenatal- which is reliable and inexpensive: and Screening Donors for ly cannot readily identify multifactorial (iv) a clear understanding between man- Artificial Insemination disorders. including most instances of agement and labor about what action idiopathic mental retardation and con- might be taken on the basis of test results It is possible for a woman whose mate genital malformations. and who would have access to this infor- has a dominant gene for a serious genetic In addition to the genetic factors trans- mation. Omenn (54) has also listed traits disease, or who shares with her mate a mitted from parents tc child, the occur- known to be genetically polymorphic gene for a serious autosomal recessiverence of new n-atations must also be and which. if deficient, might predispose disease, or who has no male partner. to considerr.vi. New dominant mutations an individual to occupational morbidity bear a healthy child by means of artificial may cause genetic disease regardless of upon exposure to chemical igents (N- insemination. It is the responsibility ofthe screening of prospective parents. acetyltransferase, plasma pseudocholin- the physician performing artificia' insem- Methods to monitor human mutation esterase, glucose-6-phosphate dehydro- :-.ation to maximize the probability thatrates art urgently needed because of genase. and methemoglobin reductasethe resulting child will be born healthy. increaseden'-ironmental exposureto deficiency) and to inhaled pollutants (a1- Hence the genetic screening of the sperm mutagenic agents. antitrypsin, arylhydrocarbon hydroxy-donor should be particularly comprehen- lase inducibility, metabolic conversion sive. Such screening should include a of nicotine, and plasma paraoxonase). complet,z medical history with inform Psychological Aspects of It was recently reported that 59 major tion on any exposure to radiation or Genetic Screening corporations were considering adopting mutagenic drugs. a reproductive as well sore kind of genetic testing of employ- as family history. Rh typing if the recipi- Discussions of genetic screening often ees (55).' abor leaders and toxicologists ent is Rh-negative, and testing for any refer to reproductive dec.sion-making as have expressed concern that industry is heterozygous state commonly found in though reproduction were necessarily putting a bigger emphasis on -weeding his or the recipient's ethnic group (58). preceded by deliberation. In fact. even out the susceptibles- than on cleaning for couples at genetic risk, many concep- up the workplace. tions are not planned. others represent Today. many people believe that the Population Aspects of Genetic Screening attempts to compensate for a deceased statement made by Cooper (36) a decade or defective child. still others constitute ago still applies: Hohenemser et al. (59) have suggested efforts. often unconscious. to demon- a method for constructing. for any tech- strate ability to bear a normal child. The What is the current state of tests of hyper nological innovation, a profile of hazard- average couple has difficulty with the susceptibility? There is insufficient epidemio- ousness. This profile reflects both haz- logic evidence to support the use of any of concept of probability and may. while them as a criterion for employability without ards (threats to humans and what they ignoring the actual risk of its occurrence many qualifications. On the other hand. there value) and risks (quantitative measures (ts!). convert a statement of risk (for is ample scientific evidence to support wider of hazard consequences that can be example. d 1 percent chance of having a testing. Premature assumptions as to the ne- expressed as conditional probabilities cessity for such test. Or nveroptimisuc claims child with a chromosome abnormality) for the benefits can actually impede testing of experiencing harm). Since genetic into a binary statement (either it will or it On the basis of what we now know. no screening can affect the genetic structure will not happen) They then may visual- employers should be regarded as liable or of offspring. the °ffects ,,f such screening ize the w orst outcome and judge whether derelict for not choosing to screen hi. employ- may be long lasting. However. unless or not they could cope with tt(62). ees. If he screens all employees. he would choices were to be mandated on a large have to consider whether he would be regard- Additional information on the process of ed as liable to criticism for using a positive scale, no significant alteration in the ge- genetic counseling is provided elsewhere test to deny employment. or conversely. for netic structure of population., would be (63). Achieving the full benefits of genet- jeopardizing the health of an individual per likely. Hence, ensuring the availability ic screening will require better methods mined to work with a positive test Ititis of fri :e choice should ensure continued for dearly understood that the appropriate appli- communicatingriskinformation cation of tests of hypersusceptibility is still on genetic diversity of the population. based upon a better understanding of Mal. then progress can be made in studying how individuals deal with probabilities of them. adverse reproductive outcomes. imitations of Screening Capabilities The workplace is only one example of an environment that may reveal geneti- It has been estimated that, of every Ethical Aspects of Genetic Screening cally determined differences in suscepti- 200 rewborns, approximately tm 0 will bilities among individuals. The morbidity have a significant single gene 14.:' ,nuer, Genetic screening programs. existing to be reduced by genetic screening isone will have a chromosome disorder. and proposed. have spprked many ethi- thus not due to genetic factors exclusive- eight will have a sigwricant congenital cal debates over the past decade (64 /. 1 c 8 163 The President's Commission for theof a proposed screening program willand federal governments should be clari- Study of Ethical Problems in Medicine outweigh the burdens, and, if thisis fied and integrated (70). Legislative and and Biomedical andBehavioralRe-judged to be likely, what priority toexecutive branches need the advice of search has recently issued a report onassign the program in competition forcommissions which include medical ge- the ethical, social, and legal implica-limited resources with other desirableneticists to prevent hasty legislation and tions of genetic screening, counseling,programs of health care. As in other to provide for timely updating of health and education programs (53). The Com- fields of medicine, a case-by-case analy- policy without requiring legislative revi- mission enunciates five principles and sis, as advocated by Toulmin (65), maysion, such as provided in Maryland by makes some recommendations.Ex- be more helpful than abstract principles. the Commission on Hereditary Disor- cerpts are: ders (7!). I) Confidentiality. "Genetic informa- Kaback has distinguished three ap- tion should not be given to unrelatedLegal Aspects of Genetic Screening proaches to the control of genetic dis- third parties... ." However, adoption ease: cure, effective therapy, and pre- laws should be changed so that informa- If a family had an undesirable repro-vention (72). Cure-that is, the correction about serious genetic risks can beductive outcome, such as the birth of ation of the intrinsic defect in germ line conveyed to adoptees or their biological defective child, and there was reason toDNA-is not in the immediate future, families without betraying anonymity. identify the family as at increased riskdespite the success of certain recent 2) Autonomy."Mandatorygenetic for such an outcome, and yet the physi-gene transfer experiments with the use of screening programs are oniy justified cian did not inform them of their optionssomatic cells in vitro. Prevention is a when voluntary testing proves inade-(for example, prenatal diagnosis). thenhigh priorityprimarily because truly quate to prevent serious harm to thethe family may decide to brinesuit effective therapyisnot available for defenseless, such as children, that couldagainst the physician (66). Other exam-most genetic diseases. be avoided were screening performed.ples of legal liability in the provision of The scientific community bears a re- ... The value of the informati.o provid-geneticservicesincludeinterventionsponsibility, not only to expand knowl- ed by genetic screening and counseling which proves harmful, for example, arti-edge but also to ..ducate the public. would be diminished if available repro-ficial insemination resulting in the birthScientists must assist their fellow citi- ductive choices were to be restricted.of a child with Tay-Sachs disease (67), orzens in understanding the true promise (This is a factual conclusion that is not breach of confidentiality occurring whenof science, including what science can- intended to involve the Commission in a a physician notifies relatives of theirnot provide. Science provides options national debate over abortioi.). genetic risk without the permission of butindividuals must choose among 3) Knowledge. "Decisions regarding the patient (68). them. the release of incidental findings (such as nonpaternity) or sensitive findings (such References and Notes as diagnosis of an XY female) should Conclusions 1. National Academy of Sciences, Genetic Screen- ing Principles. Programs. and Researtn (Na- begin with the presumption 1,r favor of tional Academy 'Sciences, Washington. D.C.. 1975). p. 9. disclosure.. . ." An informed public re- Genetic screening thus represents nei- 2. C R. Scnver and C. L. Clow. N. Engl. J. Med. quires. not just extensive genetic coun- ther a panacea nor an anathema. Among 303. 1336 (1980). 'bidp. 1394. 3. H L. Lcvy, Ade Hum Genet 4. 41 (1973) seling services, but more intensive expo-its past accomplishments are reduction 4. R Guthne. J. Am. Med. Ascot- 178. R63 (1964 suretogeneticprinciplesinpublic in the incidence of symptomatic inborn 5 _ and A Sum. Pediatrics 32, 338 (1963)- 6. N. A. Holtzman. Newborn Screening for Genet- schools. errors through net?, born screening and. ic-Metabolic Disea-es. Progress.Principles. 4) Well-being. **Screening programs for many couples at risk for a child with a and Recommendations (Publ. No (HSA) 77, Department of Health. Education and Welfare. should not be undertakenuntilthe serious birth defect. provision of the Washington. D.C.. 1,x77). p 5207. N Holtzman, [screening) test has first demonstrated its C Leonard, M. Farfel. AnnaRe. Public option to avoid hay.ng a child with a Health 2, 219 (1981); C. R Salver, Prog. Chn. value in well-conducted. large-scale pilotdefect that could have been detected. Bwl. Res. 103B. 437 (1982) . A full range of prescreening 7 A Tounan and 1Sidbury -in Me Vetahola studies.. . Still uncertain is the advantage to be Busts of Inherited [Meuse. l B Stanburv. 1 B and follow up services for the population gained by optimal provision of carrier Wyngaarden. D S Freden kson. 1L Gold- stein. M S Brown. Eds 114eGrav-11111. New to be screened should be available before testing. Individuol differences in recep- York. cd 5. 1983). p 270 a program is introduced.' tivity to genetic ,nformation and in re- R R Lenke and H L Lenz Am J Obctet Glnecol 142. 548 (1982). H N Kirkman. Appl 5) Equity. "Access to screening may productive preferences complicate poli- Res Mental Retard 3. 319 (19821 take account of the incidence of genetic cy-making. 9 L Cartier. C L Clov. A Lippman-Hand. 1 Monssette. C R Salver. API J Pahl Health disease in various racial or ethnic groups If the promise of genetic screening ri 72. 1386 (1982). H L Lev). chid . p 1320 within the population without violating 10 G M Komrowcr. JInher%fetal,Ms 5 to be fulfilled. certain needs for the fu- (Suppl 2). 96 (1982). G M Komrov cr. Lan( et the principles of equity. justice, and fair- ture are evident. First, research must be 1983-1. 190 (1983) IINev England Congenital Hvpothy rou'.sm Col- ness." conducted on the best delivery -techa- laborative. Lancet 1981-11. 1995 (198)) The above precepts are concernednism for technologies already at hand. D A Fisher and A H Klein. N Engl J tied 304. 702 11981) primarily with protecting the individu- For example, now that it is possele for a 13 1 W Bush. M. M Chen. D LPatrick. in al from undesirable effects of geneticcouple at risk to avoid the birth of a first Health Stoics Inderec R L Berg. Ed (Hospi- tal Research. education Trust. Chicago. 1973). screening. Such effects will be mini- child with sickle cell anemia or Cooley's Massachusetts Department Public Health. A Engl J Alert 291, 1414 )1974) K C Steiner mized if screening programs adopt the anemia by analyzing fetal DNA. v0- q and H. A Smith. factual 10. 34 119731, N A specific goal. not of reducing the Inci-kind of screening program should uc Holtzman. Birth 1)efec is Om Art Ser 19. III (129W3.) dence of a disease, but of maximizing used to identTy such couples? Compa-i- 14 Erbe. Bath Del (cis Oro: Art .Ser 17. 167 options available to couples at risk for an sons arc needed between various meth- (1981) 15 B 1 Canon. Screni c 183. 1284 11975). 1 L affected child. ods of delivery of genetic services (69). Hamerton. Bath Defects Orig. Art Ser 15, 267 The larger ethicai issues in genetic The roles of the health care provider. the (1979) 16R.979)1 West and 1 K Lloyd. Ads Pedratr 26. I screening concern whether the benefits voluntary organization, and local, state. (1979) 164

17. P. T. Rowley.N.Y J Med.78.2 (1978): E. M (1982): R. G. Elks. R. Williamson. M Niazi. D tional Academy of Sciences. Washington. D C.. Rubin and P. T. Rowley.Am. J Dis. Child.133. V. Coleman. D Hrwell.N Engl J. Med.308. 1975). pp 162 and 164. 1248 (1979): W. N. Steinberg. T. P. Carter. J. 1433 (1983). 49B Childs.Am. J. Med Genet.13. 319 (1982; Humbert. P. T. Rowley. J.Pedtatr.100. 373 30 M. M. Kaback.Birth Defects Ortg Art Ser18. 50C. R Scnver and C L. Clow.Prog Clin. Bud. (1982). P. T. Rowley and D. H. Huntzinger, Am. 243 (1982). Res.18. 379 (1977). J. Dis. Child.137. 341 (1983): R. Grover. S. 3!M. M Adams. J. D. Enckson. P. M Layde. 51.B. Childs and F Hickman. Daeda/us (Spring Shahith. B. Fisher. D. Goldberg. D. Wethers. G. P. Oakley. JAm. Med. Assoc.246. 758 1983! D. 189. Am. J. Publ. Health73. 249 (1983): C. R. (1981). 52S. Kessle.Am J Med. Genet.7. 323 (1980) Scnver.ibidp. 243 32. A. Caoet alBirth Defec s Orig. Art Ser.18. 53.President's Commission for the Study of E:hical 18. H. Zellweger and A. Antonik.Pediatrics55. 30 303 (1982). B. Modell and M. Mazouras.ibid .p Problems in Medicine and Biomedical and Be- (1975): H. Plauchu. C. Dellamonica. J. Cone. J 285. havioral Research.Screening and Counseling M. Robert. JGenet. Hum.28. 651 (1980). R. 33 N A. Holtzman.Pediatrics71. 658 (1983). M. for Genetic Conditions. A Report on the Ethical. Skinner. A E. H. Emery. G. Scheuerbrandt. J. Sun.Science221. 440 (1983). Social, and Legal Implications of Genetic Syme.J. 11.ed. Genet19. i (1982). B Modell. R H T Ward. D V IFairweather. Screening. Counseling, and Education Pro- 19. C. R. Scrim. inNeonatal Screening for Inborn Br Med J1. 1347(1980) grams(Government Printing Office. Washing. Errors of Metabolism.H. Bickel. R. Guthne. G. 35J. P Marionet al . Am J Oh Gsn 138. II ton. D.0 . February 1983) Hammersen, &It(Springer-Verlao. M Adam, eiill . 139. f-73 54. S ()Tenn.! Ort upMei! 24. 369 0982! 1980). (1981). 55.C Holden.Science217. 336 (1982). 20 R Faden. A J Chwalow. N. A Holtzman. S 36 M M Kaback.Birth Defects Ong Art Ser18. 56.W. C Cooper. J.Getup Med15. 355 (1973) D. Horn.Am J. Publ. Health72. 1347 (1982). 243 (1982) 57B Childs.Am. J. Hum. Genet.29. 1 (1977). R. R Faden. N. A. Holtzman. A J. Chwalow 37 M M Kaback.Prog Clin Bad Rey103 (part 58F C Fraser and R A Forse.Am. J. Med. ibid..p. 1396: G. J. Annas.ibid..p1401 B. 447 (19821 Genet.10. 399 (1981). W. G. Johnson. R. C. 21 A. Hansson and M. Mikkelson. CstogenetCell 38R. H Kenen and R M Schmidt.Am J Pahl Schwart. A. M Chutonan.N. Engl J Med. Genet20. 194 (1978). Health 68.1116 (1978). 3()4. 755(1981). 22 A. Milunsky.Genetic Disorders and the Fetus 39 G. Stamatoyannopoulos. in Proh/cmc ofScreen- 59C Hohenemser. R. W. Kates. P. Stem. Sci- Diagnosis. Prevention. a,Treatment(Plenum. ing and Counseling in the Hemoglobinoputhies ence 220. 378 (1983). New York. 1979) Birth Defec lc Proc eedingc of the Fourth Inter- 60.E. Matsunaga.Mutat. Res99. 95 (1982). C. 23 R. F GeeveretI.. ProcNall Acad. Sc:. national Conference.A G Motulsky and J Denniston.Anna. Rev Genet.16. 329 (1982). J. U.S A78. 5081 (1981): J. C Chang and Y W Ebling. Eds. (Excerpta Medica. Vienna. 1974). M. Opitz.Ped Rev 3,57 (1981). Kan.Lancet1982-11. 1127 (1981). pp 268-275 61.C. 0. Leonard. G A Chase. B. Childs.N. 24J. C Chang and Y. W Kan.N Engl J Med 40. M K McCormack.Am Famils Practice24. Engl. J. Med.287. 433 (1972) 307. 30 0982). S. H. Orkin. P F. R Little. H 153 (1981). 62A. LippmanHand and F. C. Fraser.Am. J. H Kazazian. Jr.. C D. Boehm.ibid.307. 32 41 National Academy of Sciences.Genetic Screen- Med. Genet.4. 51 (1979).ibid..p. 73. (1982). J. T Wilsonet al.. ProcNall Acad ing Prim iplec. Program. and Research(Na. 63F. C. Fraser. Am. J.Hum. Genet.26. 636 Sct U.S.A.79. 3628 (1982) tional Academy of Sciences. Washington. D C.. (1974). J. R. Ss.rcnson. J. P. Swam. N. A. 25Y. W Kan. M. S. Golbus. A M. Dozy. N.Engl. 1975). p. 188 Scotch.Birth Defects Orig. Art. Ser17 (1981) J. Med.295. 1165 (1976) 42P. T. Rowley. J.Am Med Assoc236. 374 64.M. Lappe. J. M. Gistafson. R Roblin.N. Engl. 26 P. F RLittle et al . Nature (London)285. 144 (1976). P T. Rowley. M. Lipkin. L Fisher. in J Med.286. 1129 (1972). J. C. Fletcher.Cltn. (1980). H. H Kazazian. Jr..et al Blood56. 926 Service and Edna anon in Medical Genetics.I. Obstet. Gynecol.24. 1151 (1981) (1980). S. E. Antonarakis. C. D. Boehm. P. V. H Porter and E B Hook. Eds (Acadzinic 65.S. Toulmin.Perspect Biol. Med 25.736 (1981/ Giardina. H. H. Kazazian. Jr .ProcNatl. Press. New York. 1979). pp 285-293. P. T 82). Acad Sri. U S.A.79. 137 (1982). S. H. Orkinet Rowley. L Fisher. M Lipkin. Jr. inThalasse- 66.E. E. Wnght and M W. Shaw.Cltn Obstet. al.. Nature (London)296. 627 (1981). C. D mai Recent Advances in Detection and Treat- Gynecol.24. 1133 (1981) Boehm. S. E Antonarakis. J A Phillips. G ment.A Cao. U Carcass'. P T Rowley. Eds 67.A M Chutonan, W C Johnson. R. C. Stetson. H. H Kazazian. Jr..N Engl. J Med. (Liss, New York. 1982).Birth Defects Ortg Art Schwartz.Am. J. Hum Genet32. 102A (1980). 308. 1054 (1983). Ser18 (No. 7). 231 (1982): R. B. Scott.J Am 68.NI W. Shaw.Prog ClinBailRes.18. 305 27. R. B Wallace. M. Schold. M. J. Johnson. P Med. A csoc .241. 1145 (1979) (1977) Dembek. K. Itakura.NucI Acid Res.9. 3647 43 C L Clow and C R S.nver.Prop Clin Biol. 69J. M. Swintet al.. Precentice Med.8. 463 (1981). B. J. Conneret al.. Proc Nall Acad. Res.18. 381 (1977) (1979). L. Fisher. M. Lipkin. Jr.. P T Rowley. Set U S.A.80. 278 (1983). S. H Orkin. A F. 44 M. J. Goodman and I.E. Goodman.Hastings Am. J. Hum Genet33. 987 (1981) Markham. H. H. Kazazian. Jr..J Clin Invest Center Rep12. 20 (198. 70C R Scnver. C Laberge. C. L. Clow. F. C. 71.775 (1983) 45INI Rosenstock.Prog Jut Biol Rec18. 329 Fraser.Science200. 946 (1978). 2S. D. Botstem. R. L. White. M Skolnick. R W (1977) 71.N. A. Holtzman. inGenetics and the Law II.A. Davis.Am. J Hum Genet.32.314 (1980). K E. 46 N A Holtzman. C 0 Leonard. NI R Farfel. Milunsky and G J Annas. Eds (Plenum, New Davis.Hum. Genet. 58.351 (1981). S. E Anton- Anna: Rev Pub Heithh2. 219 i1981) York. 1976). p. 247. arakis. J. A Phillips Ill. H. H. Kazazian. Jr . J 47 N. A Holtzman.Prog Con Rad Re%103B. 72.M M. Kaback. inGenetics and the Perinatal Pedtatr.100.845 (1982) 413 (1982) Patient.'first Symposium on Perinatal and De- 29 RWilliamsonetal. Lancer'981 -L. 1125 48National Academy of Sciences.Genetic Screen- velopmental Medicine(Mead Johnson & Co.. (1981). J. M Oldet .ibid ' 1413 ing Programs. Print:plc-v. and Research(Na- E. ansville. Ind . 19736 p 51 he scientific community generally agrees that objective meas- regulatory approach that would separate the task of investigating a ures of the hazards presented by toxic chemicals, food addi- technological activity from the task of making decisions about the tives, or occupational exposures are needed to clarify the appre,viateness of that activity. trade-offs that are a part of public and private regulatory decisions. Paolo F. Ricci and Lawrence S. Molton take another approach. The search for "risk indicators" to help both the policymakers and the They review the judicial record on the use of risk analysis to establish public understand potential hazards has assumed great popularity environmental standards. The courts must interpret congressional among scientists. But conflicts arise over the appropriate role of intent in reviewing an agency's rule-making decisions, they note, and scientists who assist in public-policy efforts designed to minimize the they identify issues emerging in recent judicial reviews of regulatory costs and hazards associated with technological change. Those who actions. argue that scientists should help the government cope with the un- Sheila Jasanoff and Dorothy Nelkin take issue with the remedies certainties presented by new technologies are challenged by col- proposed by advocates of a "science" of risk assessment. In their leagues who believe that these issues are inherently more political examination of litigation based on disputes over science and technol- than scientific in nature. One outgrowth of the search for a means to ogy, they argue that proposed reforms frequently misconceive the balance scientific objectivity with politic' action has been the in- problems faced by the courts because they concentrate on technical creased emphasis on studies of risk assessment. uncertainty rather than on the conceptual and policy issues at stake. Chauncey Starr introduces one of the first quantitative efforts to Jasanoff and Nelkin prefer to rely more on traditional forums for respond to the question, How safe is safe enough? In his risk-benefit conflict resolution than do some of the other contributors to this analysis, Starr measures the acceptability of voluntary and in- chapter. voluntary risks using data on accidental deaths arising from tech- C. Hohenemser, R.W. Kates, and P. Slovic construct a unique nological developments already in public use. He then extrapolates profile for technological hazards that incorporates quantitative physi- from these figures to e-timate the level of risk of new technologies cal, biological, and social descriptors. The profile, termed seeking to provide similar services. "hazardousness," was tested in pilot experiments on perception and Judge David L. Bazelon focuses on the invisible judgments often appeared to capture a large fraction of the public's concern with imbedded in risk assessments in his article on risk and responsibility. hazards. Judgments involved in government regulatory decisions affecting William D. Ruckelshaus appeals to the scientific community to public health and safety, h.; notes, cz.n no longer be delegated to make a greater effort to explain to the public the uncertainties inso-called disinterested scientists. He recommends that society rely volved in estimates of r.sk. :is: urges the development of a common instead on procedural standards to help sort out scientific tam, statutory framework to replace the patchwork of laws and regulations inferences, and values in risk regulation that deal with environmental risks. He also endorses separating David Okrent develops a foundation for a science of risk assessscientific risk assessment from the use of these assessments in regula- ment, describing the need to measure societal risks accure'y, to tory decisions and management actions. examine and ref va.uate priorities in risk decisions, and to determine How can science most effectively contribute to public debates over the level of expenditure for risk reduction beyond which adverse the nature and significance of environmental, consumer, or occupa- economic and political cor Aerations may be overriding. Chauncey tional risks? The authors in this chapter present no uniform rem tdy or Starr and Chris Whipple show that the cost-benefit type of risk solution. Instead, the reader is left with the impression that efforts to analysis that was used for early evaluations of technological risks is extend science into politics have resulted in som, politic:zation of limited by subjective interpretations of risk perceptions They science itself. Coupling scientific research with social and political recommend the use of quantitative risk criteria, such as safety targets, reforms has raised new questions about the motivations, methods, to improve the effectiveness of risk management. and sponsorship of individual research efforts. The result has been Simon Ramo continues the discussion about risk management by Increased public skepticism about science and calls for new account- pointing out that government regulations have often resulted inability measures within the scientific community. RC inequitable mitigation of technological hazards. He proposes a new

,-; -4 .1 166

achieve maximum social benefit at minimum social cost. Unfortunately,we f ave not as yet developed sucha pre- oictive system analysis. As a result,our society historically has arrivedat acceptable balances of technological ben- efitand socialcost empiricallyby trial, error, and subsequent corrective steps. In advanced societies today, this historical empirical approachcreates an increasingly critical situation, fortwo basic reasons. The firstisthe well- known difficulty in changinga techni- The evaluationofteehm.;a1ap-sistent patterns of fatalities in the pub-cal subsystem of our society once it has proaches to solving societal problemslic use of technology. (That this maybeen woven into the economic, politi- customarily involves consideration of not always be so is evidenced by thecal, and cultural structures. Forexam- the relationship between potential tech-paucity of data 'elating to the effectsple, many of our environmental-pollu- nical performance and the required in-of environmental pollution.) Thesec-tic. problems have known engineering vestment of societal resources. Althoughond assumption is that such I.toricallysolutions, but the problems of economic such performance-versus-cost relation-revealed social preferences and costsreadjustment, political jurisdiction, and ships are el.rly useful for choosingare sufficiently enduring to permit theirsocial behavior loom very large. It will between alternative solutions, they douse for predictive purposes. take many decades to put into effect not by themselves determine how much In the absence of economic or socio-the technical solutions we know today. technology a society can justifiably pur-logical theory which might give betterTo give a specific illustration, the pol- chase.This latterdeterminationre-results,thisempirical approach pro-lution of our water resources could be quires, additionally, knowledge of thevides some interesting insights intoac-completely avoided by means of engi- relationship between social benefit andcepted social values relative to persona!neering systems now available, but pub- justified social cost. The two relation-risk. Because this methodology is basedlic interest in making the economic and ships may then be used jointly to de-on historical data, it does not serve topolitical adjustments needed for apply- termine the optimum investment ofdistinguish what is "best" for societying these techniques is ve.y limited. It societal resourcesinatechnologicalfrom what is "traditionally acceptabte."has been facetiously suggested that, as approach to a social need. a means of motivating the public, every Technological analyses for disclosing community and industry should be re- he relationship between expected per-Maximum Benefit at Minimum Cost quired to place its water intake down- formance and monetary costsare a stream from its outfall. traditional part of all engineering plan- The broad societal benefits of ad- In order to minimize these difficul- ning and design. The inclusion in suchvances in technology exceed the asso-ties,it would be desirable to try out studies of all societal costs (indirectasciated costs sufficiently to make tech-new developments in the smallest social well as direct) is less customary, andnological growth inexorable. Shef's so-groups that would permit adequate as- obviously makes the analysi- more dif-cioeconomic study (1) has indicatedsessment. This is a common practice ficult and less definitive. Analyses of thattechnologicalgrowth hasbeenin market-testing a new productor in social value as a function of technicalgenerally exponential in this century,field-testing a new drug. In both these performance are not only uncommon doubling every 20 years in nations hav-cases, however, the experiment is com- butare rarely quantitative. Yet weing advanced technology. Such tech-pletely under the control of a single know that implicit in every nonarbi-nological growth has apparently stim-company or agency, and the test infor- trary national decision on the use of ulated a parallel growth in socioeco-mation can be fed back to thecon- technologyis a trade-off of societalnomic benefits and a slower associatedtrolling group in a time that is short benefits and societal cost growth in social costs. relative to the anticipated commercial In this article I offer an approach The conventional socioeconomic ben-lifetime of the product. This makes it for establishing a quantitative measure efitshealth, education, incomearepossible to achieve essentially optimum of benefit relative to cost for an im-presumably indicative of an improve-use of the product in an acceptably portant element in our spectrum of ment in the "quality of life." The costshort time. Unfortunately, this is rarely social valuesspecifically, for acciden-of this socioeconomic progress shows upthe case with new technologies. Engi- tal deaths arising from technological in all the negative indicators of our so-neering developmentsinvolving new developments in public use. The anal-cietyurban and environmental prob-technology are likely to appear in many ysis is based on two assumptions. Thelems, technological unemployment, poorplaces simultaneously and to become first is that historical national accidentphysical and mental health, and so on.deeply it .a into the systems of records are adequate for revealing con- If we understoodquantitativelytheour sock Ineir impact is evi- causalrelationshipsbetweenspecificdent or m surabbl. The author is dean of the School of Engineer- ing and Applied Science, University of California,technological developments and societal This brings us to the second reason Los Angeles. This article is adapted from a paper values, both positive and negativt, we presented at the Symposium on Human Ecology for the increasing severity of the prob- held atAir lieNouse, Warrenton, Virginia,inmight deliberately guide and regulatelem of obtaining maximum benefits at November 1968. technological developments soastominimum costs. It has often been stated

1 ?2 167 that the time required from the con-example, automobile and airplane safe-on highways and a higher probability ception of a technical idea to its firstty have been continuously weighed byof accidents. If, subsequently, the traffic application in society has been drasti-societyagainst economiccostsanddensity increases, he may decide that cally shortened by modern engineeringoperating performance. In these andthe penalties are too great and move organization and management. In fact,other cases, the real trade-off process isback to the city. Such au ind;vidual the history of technology does not sup-actually one of dynamic adjustment,optimization process can be compara- port this conclusion. The bulk of thewith the behavior of many portions oftively rapid ,because the feedback of evidence indicates that the time fromour social systems out of ph' :e, due toexperience to the individual is rapid), conception to first application (or dem-the many separate "time constants" in-so the statistical pattern fo- a large onstration) has been roue.), unchangedvolved. Readily available historical datasocial group may be an important "real- by modern management, and dependson accidents and health, for a varietytime" indicator of societal .trade-offs chiefly on the complexity of the devel-of public activities, provide an enticingand values. opment. stepping-stone to quantitative evalua- "Involuntary" activities differ in that However, what has beenr% ducedtion of this particular type of socialthe criteria and options are determined substantially in the past century is thecost. The social benefits arising fromnot by the individuals affected but by time from first use to widespread inte-some of these activities can be roughlya controlling body. Such control may gration into our social system. Thedetermined. On the assumption that inbe in the hands of a government agen- techniques for societal diffusion of asuch historical situations a socially ac-cy,apoliticalentity,aleadership new technology and its subsequent ex-ceptable and essentially optimum trade-group, an assembly of authorities or ploitation are now highly developed.off..4 values has been achieved, we"opinion-makers,"oracombination Our ability to organize resources ofcould say that any generalizations de-of such bodies. Because of the com- money, men, and materials to focusveloped might then be used for predic-plexity of large societies, only the con- on new technological programs has re-tive purposes. This approach could givetrol group is likely to be fully aware duced the diffusion-exploitation timea rough answer to the seemingly simpleof all the criteria and options involved by roughly an order of magnitude inquestion "How safe issafe: enough?"in their decision process. Further, the the past century. The pertinence of this question totime required for feedback of the ex- Thus, we now face a general situa-all of us, and particularly to govern-perience thatresults from the con- tion in which widespread use of a newmental regt.latory agencies, is obvious.trolling decisions is likely to be very technological development may occurHopefully, a functional answer mightlong. The feedback of cumulative in- before_s social impact can be proper-provid. a basis for establishing per-dividual experiences into societal com- ly assessed, and before 1.ny empiricalformance "design objectives" for themunication channels (usually political adjustment of thebenefit- versus -costsafety of the public. or economic) is a slow process, as is relation is obviously indic ited. the process of altering the planning of It has been clear for sr me time that the control group. We have many ex- predictive technological assessments areVoluntary and Involuntary Activities amples of such "involuntary" activities, a pressing societal need. However, even war being perhaps the most extreme if such assessments become available, Societal activities fall into two gen-case of the operational separation of obtaining maximum socialbenefitateral categoriesthose in which the in-the decision-making group from those minimum cost also requires the estab-dividual participates on a "voluntary"most affected. Thus, the real-time pat- lishment of a relative value system forbasis and those in which the participa-tern of societal trade-offs on "involun- the basic parameters in our objectivetion is "involuntary," imposed by thetary" activities must be considered in of improved ' quality of life." The em-society in which the individual lives.terms of the particular dynamics of pirical approach implicitly involved anThe process of empirical optimization intuitivesocietalbalancingof suchof benefits and costs is fundamentally "ii 10 0 values.A predictiveanalyticalap-similar in the two casesnamely, a 3i9 9 0 o8 proach will require an explicit scale ofreversible exploration of available op- 0. K ME Coal relative social values. tionsbut the time required for em-u mining For example, if technological assess-pirical adjustments (the time constantsg6 6 0 o ment of a new development predicts anof the system) and the criteria for op- .c VA s C 5 etas increased per capita annual income oftimization are quite different in the two E rninin: 4 x percent but also preuicts an associ-situations. 64 ..... ated accident probability of y fatalities In the case of "voluntary" activities, 4... annually per million population, thenthe individual uses his own value sys- 03 o /3 luri >, d* how are these to be compared in theirtem to evaluate his experiences. Al- co / mining and quarrying effect on the "quality of life"? Becausethough his eventual trade-off may not C / 2 2 the penalties or risks to the publicbe consciously or analyticallydeter- E L arising from a new development can bemined, or based upon objective knowl-6 , ..... reduced by applying constraints, there w Risk,'wager edge, it nevertheless is likely to repre- 4.. will usually be a functional relationshipsent, for that individual, a crude op- 11, / ?" (or trade-off) between utility and risk,timizationappropriatetohisvalue i i the x and y of our example. system. For example, an urban dweller 2 00 2.50 300 350 4.00 4 50 There are many historicalillustra-may move to the suburbs because of a0) Hour y wage (dollars) tions of suchtrade-off relationshipslower crime rate and better schools, atFig. 1. Mining accident rates plotted rela- that were empirically determined. Forthe cost of more time spent travelingtive to incentive. 173 168 10'4 %e."... a ,,, assumed proportional to its benefit to t : alaff . :,1)AviArioti 1 him. In the case of .he "involuntary" ac- 10'8 tivities, the contribution of the activity to the individual's annual income (or the equivalent) was assumed proportional toitsbenefit.Thisassumptionof roughly constant relationship between benefits and monies, for each class of activities,is clearly an approximation. 10'8 However, because we are dealing in orders of magnitude, thedistortions 10-8 likely to be introduced by this approximation are relatively small. g 1010 In the case of transportation modes, the benefits were equated with the sum

t 1 I I I t I I I 1 I I 1 1 of the monetary cost to the passenger 10'11 II'II o 400 800 1200 1600 2000 2400and the value of the time saved by that AVERAGEANNUAL BENEFIT /PERSON INVOLVED (DOLLARS) particular mode relative to a slower, competitive mode. Thus, airplanes %ere Fig. 2. Risk (R) plotted relative tobenefit (B) for various kinds of voluntary and involuntary exposure. compared with automobiles, and automobiles were compared with public transportation or walking. Benefits of public transportation were equated with approach to an acceptable balance ofmight be useful to include all injuriestheir cost. Inallcases, the benefits social values and costs. The historical(which are 100 to 1000 times as nu-were assessed on an annual dollar basis trends in such activities 'lay thereforemerous as deaths), the difficulty in ob-because this seemed to be most relevant be more significant indi..tors of socialtaining data and the unequal signifi-to the individual's intuitive process. 7:or acceptability than the existent tradecance of varying disabilities would in-example, most luxury sports require an offs are. troduce inconvenient complexity forinvestment and upkeep only partially In examining the historical berefit-this study. So the risk measure useddependent upon usage. The associated risk relationships for "involuntary" ac-hereisthe statisticalprobability ofrisks, of course, exist only during the tivities, it is important to recognize thefatalities per hour of exposure of thehours of exposure. perturbing role of public psychologicalindividual to the activity considered. Probably the use -f electricity pro- acceptance of risk arising from the in- The hour-of-exposure unit was chos-vides the best example of the analysis fluence of authorities or dogma. Be-en because it was deemed more closelyof an "involuntary" activity. In this cause inthissituation the decision-relatedtotheindividual'sintuitive case the fatalities include those arising making is separated from the affectedprocess in choosing an activity than afrom electrocution, ele-.1rically caused individual, society has generally clothedyear of exposure would be, and gavefires, the operation of power plants, many of its controlling groups in ansubstantially similarresults.Anotherand the mining of the required fossil almost impenetrable mantle of author-possible alternative, the risk per activ-fuel. The benefits a:::.re estimated from ity and of imputed wisdom. The public:ity, involved a comparison of too manya United Nations study of the relation- generally assumes that the decision-dissimilar units of measure; thus,in ship between energy consumption and making process is based on a rationalcomparing the risk for various modesnational income; the energy fraction analysis of social benefit and socialof transportation, one could use riskassociatedwtihelectricpower was risk. While it often is, we have all seenper hour, per mile, or per trip. As thisused. The contributions of the home after-the-fact examples of irrationality.study was directed toward exploring auseof electric power to our "quality It is important to omit such "witch-methodology for determining social ac-of life"more subtle than the contri- doctor" situations in selecting examplesceptance of risk, rather than the safestbutions of electricity in industryare of optimized "involuntary" activities,mode of transportat'ln for a particularomitted. The availability of refrigera- because in fact these situations typifytrip, the simplest _ommon unitthattion has certainly improved our na- only the initial stages of exploration ofof risk per exposure hourwas chosen.tional health and the quality of dining. options. The social benefit derived from eachThe electric light has certainly provided activity was converted into a dollargreat flexibility in patterns of living, equivalent, as a measure of integratedand televisionisa positive element. Quantitative Correlations value to the individual. This is perhapsPerhaps,however,thegross-income the most uncertain aspect of the cor-measure used in the study is sufficient With this description of the problem,relations because it reduced the "qual-for present purposes. and the associated caveats, we are in aity-of-life" benefits of an activity to an Information on acceptance of "vol- position to discuss the quantitative cor-overly simplistic measure. Nevertheless untary" risk by individuals as a func- relations. For the sake of simplicity inthe correlations seemed useful, and notion of income benefits is not easily thisinitial study, I have taken as abetter measure was available. In theavailable, although we know that such measure of the physical risk to the in-case of the "voluntary" activities, thea relationship must exist. Of particular dividual the fatalities (deaths) associ-amount of money spent on the activityinterest, therefore, is the special case of ated with each activity. Although itoy the average involved individual wasminers exposed to high occupational 174 169

100.0 lo-5 10.0 8 8.0

6 6.0 o us 10.0 be EINIIII' 4.0 > 0 a z SY oz a as--: .., = 1.0 cc's' a. 6 4. DISEASE 1.02 a.., ,.: - 08 tri .1 I-< 10-11 / 0.64 4. - /....---- INVOLVED -

/ _ 10-7 0.01 / 1940 1960 :900 1920 0.2 YEAR 2 I Fig. 3 (above). Risk and participation trends for motor vehicles.

Fig. 4 (right). Risk and participation trends for certifiedair 10-7 0.1 carriers. 1940 1950 1960 1970 fEAR

risks. In Fig. 1, the accident rate andobvious being the difference by severally exposed see this matter from differ- the severity rate of mining injuries areorders of magnitude in society's will-ent perspectives. The disease risk perti- plotted asainst the hourly wage (2, 3).ingness to accept "voluntary" and "in-nent to the average age of the involved The acceptance of individual risk is anvoluntary" risk. As one would expect,group probably would provide the basis exponential function of the wage, andwe are loathe to let others do unto usfor a more meaningful comparison than can be roughly approximated byawhat wt, happily do to ourselves. the risk pertinent to the national aver- third-power relationship in this range. The rate of death from disease ap-age age does. Use of the figure for the If this relationship has validity, it maypears to play, psychologically, ayard-single group would complicate these mean that several "quality of life" pa-stick role in determining the acceptabil-simple comparisons, butthatfigure rameters (perhaps health, living essen-ity of risk on a voluntary basis. Themight be more significant as a yard- tials, and recreation) are each partlyrisk of 'eath in most sporting activitiesstick. influenced by any increase in availableis surprisingly close to the rick of death The risks associated with general avi- personal resources, and that thus thefrom diseasealmost asthough,ination, commercial aviation, and travel increased acceptance of riskis expo-sports,theindividual'ssubconsciousby motor vehicle deserve special com- nentiallymotivated.Theextenttocomputer adjustedhiscourage andment. The latter originated as a "vol- which this relationship is "voluntary"made him tal:,. risks associated with auntary" sport, but in the pasthalf- for the miners is not obvious, but thefatality level equaling but not exceed-century the motor vehicle ha,: oecome subject is interesting nevertheless. ing the statistical mortality due to in-an essential utility. Genera! aviation is voluntary exposure to disease. Perhapsstill a highly voluntary activity. Com- this defines the demarcation betweenmercial aviation is pertly voluntar; and Risk Comparisons boldness and foolhardiness. partlyessentialand,additionally,is In Fig. 2 the statistic for the Vietnamsubject to government administration The results for the societal activitieswar is shown because itraises an in-as a transportatiorutility. studied, both "voluntary" and "involun-teresting point. It is only slightly above Travel by motor vehicle has now tary," are assembled in Fig. 2. (For de-the average for risk of death fromreached a benefit-risk balance, as shown tails of the risk-benefit analysis, see thedisease. A.1suming that some long-rangein Fig. 3. It is interesting to note that is only slightly appendix.) Also shown in Fig. 2 is thesocietalbi:nefit was anticipated fromthe present risk level third-power relationship between riskthis war, we find that the relatedrisk,below the basic level of risk from dis- and benefit characteristic of Fig. 1. Foras seen by society as awhole, is notease. In view of the high percentage comparison, the average risk of deathsubstantially different from the averageof the population involved, this probably represents a true societal judgment from accident and fromdiseaseisnonmilitary risk from disease. How- on the acceptability of risk in relation shown. Because the average number ofever, for individuals inthe military- fatalities from accidents is only aboutservice age group (age 20 to30), theto benefit. It also appears from Fig. 3 that future reductions in the risk level one-tenth the number fromdisease,risk of death in Vietnam is about ten will be slow in coming, evenif the their inclusion is not significant. times the normal mortality rate (death historical trend of improvement can be Several major features of the benefit-from accidents or disease). Hence the risk relations are apparent, the mostpopulation as a whole and those direct-maintained (4). 175 170

io-4 .1 8 O/0 .0...... ( .,#.0. 6 0""0. .0 0 102 ., -C.) .. 17 0-J 0\-MOT011 VEHICLE z 4o O

-J 10 Q. / 0CL CL

b` % 1NVOLVEO CO4MERCIAL " /-0. AVIATION o 2u. \--GENERAL 0 AVIATION

10-I 1900 (DISEASE Pt104; 1920 1940 1960 YEAR to-51 0-2 1940 1950 1960 Fig. 5 (I ft). Risk and participation trends for general aviation. YEAR Fig. 6 (above). Group risk plotted relative to year.

Commercial aviation has barely ap-each of the activities of Figs. 3-5 Public Awareness proached arisklevel comparable toplotted in Fig. 6. This graph represents that set by disease. The trend is sim-the historical trer.d of totalfatalities Finally, I attempted to relate these ilar to that for motor vehicles, as shownper hour of exposure of the popula-risk data to a crude measure of public in Fig. 4. However, the percentage oftion involved (7). The leveling off ofawareness of the associated social ben- the population participating is now onlymotor-vehicle risk at about 100 fatali-efits (see Fig. 7). The "benefit aware- 1/20 that for motor vehicles. Increasedties per hour of exposure of the partici-ness" was arbitrarily defined as the public participation in commercial avi-pating population may be significant.product of therelative level of ad- ationwill undoubtedlyincreasetheBecause most of the U.S. population isvertising, the square of the percentage pressure to reduce the risk, because,involved, this rate offatalities mayof population involved in the activity, for the general population, the benefits sufficient public visibility to setand the relative usefulness (or impor- are much less than those associateda level of social acceptability. It is in-tance) of the activity to the individual with motor vehicles. Commercial avia-teresting, and disconcerting,tonote(8). Perhaps these assumptions are too tion has not yet reached the point ofthat the trend of fatalities in aviation,crude, but Fig. 7 does support the optimum benefit-risk trade-off (5). both commercial and general,is uni-reasonable position that advertising the For general aviation the trends areformly upward. benefits of an activity increases public similar, as shown in Fig. 5. Here the risk levels are so high (20 times the

risk from disease)thatthisactivity COMMERCIAL AVIATION must properly be considered to be in 41 AUTOMOBILE /1 the category of adventuresome sport.0 0 SMOKING 0. However, the rate of risk is decreasing X 41 so rapidly that eventually the risk for U.16 -- general aviation may be little higher Z than that for commercial aviation. Since 0 the percentage of the population in- RAILROADS 0 0z volved is very small, it appears that theit 41 present average risk levels are accept- 0. able to only a limited group (6). 41 The similarity of the trends in Figs. a 3-5 may be the basis for another hy-4 pothesis,asfollows:theacceptable ar 0 FIREARMS risk is inversely related to the number NUCL FAR of people participating in an activity. 104 10-3 10 io' The product of the risk and the per- BENEFIT AWARENESS centage of the population involved in Fig. 7. Accepted risk plotted relative to benefitawareness (see text). 171 acceptance of a greater level of risk. Technical studies of the consequencesalthough this study is only exploratory, This, of course could subtly produce aof hypothetical extreme (and unlikely)itrevealsseveralinterestingpoints. fictitious benefit-risk ratioas may benuclear power plant catastrophes, which(i) The indications are that the public the case for smoking. would disperse radioactivity into popu-is willing to accept "voluntary" risks lated areas, have indicated that aboutroughly 1000 times greater than "in- 10 lethal cancers per million populationvoluntary"risks.(ii) The statistical Atomic Power Plant Safety might result (10). On this basis, we cal-risk of death from disease appears to culate that such a power plant mightbe a psychological yardstick for estab- I recognize the uncertainty kiherentstatistically have one such accidentlishing the level of acceptability of in the quantitative approach discusseduery 3 years and still meet the riskother risks.(iii) The acceptability of here, but the trends and magnitt deslimit set. Fiowever, such a catastropherisk appears to be crudely proportional may nevertheless be of sufficient va-would completely destroy a major por-to the third power of the benefits (real lidity c warrant their use in determin-tion of the nuclear section of the p, ntor imagined). (iv) The social accepting national "design objectives" forand either require complete disman-ance of risk is directly influenced by technologicalactivities. How wouldtling or years of costly reconstruction.public awareness of the benefits of an this be done? Because power companies expect plantsactivity, es determined by advertising, Let us consider as an example theto last about 30 years, the economicusefulness, and the number of people introduction of nuclear power plantsconsequences of a catastrophe everyparticipating. (v) In a sample applica- as a principal source of electric power.few years would be completely unac-tion of these criteria to atomic power This is an especially good example be-ceptable. In fact, the operating com-plant safety, it appears that an engi- cause the technology has been primar-panies would nut accept one such fail-neering design objective determinel by ily nurtured, guided, and regulated byure, on a statistical basis, during theeconomic criteria would result in a the government, with industry under-normal lifetime of the plant. design-target Ask level very much lower takingtheengineering development It is likely that, in order to meet thethan the present socially accepted risk and the diffusion into public use. Theeconomic performance requirement; offor electric power plants. government specificaily maintains re-the power companies, a rataophe Perhaps of greatest interest is the fact sponsibility for public safety. Further,rate of less than 1 in about 1rplant-that this methodology for revealing ex- the engineering of nuclear plants per-years would be needed. This would beisting, social preferences and values may mits continuous reduction of the prob-a public risk of 10 deaths per 100be a means of providing the insight ability of accidents, at a substantialplant-years, or 0.1 death per year peron social benefit relative to cost that is increase in cost. Thus, the trade-off ofmillion population. So the economicso necessary for judicious national deci- utility and potential risk ca'a be madeinvestment criteria of the nuclear plantsions on new technological develop- quantitative. userthe power companywculd prob-ments. Moreover, in the case of the nuclearabiy set a risk ievei 1/200 inc present power plant the historicalempiricalsocially accepted risk associated with Appendix: Details of approach toachieving an optimumelectric power, or 1/40 the present Risk-Benefit Analysis benefit-risk trade-offis not pragmati-risk associated with coal-burning plants. Motor - vehicletravel. The calculation t_ally feasible. All such plants are now of motor-vehicle fatalities per exposure so safethat it may be 30 years or An obvious design question isthis:hour per year is based on the number of longer before meaningful risk experi-Can a nuclear power plant be engineeredregistered cars, an assumed11/2 persons ence will be accumulated. By that time,with a predicted performance of lessper car, and an assumed 400 hours per many plants of varied design will bethan 1 catastrophic failure in 100 plant-year of average car use [data from 3 and years of operation? I believe the answer11]. The figurefor annualbenefitfor in existence, and the empirical acci- motor-vehicle travel is based on the sum dent data may not be applicable tois yes, but that is a subject for a differentof costs for gasoline, maintenance, insur- those being built. So a very real ne'doccasion. The principal point is that theance, and car payments and on the value exists now to establish "design objec-issue of public safety can be focusedof the time savings per person. Itisas- on a tangible, quantitative, engineeringsumed that use of an automobile allows tives" on a predictive-performance ba- a person to save 1 hour per working day sis. 4..31,511 *aLlp..11Vo and that a person's time is worth $5 per Let us first arbitrarily assume that This example reveals a public safetyhour. nuclear power plants should be as safeconsideration which may apply to many Travel by air route carrier. The estimate as coal-burning plants, so as not toother activities: The economic require-of passenger fatalities per passenger-hour ment for the protection of major capitalof exposure for certified air route carriers increase public risk. Figure 2 indicates is based on the annual number of pas- that the total risk to society from elec-investments may often be a more de-Anger fatalities listed in the FAA Statisti- tric power is about 2 X i9 -9 fatalitymanding safety constraint than socialcal Handbook of Aviation (see 12) and per person per hour of exposure. Fossilacceptability. the of passenger-hours per year. The latter number is estimated trom the fuel plants contribute about Vs of this average number of seats per plane, the risk, or about 4 deaths per million pop- seat load factor, the number of revenue ulation per year. In a modern society,Conclusion miles flown per year, and the average a million people may require a million plane speed (data from 3). The benefit kilowatts of power, and this is about The application of this approach tofor travel by certified air route carrier is other areas of public responsibility isbased on the average annual air fare per the size of most new power stations. passenger-mile and on the value of the So, we now have a target risk limit ofself-evident. It provides a useful meth-time saved as a result of air travel. The 4 deaths per year per million-kilowattodology for answering thequestioncost per passenger is estimated from the power station (9). "How safe is safe enough?" Further,averagerateperpassenger-mile(data 1' ?'' 172 from3),the revenue miles flown per year Smoking.The estimate of the tisk from References and Notes (data from 12), the annual number of sm'king is based on the ratio for the 1.A. L. Shef, "Socioeconomic attributes of our passenger hoardings for 1967 (132 x Ur,mortality of smokers relative to nonsmok- technological society," paper presented before according to the United Air Lines News ers,theratesoffatalitiesfrom hears the IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Elec- Bureau), and the assumption of 12 board-disease and cancer for the general popu- tronics Engineers) Wcccon Conference, Los ings per passenger. lation, and the assumption that the Angeles, August 1968. risk 2.Minerals Yearbook (Govc t n Tic nt Printing General aviation.The number of fatal-is continuous [data from theSummary of °Mee. Washington. D.C.,1966). ities per passenger-hour for generalavia- the Report of the Surgeon General's 4,4 3.U.S. Statistical Abstract (Government Print- ing Office, Washines.m, D.C., 1967). tion visory Committee on Smoking and Ilea t is a function of the number of an- 4.The procedure outlined in thc appendix was nual fatalities, the number of plane hours(Government Printing Office, Washington, usedIncalculating thctick associated with flov.a per year, and the average numberD.C., 1964)). Thc annual intangible bene- motor-vehicle t In ordcr to calculate ex- of passengers per plane (estimated fromfitto the cigarette smoker iscalculated posure hours for various years,itwas as- from the American Cancer Society's esti- sumed that the average annual driving timc the ratio of fatalitiestofatalcrashes) per car increased linearly from SO hours in (data from12). Itis assumed that in 1967mate that 30 percent of the population 1900 to 400 hours In1960 and thereafter. the cash outlay for initialexpendituressmokes cigarettes, from the number of The percentage of people involved is based and maintenance costs for generalavia-cigarettes smoked per year (see 3), and on thcU.S.population,thcnumbercf registered cars, and thc assumed value of 1.5 tionwas $1.5 X 10'. The benefitisex-from the assumed retail cost of $0.015 nettle norear, pressedin terms of annual cash outlayrr ea a tette. S.The procedure outlined in the appendix was per person, and the estimate is based on Vietnam.The estimate of the risk as- used in calculating the risk associated with. the number of passenger-hours per yearsociated with the Vietnam war is based andthcnumberofpeoplewhoflyin. certifiedair route carriers for1967For a and the assumption that the average per-on the assumption that 500,000 men are given year. the n mbcr of people who fly is son flies 20 hours, or 4000 miles, annual-exposedthereannuallytotheriskof estimated from the total number of passenger ly. The value of the time saved is baseddeath and that the fatality rate is 10.000 boardings and the assumption that the aver- on the assumption that a person's time ismen per year. The benefit for Vietnam is age passenger makes six round trips per year calculated on the assumption that the en- (data from 3). worth $10 per hour and that he saves 60 6.The method of calculating risk for general hours per year through traveling the 4000tireU.S.populationbenefitsintangibly aviationisoutlinedintheappendix. For miles by air instead of by automobile atfrom the annual Vietnam expenditure of a given year. thc percentage of people in- 50 miles per hour. $30 x 10'. volvedisdefined by thc number of active Electric power. aircraft (see3);thenumberofpeople Railroad travel.The estimate of rail- The estimate of the risk per plane, as defined by thc ratio of fatal!. road passenger fatalities per exposure hourassociated w:th thc use of electric power ties to fatal crashes: and the population of per year isbased on annual passengeris based on the number of deaths from theU.S. electriccurrent;the number of deaths 7.Group risk per exposure hour for thein- fatalities and passenger-miles and an as- volved groupis definedasthe number of sumed average train speed of 50 milesfrom fins caused by electricity; the num- fatalities per person-hour of exposure mul- per hour (data fromII).Thc passengerber of deaths that occur in coal mining. tiplied by the number of people who partici- benefitfor railroadsis bascd on figuresweighted by the percentage of totalcoal pate in thc activity. The group population and productionusedtoproduceelectricity theriskformotorvrisici...s,certifiedair for revenue and passenger-miles for com- .^utecarriers, and general aviation can be muters and noncommutcrs riven inThe and the number of deaths attributable to obtained from Figs. 3-5. Yearbook of Railroad Facts(Associationair pollution from fossil fuel stations [data 8.In calculati Ig "benefit awareness"itIsas. mimedthatthcpublic'sawarenessofan of American Railroads, 1968). Itisas-from 3 and // and fromNuclear Safety 5. 325 (1964)].Itis assumed that activityisa function of A, thc amount of sumed that the average commuter travels the money spent on advertising: P, the numbcr 20 miles per workday byrail and thatentireU.S.populationisexposedfor cif people who take part In thc activity: and the average noncommutcr travels10008760 hours per year to the risk associated U, the utility value of the activity to the per- miles per year by rail. with electric power. The cstimatc for the son involved. A is based on the amount of bPnclitisbased ontheassumption that money nsentby a particularindustryin Theestimate for skiin fatalities advertisingitsprodosst.normalized withre- there is uileci i.snieiatian between per spect to the food ar.I food products industry, per exposure hour is based on informationcapitagrot..,national p'oduct and com- which is the leading advertiser in thc U.S. obtained from the National SkiPatrolmercial energy consumption for the na- 9.In comparing nuclear and fossil fuel power f '-1967-68 southern California skitions of stations. therisks associated with the plant the world [data fromBriggs, diluents and mining of thcfuel should be season: 1 fatality,17days of skiing. Te :urology and Economic Development included 16.500skiersper day, and 5 hours of hieachcase.Thefatalitiesas- (Knopf, Ncw York1963)). Itis huffier %mimed with coal mining arc about1/4 the skiing per skier per day. The estimate ofassumed that 35 pc.cent of the energy total attributable to fossil old plants. As the benefit fu, ,kiing is based on the averageconsumed in the U.S. is used to prodace tonnageofuraniumorerequiredforan number at days of skiing per year pct equivalentnuclearplant N lesstharthe electricity. coaltonnage by more thanan ordcrof person and the aveLige cost of a typical Natural disasters.The riskasst.ciated magnitude. the nuclear plant problem primari- ski trip [data from "The Skier Market in:kith natural disasters was computed for lyinvolveshazard from effluent. Northeast North Amcrica,"U.S.Dep.C.S. floods (2.5 x 10' fatality per person- 10.This number is my cstimatcfor maximum Commerce Publ.(1965)1. In addition, it fatalities from an extreme catastrophe result- hour of exposure), tornadoes in thc Mid- ingfrommalfunctionofatypicalpower is assumed that a skier spends an averagewest(2.46 x 10' fatality), major U.S. reactor. Foi a methodology for making this of 525 per year on equipment. storms(0.8 x 10-10 calc.ilation.scrF.R. Farmer, "S. cri. fatality), and Cali- teria-a new proach."paper presentedat Hunting.The cstimatc of the risk infornia earthquakes (1.9 x 10' fatality) thc Internatu...alAtomicEnergy Agency hunting is based on an assumed value of(data fromII).The value for flood iisk Symposium inVic:ina. April 1967. Applica- 10 hours' exposure per homing day, theis based on assumption that everyone tion of Farmer's method to a fastbreeder annual number of hunting fatalities, thein the U.S. is exposed to the danger 24 pouer pl:oitin a modern buildir:,gives9 redactionoffatalities lessthanthisas- number of hunters, and the average numhours per day. No benefit figure was assumed limit by one or Ito orders of magni- ber of hunting days per year [data fromsigned in the case of natural disasters. tude. IIand from "National Survey of Fishing Disease and accidents.The average risk 11."Accident Facts." hut. Safety Comae. POI and Hunting,"U.S. Fish (1967). Wildlife Serv.in the U.S. due to disease and accidents I, -. Ilatullitiok of Al lath», (Gov- Publ.(1965)1. The average annual ex-is computed from data given inVital Sta- t. Inment lilting°time. W ashington. D.0 , penditureperhunter was $82.54 in 1965tistics of the U.S.(Government Printing (data from 3). Office, Washington, D.C., 1967).

' 3 173

sion-making tasks. Often the best we can say is that a product or an activity poses a "risit-Of risk."

Who Decides? Scientists v. the Public

Under these circumstances, the questions of who decides and how that decision is made become all the more critical. Since we have no shaman we must have confidence in the decision-making Risk Regulation: A Problem for accidents, or the chance that a tree willprocess so that we may better tolerate fall on a man felling it to produce fire- the uncertainties of our decisions. Democracy in the TtchnologkalAge wood. In order to have mobility, we risk Courts are often thrust into the role of In 1906, Congress enacted the Pureauto accidents and illness from air pollu- authoritative decision-makers. But in re- Food an . Drug Act, the first general foodtion. In Irder to have variety and conve-cent years there has been growing con- and drug safety law for the United nience in our food supply, we risk cancer cern about the ability of the judiciary to States. Commenting on the provisions ofor other toxic reactions to additives. cope with the complex scientific and the act, the House committee observed: Ironically, scientific progress not only technical issues that come before our "The question whether certain sub-creates new risks but also uncovers pre- courts. Critics note, quite correctly, that stances are poisonous or deleterious to viously unknown risks. As our under-judges have little or no training to under- health the bill does not undertake to de-standingoftheworldgrowsex- stand and resolve problems on the fron- termine, but leaves that to the determi- ponentially, we are constantly learningtiers of nuclear physics, toxicology, hy- nation of the Secretary ... underthe that old activities, once thought safe, in drology, and a myriad of other special- guidance of proper disi-'erested scien- fact pose substantial risks. The question ties. And the problem is growing. Hardly tific authorities, after most careful study,then is not whether we will have risk at a sitting in our court goes by without a CAd 6011, CApCIIIIICIli dad thorough all, but how much risk, and from ...hatcat frnm the t:huirArmental Protection research." source. Perhaps even more important,Agency, the Food and Drug Administra- This statement reflected a deep faith in the ques:ion is who shall decide. tion, the Occupational Safety and Health the ability of "disinterested" scientists In our daily lives we do not confrontAdministration (OSHA), or the Nuclear to determine for ociety what substances the trade-off between dollars and livesRegulatory Commission (NRC). These posed an unacceptable risk. More than very directly or self-consciously. Butcases often present questions that ex- 70 years of regulation have called into when we make societal policy decisions, perts have grappled with for years, with- question that naïve faith. We are no such as how much to spend to eliminateout coming to any consensus. longer content to deleY--- the assess- disease-producingpollutants, we are But the problem, of course, is riot con- ment of and response t to so-called painfully aware that we must ake whatfined to the judicial branch. Legislators disinterested scientists. indeed, the very Guido Calabresihascalled"tragic are daily faced with the same perplexing concept of objectivity embodied in thechoices." questions. They, too, lack the expertise word disinterested is now discredited. In primitive societies these choicesto penetrate the deepest scientific mys- The astounding explosion of scientific were often made by the tribal witch doc- teries at the core of important issues of knowledge and the incre,ing sophisti- tor. When the need to choose betweenpublic concern. This problem ultimately cation of the public have 1lically trans-cherished but conflicting values threat-strikes at the very heart of democracy. formed our attitude toward risk regula- ened to disrupt the society, the simplestThe most important element of our gov- tion. As governmental health and safety path was decision by a shaman, or wiz-ernment, the voter, simply cannot be ex- regulation has become pervasive, there ard, who claimed special and miraculouspected to understand the scientific predi- is a pressing need to redefine the relation insight. In our time shamans carry thecate of many issues he must face at the between science and law. This is one oftitle doctor instead of wizard, and wearpolls. the greatest challenges now facing gov- lab coats and black robes instead of reli- Some well-meaning scientists question ernment and, indeed, society as a whole. gious garb. the wisdom of leaving risk regulation to Risk regulation poses a peculiar prob- But ours is an age of doubt and skepti-the scientifically untutored. They won- lem for government. Few favor risk forcism. The realist movement in law ef-der, to themselves if not aloud, whether its own sake. But new risks are the inevi- fectively stripped the judiciary of itsthe public should be ['omitted to make table price of the benefits of progress in Solomonic cloak. So, too, thr public hasdecisions for society when it cannot un- an advanced industrial society. In ordercome to realize the inherent limitations derstand the complex scientific ques- to have the energy necessary to run our of scientific wisdom and knowledge. We tions that underlie the decisions. Some homes and our factories, we incur risks have been cast from Eden, and must find scientists point with relish to the cor - of energy production, whether they be ways to cope with ow intellectual naked-tradictory and seemingly irrational re- the risks of coal mining, nuclear reactor ness. To the basic question of how muchsponse of the public to risk. They ob- risk is acceptablea choice of valuesserve the public's alarm at the prospect of nuclear power - id note that the same The author is a Senior Circuit Judge, United we have learned that there is no one an- States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia swer. To the problem of how much risk apublic tolerates 50,000 automobile Circ.,1t, washington, D.C. 20.11. This article is based on a talk given at the American Bar Associa- given activity poses, we have learneddeaths a year. They decry the Delaney tion National Institute on Law, Science. and Tech that even our experts often lack the cer-clause, which singles out cancer among nology in Health Risk Regulations, washington, D.C.. 20 Apnl 1979. tain knowledge that would ease our deci- all serious risks and imposes a rigid ban, 1 7 9 171

regardless of countervailing benefits. the issues, and so unable to make in-As Philip Handler, president of the NAS, Scientists are also concerned by the formed value choices, I respond with theobserved in his preface to the report, growing public involvement in decisions words of Thomas Jefferson: "the difference of opinion which led to that, in the past, were left entirely to the this ambivalent statement is not a dif- scientific community. Many scientistsI know no safe depository of the ultimate powers of the society but the people them-fering interpretation of scientific factor believe that regulation has intruded .00 selves; and if we think them not enlightenedobservation; it reflects, rather, seriously e It to exercise their control with deeply into the sanctum sanctorum. The a whole-differing value systems." controversy ranges from the periphery of sc , discretion, the remedy is not to take it from them, b-z to inform their discretion. Handler's statement reveals a critical scientific pursuits, such as OSHA regula- issue in risk regulation. When the debate tion of laboratory work conditions, to Scientist, regulator, lawyer, and lay over saccharin is couched in terms of the the heart of thescientific enterprise. man must work together to reconcile thedegree of risk, it sounds as "tough there such as the conflict over recombinantsometimes conflicting values that under-is a scientific issue, appropriate for reso- DNA research. Regulators are accuse( lie theirrespective interest,per-lution by trained scientists. In fact, how- of stifling creativity ,nd innoN:tion in thespectives, and goals. This cooperationever, the terms moderate and high do not name of the false 12. f safety. Science,can be achieved only through a greaterconform to any differences in experimen- once invoked as an to progressiveunderstanding of the proper roles of thetal data, but rater correspond to the sci- government, more and more views thescientific, political, and legal commu-entists' view of the appropriate regula- political process with hostility and dis-nities in addressing the public regulation tory response. dain. of risk. Only then can we achieve apro- The growing use of analytic tools such In reaction to the public's oftenemo- gram of risk regulation that accommo-as cost-benefit analysis magnifies the tional response to risk, scientistsare dates tit best of scientific learning withchance that unrecognized value juug- tempted to disguise controversial valuethe demands of democracy. ments will creep into apparently objec- decisions in the cloak of scientific objective assessments. Even the most con- tivity, obscuring those decisions from scientious effort by experts not to exceed political accountability. Sorting Out Scientific Facts, Inferences, their sphere of competence may be in- At its most extreme, I have heard sci- and Values in Risk Regulation adequate to safeguard the validity of the entists say that they would consider not decision-making process. Outside scru- disclosing risks which in their vieware The starting point is to identify the facttiny may be. imperat:vc. insignificant, but which might alarm theand value questions involved in a risk public if taken out of context. This prob- regulation decision. In determining ques- lem is not mere speculation. Consider tions of fact, such as the magnitude ofThe Role of Courts the recently released tapes of the NRC'srisk from an activity, we as a society deliberation over the accident at Three must rely on those with the appropriate It is at this point that courts can make Mile Island. They illustrate dramaticallyexpertise. Judges and politicians have notheir contributionto sound dccision- ho v concern for minimizing publicreac- special insights in this area. Where ques- making. Courts cannot second-guess the tion can overwhelm scientific candor. tions of risk regulation involve valuedecisions made by those who, by virtue This attitudeis doubly da.igerous. choices such as how much risk is accept-of their expertise or their politicalac- First, it arrogates to the scientists the fi- able, we must turn to the political pro-countability, have been entrusted with nal say over which risks are important cess. ultimate decisions. But courts can and enough tc merit public discussion. More But even this formulation leaves manyhave playeu a critical role in fostering the important, it leads to the suppression ofproblems unanswered. There is no bright kind of dialogue and reflection that can information that may be critical to devel- line between questions of vale., and ofimprove the quality of those decisions. oping new knowledge about risks3r fact. Even where a problem is appropri- Courts, standing outside both scien- even to developing ways of avoiding ately characterized as one of scientifictific and political debate, can help to those risks. fact, consensus and certainty mayverymake sure that decision-makers articu- It is certainly true that the public's re- often be impossible even in the scientificlate the basis for their decisions. In the action to risk is riot always in proportioncommunity. Many p-oblems of scientificscientists' realmthe sphere of fact to the seriousness of the threatened harm inference lie in the realm of "trans-sci-courts can ask that the data be de- discounted by its probability. But the ence" and cannot be resolved by scien-scribed,hypothesesarticulated,and public's fears are real. tific method and experimentation. above all, in those areas where we lack Scientists must resist the temytation to The recent National Academy Sci-knowledge, that ig' aranze be confessed. belittle these concerns, however irratio-ences (NAS) report on saccharin vividlyIn the political realmthe sphere of val- nal they may seem. The scientific com- illustrates the problem of separating factuescourts can askthatdecision- munity must not turn its back on the po- from value in risk regulation. Althoughmakers explain why they believe that a litical processes to which we commit so- there is a reasonable scientific consensusrisk is too great to run, or why a particu- cietal decisions. S :ientists, like all citi-on the effects of saccharin in rats, the im-lar trade-off is acceptable. Perhaps most zens, must play an active role in the portant question of human risks and theimportant, at the interface of fact and discussion of competing values. Theirappropriate response to those risksre-value, courts can help ensure that the specialexpertisewill inevitably and main controversial. On the basis ofur-value component of decisions is explicit- rightly give them a persuasive voice controverted animal experimesttal Jata,ly acknowledged, not hidden in quasi- when issues are discussed in our assem- the NAS panel could not conclude scientific jargon. blies and on our streets. But the choice whether saccharin should be considered This role does not require,as some must ultimately be made in a politically a substance posing a "high" risk of can-have suggested, that courts intrudeex- responsible fashion. To those who feelcer, or or.ly a "moderate" risk. Yet thiscessively into an agency's processes. the public is incapable of comprehending lack of consensus should not surprise us. The demands of adequate process are ISO 175 not burdensome. Surely it is not unrea I expressed these concerns inNatural so-called informal rule-making under the sonable to suggest that agencies articu-Resources Defense Council v. Nuclear 1946AdministrativeProcedureAct. late the basis of their decisions or thatRegulatory Commission (I).In that caseThey returned the case to our court, they open their proceedings and deliber-our court was asked to review the NRC'showever,todetermine whether the ations to alt interested participants andquantification of the environmental ef-record supported the substantive con- all relevant information. fects of the uranium fuel cycle. includingclusions of the NRC. These requirements are in everyone'sthe "back end" of the cycle, waste dis- Whether the Supreme Court's deci- best interest, including decision-makersposal and reprocessing. sion represents a fair reading of what our themselves. If the decision-making pro- The NRC concluded that those effectsopinion in fact required the agency to do, cess is open and candid it will inspire are'relativelyinsignificant." Yet theI leave to the legal scholars. My own more confidence in those who are af-only evidence adduced in support of itsview is that the Supreme Court's deci- fected. Futher, by opening the process toassessment was the testimony of a singlesion will have little impact because many public scrutiny and criticism, we reduceNRC expert. Most of the testimony wasof the new laws governing risk regulation the risk that important information willconclusory and the expert gave little orexplicit!y direct agencies to use decision- be overlooked or ignored. Finally, open-no explanation of the underlying basismaking procedures that supplement the ness will promote peer review of bothfor his optimism. minimal requirements of informal t-ul factual determinations and value judg- To my mind, that testimony, withoutmaking under the Administrative Pro- ments. more, provided an inadequate basis forcedure Act. Statutes such as the Clean making critical nuclear plant licensingAir Act Amendments of 1971, the :lean Coping with Uncertainty decisions. My objection was not foundedWater Act of 1977, and the Toxic on any disagreement with the expert'sSubstances Control Act of 1976 in- Risk regulation in itself carries risks.conclusions. For all I knew then or knowclude procedural and record-enhancing No problem of any significance is so well now, he may have been accurate in mini-features that will contribute substantially understood that we can predict with con-mizing the risks from nuclear waste dis-to the quality and accountability of agen- fidence what the outcome of any deci-posal. Nor do I criticize the NRC for fail-cy decisions. sion will be. But there are two differenting to develop foolproof solutions to the kinds of uncertainty that plague risk reg- problem of waste disposal. What I found ulation. SUII1C Ullt.Cttaility is iiuicrcui 11L that...1mnstrwolierA Str ctered Apprertch ileektert- manner with which the NRC accepted regulating activities on the frontiers of Making Under Uncertainty scientific progress. For example, we sim-the sanguine predictions and refused to ply do not know enough about the con-come to grips with the limits of the agen- I have never believed that procedures tainment potential Of salt domes to knowcy's knowledge. I stated(2): per se are a cure-all for solving regula- with confidence whether they are ade- To the extent that uncertainties necessarily tory problems. Rather, procedural safe- quate for storing nuclear wastes for thou- underlie predictions of this importaroon the guards serve an instrumental role, and it sands of years. In the face of such uncer- frontiers of science and technology, there is a is the fullness of the inquiry that is para- tainty society must decide whether orconcomitant necessity to confront and ex- mount. If tne inquiry is comprehensive not to take a chanceto wait for more plore fully the depth and consequences ofandconscientious without additional such uncertainties. Not only were the gener- information before going ahead with nu- alities relied on in this case not subject to rig- procedural safeguards, it provides the clear production, or to go forward andorous probingin any formbut when ap-best record we can hope for in making gamble that solutions will be found in the parently substantial criticisms were brought the difficul! ct oices w now face. Con- future. to the Commission's attention, it simply ig- versely, even whet: all the procedural The other ki Id of uncertainty that in- nored them, or brushed them aside. Without a thorough exploration of the problems in-niceties are observed, if there is no com- fects risk regulation comes from a refusal volved in waste disposal, including past mis- mitment to a candid exploration of the is- to face the hard questions created bytakes, and a forthright assessment of the un-sues, the predicate for good decision- lack of knowledge. It is uncertainty pro-certainties and differences in expert opinion,making will be :acking. duced by scientists and regulators whothis type of agency acti ,n cannot pass muster Agencies are now revising their proce- assurt. the public that there are no risks, as reasoned decisionmaking. dures to increase the availability of ex- but know that the answers are not at The "thorough e:tploration thatI pert advILwithout abdicating agency hard. Perhaps more important, itis afound lacking is particularly Important inresponsibilityforvaluedecisions. false sense of security because the hardtechnically complex matters such as nu- Agencies have begun to encourage and questions have never been asked in theclear waste disposal. Since courts lackfund public intervenors. These steps first place. the expertise to assess the merits of the have increased the range of the adminis- In the early days of nuclear plant li-scientific controversy, "society must de-trative process, and have forced the censing, for example, the problem ofpend largely on o -rsight by the techni-agencies to wrestle with the difficult long term waste disposal was never evencally trained members of the agency and questions which might otherwise escape an issue. Only after extensive proddingthe scienthic community at large to mon-public scrutiny. Restrictions on ex parte by environmental and citizens' groupsitor technical decisions." There were acontacts have increased our confidence did the industry and regulators show anynumber of avenues open to the NRC forin agencies' impartiality and fairness. awareness of waste disposal as a prcb-the kind of expion.tionhat permitsThe visibility of decision-making pro- lem at all. Judges like myself becamemeaningful oversightbut the agencycesses and decisions themselves has troubled when those charged with ensur-adopted none of them. been enhanced by Congress' and the ing nuclear safety refused even to recog- The Supreme Court unanimously re-courts'commitmentto oNnness, nize the seriousness of the waste dis-versed our decision(3).They felt that wethrough the Freedom; Information posal issue, much less to Fopose a solu-had imposed extra procedures on theAct, the Advisory Committee Act, and tion. NRC beyond those required by law forthe Crinshine Act. I am confident that the 181 courts will continue vigorously to carrythe long run cause more harm than thetainties of risk regulation. Approaching out Congress' mandate that decison- risk., it prevents. But delay that is neces-the decision to take or to step back from making be honest, open, thorough, ratio- sary for calm reflection, full debate, andrisks such as nuclear power is like com- nal, and fair. mature decision more than compensatesing to a busy intersection with our view for the additional costs it imposes. Thepartially obscured. Our instincts tell us Alaska Pipeline was embroiled in exten-to proceed with caution, because inter- The Problev of Delay sive controversy in our courts, primarilysections are dangero':s. Ultimately, the by environmental groups who ques-importance of our journey and the desir- Consideringallrelevantdata andtioned whether sufficient attention wasability of our goal may lead us to brave viewpoints is essential to good decisions. given to safety issues. The litigation im-the traffic and pull out into the highway. This is why I am concerned by recentposed substantial costs, lvath the risingBut even when we decide to proceed, we proposals to shorten the decision-makingexpenses for building the pipeline andshould not omit the moment of reflection rrocess for licensing nuclear reactors. Ithe cost of postponing a major source ofto observe the passing cars, and look have no doubt that some of the currentdomestic energy. But in the subsequentboth ways. delay is unnecessary, and it may be thatattorneys' fees proceedings the com- current proposals do not affect criticalpanies themselves conceded that the liti- References and Notes de:iberative processes. I do not expressgation produced substantial safety im- I. Natural Resources Defense Council v. Nuclear any views on specific proposals. I onlyprovements in the pipeline that Congress Regulatory Commission, Fed. Rep. 2nd Ser., vol. 547. p. 633 (D.C:Circuit 1976). reversed sub want to caution that in speeding up theultimatelyapproved.Sometimes he nom. Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council (3). Noth- process, we must take care not to sacri-benefits of delay can be dramatic. The ing in these remarks should be taken to intimate fice the valuable and productive safe-American experience in avoiding the any vi -ws of the merits of this case in its present posture, on remand from the Supreme Court. guards that have come to be built into thetragedy of thalidomide is a poik,nant but 2. Ibid., p. 653. decision-making process. net unique example. 3.T. ermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natu- ral Resources Defense Council, U.S. Rep., vol. I not favor delay caused by an un- By strengthening the administrative 435, p. 519 (1978). thinking rejection of progress. Delayprocess we provide a constructive and from unjustified fear of the future can increative response to the inherent uncer-

their measurability. This problem (together with the poss;t:le er.oneousness of the raw data), has led to a questioning of the desirability of using such information in making decisions. Furthermore, some hazards, such as the greenhouse effect or the effect of energy policies on the chance of war (4), introduce risks that can be difficult to quantify. Never- theless, for many societal hazards, risk quantification, albeit imperfect and frequently containing large uncertainties, is The terms "hazard" and "risk" can beindividuals in the rowboat than in the ur illy possible and desirable. Decisions used in various ways. Their usage in this ocean liner (1). still have '.o be made, and they are likely article is defined by the following simple Some gene:al observations follow: to be better if they are made with the example. I) Society is not risk-free and cannotbenefit of more complete information Three people crossing the Atlantic in abe. No energy source is free of risk, ei- keeping in mind tie need for judgment as rowboat face a hazard of drowning. The ther to the environment or to the public. to when the inabili:y to completely quan- maximum societal hazard in this case isThis includes solar energy (2). Measures tify may lead to ur.warranted depen- threedeaths. Three hundred people toward achieving "soft" energy, zero in- dence on estimates. Consi: oration crossing the Atlantic in an ocean liner crease in energy consumption, and even should be given to requiring risk quan- face the same hazard of drowning, butconservation inherently carry risk. tification, as practical, for societal en- the maximum societal hazard is 300 2) There are large gaps in soc:aty's deavors. deaths. The risk to each individual perunderstanding of risks and the econom- 4) Society uses the word safe in a crossing is given by the probability of the ics of risk management (3). Risk-benefit vague and inconsi, tent fashion. Efforts occurrence of an accident in which he or anaIysis, in the legislative process and to reduce risk are not necessarily made she drowns. The risk to society is given elsewhere, is an important tool in deci in the most cost-effective way. Our pri- by the sin of the societal hazard multi-sion- making, and should be judiciouslyorities should be reevaluated. plied the probability of the hazard. employed. Procedures are needed to en- 5) In view of their statistically smaller Clearly the hazard is the same for each sure proper disclosure of assumptions,contribution to societal risk, major acci- individual, but the risk i3 greater for theuncertainties, unaggregated results, and dents may be receiving proportionately so forth, and to ensure impartial evalua- too much emphasis compared to other David (Arent is professor of engineering and ap- tion and review of any important risk- plied science at the University of California. Los sources of risk, such as chemical resi- Angeles 90(124. This article is based on testimony he benefit decisions. dues, pollutants, and wastes. presented on 25 July 1979 to the Subcommittee on &ience. Research, and Technology, U.S. House of 3) The consequences of two different 6) Society'sresources arelimited. Representatives. hazards may vary greatly12 with respect toWhen resourcesareravishedon a 177 needed service, less is available for useleum, ammonium nitrate, and liquefiedlargest of these dams (6). Historically, in measures that reduce the number ofnatural gas facilities. The largest risk oflarge dams have failed (although not nec- injuries and premature deaths. Thus adeath from an accident at one of theseessarily suddenly and in gross fashion) at more expensive source of eitctricity car-industrial facilities was estimated to bea rate of about I in 5000 per year. How- ries an economic penalty compared to aabout 1.3 X 10-' (I in £'"q) per year forever, our crude estimates of the failure cheaper source. Above a particular lev-some of the nearest Canvey residents.rate for some of the dams studied were el, expenditure of resources on addition-This risk is about five times as large asas large as I in 100 per year. al programs to reduce risks to health andthe average risk of dying in an automo- During the San Fernando Valley earth- safety may be counterproductive be-bile accident in the United States. Thequake in 1971, the Van Norman Dam cause of adverse economic and politicalaverage risk of death from an accident atrearly failed catast.ophicany due to soil effects. these installations was estimated to beliquefaction, a phenomenon recognized 7) Congress should take the lead in es-about 5 X 10-4 (1 in 2000) per year for &Ionly after its construction. Had the res- tablishing a national risk managementthe island's residents. This is about twiceervoir been full, the dam would have program that is equitable and more quan-the risk of death from an auto accident infailed (7), possibly causing 50,000 to titative. the United States. The chance of 1500100,000 fatalities. people being killed in a single accident The state of California has had a dam- was given as more than 1in 1000 persafety law since the 1971 earthquake. The Need for Information year. The chance of 18,000 being killedThe law specifies that the safety of each in a single accident was give n as Iinstate-controlled dam must be reviewed Th.re are few published assessments 12,000 per year. and a finding of "safe" made. However, of the many hazards and n.ks to w1-..lch It was statedthat these estimatesunder the law the state need not pub- society is exposed. And there are stillprobably erred on the side of pessimismlicize the risk it is imposing when it de- fewer risk assessments that (i) provide aby a factor of 2 or 3, but probably not bytermines that a dam is safe. And, of detailed statement of the assumptionsa factor of 10. The Health and Safetycourse, the maximum possible number made in arriving at the conclusion, (ii)Executive recommended that improve-of fatalities remains unchanged by any point out any uncertainties in the results,ments be made that would reduce thefinding. and (iii) have the benefit of a detailedlikelihood of each of the risk estimates Earthquakes in California. California evaluation by a competent independentby a factor of 2 or 3. With these improve-factsserioussafetyquestionscon- ootiy. ments, it was judged, the risks would becerning the possibiv catastrophic effect For example, it is difficult to find pub-acceptable. of earthquakes on its cities. This is also lished quantitative estimates of the risks My discussions with British experts intrue in other states, but in California the posed by the thousands of large dams insafety assessmen i aye given me the im-problem is acute. On 17 March 1976 the the United States. In fact, the safety ofpression that they uaubt the practicalit' U.S. Geological Survey advised Gover- such dams is generally poorly known,of obtaining improvement, for eve:),nor Brown of the relatively large likeli- particularly with respect to the more se-large facility in the British chemical in-hood that a major earthquake in Los An- rious. lower probability modes of failure.dustry, by more than a factor of 10 overgeles wouldkill many thousands of The situation is the same for facilities inthe risks estimated for Canvey. How-people, primarily from coilapse of seis- which large ar -flints of hazardous chem-ever, the British are making it a matter ofmically substandard buildings and from icals are stored. national law that safety assessment re-dam failure. A report prepared for the We a:so know little about the risksports be submitted by each industrial fa-Federal Disaster Assistance Administra- created by emissions of substants into cility utilizing or storing more than a par-tion makes equally gloomy predictions the atmosphere, by the disposal of liquidticular quantity of a hazardous chemical.(8). To my knowledge, seismically sub- and s Aid wastes, by coal-fueled electricNotification is still required if some spec-standard buildings have not been posted power stations, by residues and addi- ified lesser quantity is stored. The Healthas hazardous in Los Angeles, nor have tives in our food, by occupational envi-and Safety Executive will have the re-instructions been issued on where to go ronmentsand the list could go on. sponsibility for evaluating the risk as-in the event of dam failure. The city of Nevertheless,substantialimprove-sessment and deciding on the acceptabil-Los Angeles, of course, has been grap- ment can be made in our knowledgeity of the risk. pling with the problem of seismically about risks a I . e costs of their reduc- Japan is also instituting safety designsubstandard buildings for years (9, /0). tion. requirements for chemical plants,re-Seismic retrofit or building condemna- quirementsthatbecome increasinglytion is very costly. So far as I know, the strict in proportion to the number ofstate of California has not devoted signi- Examples of Hazard and Risk Estimates deaths that might occur if there is a seri-ficant financial resources to this problem. ous accident. Liquefied natural gas (LNG). The Canvey Island. An interesting and sig- Should not the Unites, States be devel-LNG to mology has been the object of nificant risk study, "Canvey: summaryoping some systematic approach to theseincreatirgly intense safety review in the of an investigation of potential hazardsznd other societil risks?I have littlepast few years. One of the few large pro - from operations in the Canvey Island/doubt that we nave many chemical in-posed G.S. chemical installations for Thurrock area" (5), was released in June stallations posing risks not unlike thosewhici: a serious, detailed risk study has 1978 by the Health and Safety Executive at Canvey. been published was the LNG facility for of the British government. Jams in California. Limited studies ofLOE Angeles ( / /), Oxnard, or Point Con- Canvey Island liein the Thames Riv-ten California dams by our group at theception, California. er and is 9 miles long and 2.5 miles wide. University of California, Los Angeles, The study, which was performed un- It has 33,000 residents and seven largeindicated that up to 250,000 deaths couldder a contract for the corporation re- industrial complexes, including petro-result from catastrophic failure of thequesting to build the facility, has been a 1 R 3 subject of considerable controversy. It vestigation of the matter. Colorado hasFurtherm:re, this death would probably did not include a self-crit: in whichsince imposed restrictions on rebuildingoccur after the age of 50; hence, if one assumptions were clearly identified and in the floodplain in Big Thompson, butremained consistent with the philosophy uncertainties critically evaluated. And it these restrictions are being fought. There promulgated in the NAS study, the $5 iiid not establishquantitative criteriaare many similar canyons all along themillion derived from the NRC criterion against which judge the acceptability Front Range of the Rockies, includingshould be compared to a value less than of the risk at each of the proposed sites. one that opens onto Boulder, Colorado. the $200,000 quoted in the NAS report. Although other risk estimates for these What safety precautions are being taken The societal risk from e disposal of proposed facilitieshaN ebeen issued for these canyons and for other similarkiazardous liquid and solid Astes is sub- (most project larger risks), a detailed"natural"hazards?Isthisquestio-o stantial. I doubt that society is using the study and evaluation by an independent being given the same priority as new same risk-acceptance criteria or value of group is not, to my knowledge, avail- LNG facilities or nuclear power plants? life in its choice of criteria for disposal of able. radioactive and nonradioactive wastes. I The state of California has imposed believe that a similarly large discrepancy very stringent siting requirements forExpenditures to "Save a Life" exists with respect to regulation of the LNG facilities, but California makes no transportation of hazardcus radioactive systematic assessment of the hazards The expenditures made by society to and nonradioactive materials. from large chemical installations, somesave a single life vary to a remarkable of which may pose risks similar toordegree. Morlat (13) estimated that in greater than those from the previously France, $30,000 was being spent per lifeResource Allocation proposeti LNG facility in Los Angerssaved through road accident prevention :arbor. Thus, in a state that is relativdyand abut $1 million per lifesaved Resources for the reduction of risks to advanced in its efforts to control risk tothrough aviation accident prevention. the public are not infinite. At some point, the public, it is difficult to find a uniformSinclair (14) estimated that in Great Brit- greater improvement in health and rationale for the standards, priorities, ain the expenditures ranged from $10,000 safety is to be expected from a more and resources used in this job. for an agricultural worker to $20 millionstable and viable economy than from a for a high-rise apartment dweller. reduction in pollution or the rate of acci- Comparable disparities among implicit dents. For example, Siddal (18) recently The RAM At RigThompsnrC.n.yem mues of life are easily found shuwcti a direct correlation between in- United States. In a report prepared bycreased life expectancy and improved Some may call the flood at Big Thomp-theNational Academy of Scienceseconomic circumstances in Great Brit- son Canyon, Colorado (12), a natural di- (NAS) for the Senate Committee on Pub- ain. saster. But if most of the fatalities couldlic Works in March 1975, estimates were Perhaps Congress should initiate ap- have been prevented by proper advancemade of the health costs of the pollutants propriate st'idiec to enable a reasonably planning or emergency action, I am un-from coal-fired electric generating plantsaccurate evaluation to be made of the willing to shrug off the event as a natural (15). A figurt. of $30,000 per prematureproper level of expenditure for risk m- disaster, seemingly beyond our control death was used (15, p. 611) "rather thanduction. Within such a level of ex- and not to be compared with accidents in the value of $200,000 used in highway penditure, if we fail to devote our re- man-made facilities. safety." The reasoning for this choicesources to those risks in which the most During the evening of 31 July 1976, anwas that most of the deaths occurreduction is achieved per dollar, we are intense thunderstorm stalled over a small among chronicallyill,elderly people,not optimizing the effect of our capital portion of Big Thompson Canyon, drop-and the amount by which their lives areoutlay (19, 20). Of course, one muss en- ping ten or more inches of rain in a 3- reduced may be only a matter of days or sure that there are no gross inequities; hour period. Because of the steep moun- weeks." This value of life was then usedthat no individual is knowingly left ex- taintopography,therunoff quicklyas the reference value for cost-benefitposed to a risk significantly greater than formed a virtual wall of water that dis-trade-offs that provided a basis for eval- some upper limit of acceptability. placed eveiye ing in its path. Of aboutuating the merits of various approaoh_s Each individual or group that makes 4000 peopk in the canyon, 139 died and 4 to control of emissions from coal plants, recommendations, or otherwise takes were never found. Property damage ex- including the timing of Juch controls. actionsaffectingnationalpriorities, ceeded $41 million. The estimated number of premature',ears some responsibility for y ad- The area was totally unprepared fordeaths resulting from the activities ofverse effects. Thus an individual rho et- such an event. Efforts to evacuate werecoal plants was lower in the NAS report fects the banning of DDT in a tropical made, but they were obviously inade-than the highest estimate given in other country may inadvertently cause far quate. Was the loss of life the result of apublications (16). The actual value is more deaths than he defers, since the innatural catastrophe that could not be quite uncertain. cidence of malaria will then increase. avoided? It might have been avoided al- On the other hand, in itsAs low as Similarly, if coal-burning electric gener- together by restrictions on building in the reasonably ac:iievable" (ALARA) crite ating plants are found to cause iar more floodplaina controversial matter. Ac- rion for routine releases of radioactivitypremature deaths than nuclear power cepting the de facto use of the floodplain, from a nuclear power plant, the Nuclear plants (in agreement with most published the loss of life could still have been mini- Regulatory Commission (NBC) employsestimates), an indivi,:ual or agency that mized with the benefit of some prior$1000 per man-rem as the ext -nditure successfully advocates the construction analysis, a reasonably direct method oflimit for making iolprovements. On theof coal-burning plants instead a' nuclear measuring and monis'aring rainfall, and abasis of estimates from the BEIR report power plants may be responsible for un- suitable warning system. (17), this trar.slatcs into more than $5necessary deaths. If the media should I do not recall any congressional in-million per premature death deferred. present an unbalanced perspective on 179 some aspect of risk in society, and thispolitical and social effects, and so forth.suggested a "de minimus" approach, causes risk-reduction priorities to be setAs a result, few specific proposals haveand there are a few other proposals. But, inefficiently and even wrongly, the re-been published. In an effort to stimulatemore typically, entire symposia are held spolt.,ble media would, in effect, be con-discussion on the subject, Okrent andon risk management without so much as tributing to the causing of prematureWhipple(22)described a simple quan-mentioning the subject of quantitative deaths that might otherwise have beentitative approach to risk managementrisk criteria. averted. that incorporates the following principal In conclusion, if our priorities in man- features: aging risk are wrong, if we are spending 1) Societal activities are divided intothe available resources in a way that is Approaches to Risk Acceptance major facilities or technologies, all ornot cost effective, we are, in effect, kill- part of which are categorized as essen-ing people whose premature deaths Lowrance(3)said, "A thing is safe iftial, beneficial, or peripheral. could be prevented. There is some opti- its risks are judged to be acceptable." 2) There is a decreasing level of ac-mal level of resources that should be The Van Norman Dam was presum-ceptable risk to the most exposed indi-spent on reducing societal risk, a level ably considered to be safe before it near-vidual (for example, 2 x 10-4 additionalbeyond which adverse economic nd poly failed in 1971. Was it safe? risk of death per year for the essentiallitical effects may be overriding. einally, The Los AngelesTimessome yearscategory, 2 x 10-5 for the beneficial cat-there is need for the development of a ago editorialized concerning the pro-egory, and 2 x 10-6 for the peripheralnational approach to risk management, posed Auburn Dam, saying, "Let's buildcategory). one that Congress, the President, and the it if it's safe." What does safe mean in 3) The risk is assessed at a high levelpublic can support. the context of an Auburn Dam whoseof confidence (say 90 percent), thereby failure was estimated by an experiencedproviding an incentive to obtaining bet- References and Notes engineer to be capable of killing 0.75 mil-ter d-..(The expected value of risk I. This example is, of course, simvilfied with re- lion people(2I)?We cannoj prove that gard to the hazards faced on such a journey. must be smaller the larger the uncer- Those in the rovooat face the possibility of de- there is zero probability of its failure.tainty.) hydration and starvation, while those on the What estimated failure prabability is ac- ocean liner are subject to fire and falling over- 4) Each risk-producing entity is sub- board. Other hazards can be imagined. ceptable? What level of uncertainty injected to risk assessment in terms of both 2. In 1957 I designed my own passive solar home in northern Illinois. It was very well insulated and this estimate is acceptz.tale? Will it bethe individual and society. The assess- had the tightest storm windows available. Not possibleto demonstrate that such ament is performed under the auspices of till 20 years later did I become aware that I had thereby been exposing my family to increased safety goal can be achieved? the manufacturer or owner but must be indoor air pollution. I have learned to be a skep- The NRC licensed reactor No. 2 atreviewed and evaluated independently; tic about risk.I am particularly skeptical of those who advocate a particular technology as Three Mile Island before the accidentthe decision on acceptability is made by benign, or attack a technology as too risky, without presenting a detailed, quantitative risk there. Hence t 'lad determined thata regulatory group. (For Practical rea- ..1thcat aro-ing a eb":c.Intlg "there is reasonat,te assurance that thesons, there would be some risk threshold sible alternatives, and without placing the risks in some broader societal perspective. activities authorized by this operating li-below which no review was required.) 3. Modern risk-benefit thinking had its real birth cense can be conducted without endan- 5) The cost of the residual risk is inter- with the classic paper by C. Starr [Science 165. 1232 (1969)). For background material,se.. gering the health and safety of the pub-nalized, generally through a tax paid to Committee on Public Engineering Policy [Per- lic." However, the NRC did not provide spectives on Benefit-Risk Decision Making (Na the federal government, except for risks tional Academy of Engineering, Washington, an estimate of the residual risk remainingthat are fully insurable and, like drown- D.0 , 1972)); W. W. Lowrance [Of Acceptable Risk: Science and the Determination of Safety after the inclusion of required safety fea-ing, readily attr'butable. (Kaufmann, Los Altos, Calif., 1976)); W. D. tures. And the NRC still has not quali- 6) The government, in turn, redistrib- Rowe [An Anatomy of Risk (Environmental Pro- tection Agency, Washington, D.C., 1975)); A. J. fied its definition of "reasonable assur-utes the risk tax as national health insur- Van Horn and R. Wilson ("The status of nsk- ance" with substantive numbers. ance or reduced taxes to the individual. benefit analysis," discussion paper, Energy and Environmental Policy Center, Harvard Univer- The approaches society might use in 7)Risk aversion to large events would sity, Cambridge, Mass, 1976); D. Okreat. Ed. [Risk-Benefit Methodology and Application coping with "How safe is safe enough?"be built into the internalization of the Some Papers Presented at the Engineering include (i) nonintervention (rely on thecost of i isk, but with a relatively modest Foundation Workshop (UCLA-ENG-7598. Uni- versity of California, Los Angeles, 1915)); Na- marketplace), (ii) professional standardspenalty. If a technology or installation tional Academy of Sciences Forum [How Safe is (rely on the technical experts), (iii) pro-poses a very large hazard at some very Safe The Design of Policy in Drugs and Food Additnes (National Academy of Sciences-Na- cedural approaches (muddle through),low probability (and many do), case-by- tional Research Council, Washington, D.0 , (iv) co,nparative approaches (reveal orcase decisions are made, with consid- 1974)), D. Okrent [Final Report A General Evaluation Approach to Risk-Benefit for Large imply preferences), (v) cost-benefit anal-erable emphasis on the essentiality of the Technological Sy4tems and Its Application to ysis, (vi) decision analysis, and (vii) ex- Nuclear Power (UCLA-ENG-7777, University venture. of California, Los Angeles, 1977)). pressed preferences (rely on public per- 8) An ALARA criterion on risk is re- A.I favor a national energy approach that emphasizes conservation and the wise use of all do- ception of risk). quired, although an incentive to reduce mestically available resources. Diversity will It is to be anticipated that any general-risk and associated uncertainties would better ensure resiliency Too much discussion has made it appear that the United States must ly accepted approach would incorporatealread / be provided by establishing a ,hoose between solar and nuclear energy or tte- facets of most of the above, as appropri-suitab e level for the risk tax. tween the "soft" or "hard" energy paths. We need solar and nuclear and coal energy. ateIt is not proposed that quantitative This quantitative approach torisk 5. Health and Safety Executive, Canvey. Sum- mary of an Investigati al of Potential Hazards risk-acceptance criteria can or shouldmanagement is, of course, untested. It from Operations in the Canvey Island /Thurrock represent the whole approach. However,may be both too complex and too simple. Area (Her Mgiesty's Stationery Office, London, 1978). they should play an important role. It is subject to t.- e obvious difficulty of 6. P. kyaswzmy, B. Hauss, T. Hsieh. A. Mos- It is not easy to develop a workable,defining what constitutes a risk-produc- cati, T. hicks, D Okrent, Estimates of the Risks Associated with Dam Failure (UCLA-ENG- defensible set of quantitative risk-ac-ing entity. However, there has been all 7423, University of California, Los Angeles, ceptance criteria that also allow for ben-too little real discussion of the question, !974). 7. H. Seed, H. B. See l. K. L. Lee. I. M. Idrlss, efits, societal needs, equity, economit,s,"How safe is safe enough?" Comar(23) "Preliminary report on the lower San Fernando

1 R 5 Dam slide during the San Fernando earthquake though the likelihood is highest in Los Angeles of February 9, 1971," Appendix B in interim neenng, Washington, D.C., 1975. andan Francisco. 16. C. L. Comar and L. A. Sagan, Annu. Rev. Ener- Report (California Department of Water Re- II. LNG Terminal Risk Assessment Study for Los gy I. 581 (1976). sources, Sacramento, 1971). Angeles.California (SAI.75-614-U, Science 8. S. T. Algermicsen, M. Hopper, K. Campbell, 17 Report of the Advisory Committee on the Bio- Applications, Inc., I.,as Angeles, 1975). logical Effects of ionizing Radiation (National W. A. Rinehart, D. Perkins, "A study of earth- 12. D. B. Simons et c:. , Flood of 31 July 1976 in Big quake losses in the Los Angeles, California, Academy of Sciences-National Research Coun- Thompto.: canyon. Colorado (National Acad- cil, Washington, D.C., ! °77). area," prepared for the Federal Disaster Assist- er.7 ,af Sciences-National Research Council, ance Administration, Department of Housing 18. E. Siddall, Nuclear ..'afety in Perspective (Can- Vs ashington, D.C., 1978). atom, Toronto, Ontal io, Canada, 1979). and Urban Development, by the Environmental 13. G. Moriat, "Un modele pour certaines deci- Research Laboratories, National Oceanic and 19. R. C. Schwing, Tech iol. Forecast. Soc. Chang sionsmedicales,"(CallersduSenunaire 13, 333 (1979). Atmospheric Administration. Rockville, Md., d'Econometrie, Centre Nationale de Recherche 1973. 20. R. Wilson, testimony at hearings of the Occupa- Scientifique, Paris, 19'0). tional Safety and Health Administration, Wash- 9. K. A. Solomon, D. Okrent, M. Rubin, Earth- 14 C.Sinclair,P. quake Ordinances for the City of Los Angeles. Marstrand, P. Newick, In- ington, D.C., April 1978. novation and Human Risk: The Evaluation of 21. H. Cedergren, testimony at the heanng of the California: A Brief Case Study (UCLA-ENG- Human Life and Safety in Relation to Technical 7765, University of California, Los Angeles, Water Projects Review Committee,Sacra- Change (Centre for the Study of Industnal In- mento, California, 21 March 1977. 1977). novation, London, 1972). 10. Earthquake disaster studies have also been pre- 15. "Air quality and stationary source emission 22. D. Okrent and C. Whipple, An Approach to So- pared fr Salt Lake City and the Puget Sound control," prepared for the U.S. Sehate Com- cietal Risk Acceptance Criteria and Risk Man- area. Most major U.S. cities are vulnerable to agement (UCLA-ENG-7746, University of Cali- mittee on Public Works by the Commission on fornia, Los Angeles, 1977) catastrophic damage from an earthquake, al. Natural Resources, National Academy of Engi- 23. C. L. Comar. Science 203, 319 (1979).

of an increasing public concern over the inherent risks and costs arising from previously acceptable external effects, both occasional and routine. For these reasons, the importance of ri'k as a design criterion is increasing. The basic truisms about risk are readily recognized. First, everyone knows that risk taking is an accepted part of life. Living ..-1n he fun, but it is alse. dangerous (just how dangerous can be difficult to measure). Second, everyone re- Technology creates many rict's. Deter-of component parts, including humanacts differently to risks ,.ken voluntarily mining which risks are acceipie is an participants. The final task is balancingand to risks thatare imposed by some important national issue. It pervades ma-the benefits and riskscif the new system, cutside group. Third, decisions imposing jor sectors of our economy: In food pro- starting with the internalized economy,:risks on us are being made all the time. duction we face decisions about pesti-costs. The external effects have rarelyThis results in the fourth truism' a con- cides and preservatives; transportationbeen analyzed, and it is only in recentflict is inherent when a group imposes a risks are increasingly regulated; and adecades that we have become deeplyrisk on others. Historically, such con- central issue in energy policy is the con- concerned with this difficult but impor-flicts have been resolved by compro- troversy over therisks from powertant part or the design process. mise, but rarely to everyone's satisfac- plants. Regardless of whether the seri- Risks created by technical systemstion. ousness of technological risk is only nowarise either from routine external effects Tt is, therefore, characteristic of the being recognized, or, alternatively, thatconsidered acceptaoi2 at tin time of de-Lnctioning of an organized society that the preoccupation with risk and regula-sign, or from abnormal conditions thatconflicts arise from the balancing of pub- tions is an overreaction, it is clear thatare not part of the basic design conceptlic benefits and involuntary risks to the the cost 'o society of the conflict overand its normal operation. Most abnormal individual. Because such conflict is un- accepting technological risks is great.evei.,.s usually impair or stop the op- ra-avoidable, our problem is how to manage These costs stem from the anxiety suf-tion of the technical system, and mayand minimize it. fered by those who are dismayed by thethreaten the operators. The usual ex- How should group uecision processes conflicting information about these risks,ternal effect is the loss of operationaloperate to minimize social costs and and from the litigation, misplaced invest-benefits to the users of the output. Themaximize social benefits? Group process- ment, retrofits, and costly delays that re-major internal consequences of failureses range from anarchy to dictatorship. In sult from industry's inability to predictare borne by the operating institution.most of the industrial world, we enjoy a the acceptance of risk by the public. The timely diffusion within the institu-medium tvtween these, but the process- Risk assessment is growing in impor-tion of information about such failureses for decision-making have themselves tance as a rystem design tool. The finalusually stimulates rapid modifications to become contentious issues. configuration of all techn:zal systems isreduce the rati., of failure costs to nenc- Social costs include intangibles, and the outcome of a common design se-fits. Less frequently, a failure results inthe question immediately evident is what quence. The first task of a system design-effects outside the institutional bound-costs are included anhow are they er is the development of a workable bas-ary, creating a public riskand a poten-weighted. It is obvious that if we have a ic concept. The second task is reducingtial cost te the public. These external decision process, and if we know how to the vulnerability of the system to failurescosts are usually difficult to evaluate,determine costs to the individual, we still Chauncey Starr is vice chairman of the Electnc and here the informational mechanismhave a problem with the full disclosure of Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, California for system modification is usually cum-all the social c. sts. What isfull dis- 94303. He is also direct ,r of its Energy Study Cen- ter, where Chns Whipple serves as technical man- bersome and slow. In recent years suchclosure? Do we include the options for ager. modifications have been made becausesocietal risk management as part of full IS 6 181 illustration, who in the year 1900 could Individual d niandawd. Far more frequently (I), Con- have predicted the social costs and bene-gress delegates responsibility for judgi, g i? Societal fits of the automobile? risk acceptability to regulatory agencies Finally, people's perceptions of proba-with the criteria that protection be pro- bilities are frequently in gross error. Thevided against "unreasonable" risks. The accident at Three Mile Island provedmethods by which these agencies inter- very little about probabi:;ties of suchpret "reasonableness" , ange from a for- events. The inadequacy of such singlemal analysis of risk, benefits, and alter- 0 events for providing probability numbersnatives to purely subjective evaluations. Probability rfatality can be explained analytically, but the po- Fig. I. Value systems for risk. liticalresponse and thepublicper- ceptionsareoftenbased onsingleAnalytic Approaches events. So even if a professional group disclosure: that is, the cost of the alter- The attraction of analytic methods natives for managing the risk? Does it in-develops analytic answers, it has diffi- (cost-benefit analysis, decision analysis) clude all present events, future events,culty persuading the public to accept is their capacity to make explicit the as- the people who get the benefits, and thethem. sumptions, value judgments, and criteria people who bear the costs? We have geo- Recognizing all these difficulties, it is used for making a decision. The analytic graphic distributions, time distributions,nevertheless important to explore the approachesareconsidered demographic distributionsall of thesesubject of'-tc management in order to logically sound and sufficiently flexible to accept are included by the term full disclosure.improve the quality of decision-making. any value system. Given a specific set of Where do we draw the boundaries? values and criteria, a cost-benefit analy- Decisions are not made by institu- sis could ideally indicate the decisions tions;the decision Analytic and Judgmental Approaches process involves that would best balance technological people. The government typically works risk and benefit (assuming that both tan- through agencies and committees, so A question implicit in the term accept- that, in fact, it is a few people in theable risk is "acceptable to wham ?" Cer-gible and intangible costs and benefits are included). But in reality it is difficult agencies and a few people on the com-tairdy congressional approval of any to measure group values, and a. best th, mittees who really decide what happens.method for making risk-benefit decisions hut analytic methods can cniy bc. used to How do we allocate the responsibilitycstatlishcs its Iegitirr.,-y reach a rough approximation of the so- and the costs of bad decisions? How doconsensus is needed to sustain its use. cial cost and benefits that characterize a we functionally connect authority, re-Defining this consensus is difficult be- decision. sponsibility for outcomes, and costs? cause there are technologies that are favored by a majority, or at least by a plu- The debate over the relative merits of After we establish tne social costs, thece apprnarhec generally fn,,c.cesn how do we set out priorities? How do weiality, but are opposeu by extien;e1-y motivated individuals and groups (for ex-the effects of incomplete information determine the relative merits of various (omitted and uncertain risks, benefits, outcomes? That is a subject for a sepa-ample, those who fight water fluoridation and nuclear power). Because of our ex-and values), neglect of distributional ef, rate study, because, of course, value fects, and other errors of simplification. systems depend on culture, background,perience with other political issues in which similar divisions of public opinionIt is not our intent to review the merits of economic status, and all kinds of psycho- these methods as commonly practiced; logical factors. occur (abortion, gun control), we know that has been done elsewhere (2-6). Part of the problem in risk assessmentthat we should not be optimistic over the comes from confusions that arise duringprospects that a regulatory approach can discussions of the subjectconfusionsneutralize -se controversies. Problems Physical Versus Financial Risk about reality, an iysis, and individualsuch as these raise issues, such as the perceptions. Reality is what has hap-definition of majority versus minority Because of our use of the term risk as pened or what will happen. Analysis is arights and the scope and limit of due pro- thenrobability of either financial or process based on collected data, anec-cess, that are well beyond those normal-phys'cal damage, we may tend to uncriti- dotal cases, ant statistics, any of whichly associated with risk management. cally allow the use of premises about the may or may not be correct; and, based Congress has not defined "accept-acceptance of the risk to "life and limb" on these, we invent simplified models toable" risk levels, except for the few cas-(7) to be based on an analogy to financial predict an outcome. The result,ofes in which a zero risk approach wasrisk taking. course, is a large uncertainty in the predictions. 100 0 0 - Zs All accidents What is the intuitive perception of the Motor vehici? accidents/ All cancer individuals involved? Involuntary risks /Heart disease are perezived differently by individuals. 10 000 Homicide Zio Stroke / Stomacn cancer Their perceptions may be far from real- Fig. 2. Comparison of Pregnancy, I( Diabetes ity. So, in discussing public acceptanceperceivedrisk.;ith Flood TB actual risk. [Courtesy 1,000 Tornado., of risk, we have to distinguish between Botulism the uncertain reality of what may occur,of the American Psy- . chological Associa- the uncertain analysis of predicting it,tion] 100 / and the variable perception of its poten- Smallpox vaccina on tial.r.:milarconfusionsexist, in- 13 I 10 cidentally, over social costs and social 10 tco 1.000 10 000 100,00 1.000.000 benefits, which are also involved. As an Actual number of ueaths per year f77 182 From the societal viewpoint, the pre- may be quite valid. But as Howard ( /3) sumption that risk equals cost may bepointed out, the individual evaluation of valid in most cases. For example, thethat cost is necessarily nonlinear, and io-2 cost of the risk of death is sometimes cal - becomes infinite as the probability ap- n cu'ated as being equal to the discountedproaches unity. to" net earnings of those killed. This meth- The use of an expected values or ex- od, now out of favor, operates as if thepected utility model is based on the 10 -6 loss of lives were equivalent to the premise that expected cost is simply the 10-6 10-6 10 -2 breakdown of productive machines. product of the probability of an outcome Probability Similarly, the value assigned to resil-and the evaluation of that outcome. But Fig. 3. Perception of probability. ience (8) leads to a desire to avoid cata-in the individual's view of the risk of strophic accidentsthatparallelsthe death, thisiFnot valid, for this product is strategy in which investments are diver- very large or infinite. It seemsclear that intuitive and quan- sified in order to limit loses under ad- It is often presumed that the individualtitative risk-benefit assessments can pro- verseconditions. Perhaps recognizingevaluation of the cost of risk is linearduce quite different results, even given the differences b!tween these two type ,over a probability range of interest (9,the capacity of the analytical approaches of risk, ZeckhauFer (9) argued that, on a/3), hut tnere is little firm evidence toto accommodate complex values relating per fatality basis, the social cost of mul-support any hypothesis about the shapetodifferentriskattr:butes. The dif- tiple-fatality accidents is lower than thatof this curve, as far as we know. Underferences of opinion over probability asof a single fatality because fewer survi-the common conventions of risk analy-signments are not limited to those risks vors are affected. For example, the so-sis, the slope of the curves in Fig.Iis for which data are not available; many cial ....)st of the rc s of a city or a family isreferred to as the value of life. The politi-people intuitiveiy fear travel by airplane less than thatan equivalent number ofcians' old saw that life is of infinite valuemore than by automobile, yet aviation is independent, aspersedfatalities.Al- can be reconciled if this refers to the in-safer. Explanations of this effect focus though the basis for this argument is ap-dividual evaluation of one's own life.on the degree of individual control ove' parent,itis also incomplete. For ex-This viewpoint is not inconsistent withrt.-A (/6), the conditional probability of ample, it ignores the value placed on thethe assignment of finite costs to risks. itsurvival given an accident, and the cata- continuation ofa family F'ie:the impor-is the application of an expected valuestrophicnature of airplane accident tance of this value is evident in the draftmodel that is iliappropriate foi this ev2!- (/ 7). deferment tha: was given to sole surviv-uation. The difficulty that arises from these ing sons. Similarly, Wilson ( /0) noted, second drawback with the appli-differences in assessment stems from the cation of expected value to individualdual meaning of acceptable risk The an- Small accidents throughout the tt;c:id ip, tA, from the tendencyalytical methods help regulator.,et stan- about 2 million people each year, or 4 billion by analysts to seek to accommodate dif-dards that implicitly define acceptable people in 2000 years. This is "acceptable" in the sense that society will continus to exist. ferences of opinion entirely within therisk. But the intuitive individual c.f,sess- since births continually replace the deaths. assignment of utility ( /4). This is becausements of acceptability can overrule these But if a single accident were to kill 4 billion in most decision or cost-benefit analyses,decisions through the political procet,s. people, that is, the population of the whole the probability estimates are consideredT! e repeal of neat belt interlock regu- world, society could not recover. This would roughly valid because they are based on be unacceptable evt f it only happened once lation and recent congressional action t in 2000 years. available data, engineering models (suchprevent a ban on saccharin are case: ti as fault trees), and expert opinion. But inwhich public opinion resu'ted in a policy Another example in which the ability a study of public attitudes about nuclearchange. to generalize from financial cost-benefit power, the bulk of the disagreementwas analysis has been questioned is when found to be due to different beliefs about physical risks aredistributed acrossaccident probability(/5). Althoughit time. Arrow ( //) argued that these risksmay be perfectly valid to base public pol-Intuitive Risk-Benefit Analysis should be treated as other costs, and dis- icy on expert estimates and data, the at- counted accordingly; other analysts oftempt to reconcile differences in tne as- Given the role of individual judgments the issue have questioned the validity ofsignment of costs and values is mis-of (physic...) risk and benefit in determin- this approach, and looked for alternative directed if, in fact, the controversy overing the political acceptability of specific methods for guidance on how to judge technologi risk is due to divergent be-technologies, itseems particularly valu- equity in intergenerational risk trade-offs liefs abou. probabilit' able to tryto understand intuitive i isk- (/2). benefit analysis. Efforts to develop this understanding were made by Starr (8, Intuitive Versus Analytical /8,/9). whose approach was based ona Application of Expected Value to Risk Assessment study of historically accepted risk (re- Individual Risk Assessment vealed preferences) and by Fischhoff e. We now consider the implications ofa/.( /7) and Slovic et a/.(20), whose Although the above analogy may hethe premise that ri ,k accel t-nce is ulti approach was usually based on risk- valid for the collective view of the cost ofmately inseparabli, from the psychologytaking behavior as determined by ques- risk, it may not apply to the intuiti of risk perception and evaluation. A cor-tionnaire (expressed preferences). An evaluation of risk. As Fig.Iillustrated,ollary to this premise is the assumptionadditional source of information is the the individual and societal evaluations ofthat when the results of intuitive iisk as- study by Lawless(2/ )of many -on- risk are quite different (8). In the societal sessmentsdiffer significantly from thosetroversies over technology. If we assume view, the presumption of a linear relationof the analytical methods, conflict fol-that many of these controversies arose between risk and the cost of that risk lows. because of intuitive estimates of unrea- 1 Fs 8 183

Excessive Disease mortality rate than it actually is." The s. ne observation was made by Selvidge(24).Lich- High tensteinet al. (25)found similar results Unacceptable (Fig. 2) when they asked people to esti- 102 Acceptable Moderate mate the number of fatalities from specif- "rig.4.Risk-benefit Low ic causes annually in the United States: pattern forinvolun- Natural hazards mortality rate tary exposure. The full range of perceived risk is only Negligible about 10,000 while the corresponding actual range is closer to 1,000,000." Simi- lar results were found in another survey 101 102 103 104 105 106 in which risk was ranked subjectively Benefits trelative value) (l7). The influence of this perception is important when we recall that the expected sonauly high risk (not true in all the casestook the benefits into consideration con-value or expected utility model calcu- described; some cases, such as the tha-sistently reported higher levels of ac-lates that a change in event probability lidomide tragedy, were due to late identi-ceptability than did subjects who firstby a fact )r of 1000 produces a change in fication of a risk), then the common char- evaluates risk, which reinforces the viewexpected value orutilityby alike acteristics of risk and benefit in thesethat risks and benefits are not evaluatedamount. If the probability is perceived as controversies may indicate important independently. having changed bya inch smaller factors in the intuitive risk process. Law- Despite the limitations of the per-amount, then it would not be surprising less did this, and his endings confirmceived risk-perceived benefit view of de-to find that an intui.ive evaluation of risk those of other studies in identifying cata-ciding risk acceptability, we know of nois less sensitive to probability changes. strophic potential and lack of individualbetter way to attempt to understand theThis can be extremely important for low- control over risk as "factors that influ-intuitive processes for risk decisions.probability, high-consequence risks, beence the impact of the threat." Support for this approach stems from thecause probabilities lying below an infact that thv acceptability of a risk hastuitively understandable range may be been found to increase with increasingoverestimated. Understanding the Intuitive Process benefit both by Starr( /8)and Fischhoff We postulate that this is only true to a et al. (17). point (see Fig. 3). Although we selected There is an attraction to try to develop these scales judgmentally, their chief an understanding of intuitive risk -be r.efit purpose is to ilhistratc that, at somc decisions by constructing parallels to the Benefits level of probability, the intuitive inter- analytical methods. This approach leads pretation goes from "low" or "unlikely" to a model of intuitive decision-making in Little work has been done to charac-to "negligible" or "impossible." This which subjective judgments of the proba-terize the perceived benefits of tech-hypothesis can be used to explain behav- bility and corsequence of undesirablenological activities. Starr (/8) found aior regarding seat belt use and perhaps outcomes are somehow combined tocorrelation between risk andbenefitsmoking. In a study of seat belt use, produce a perceived risk; parallel judg-awareness," which he described as aSlavic'et al.(26) noted that if the deci- ments provide a perceived benefit; thecrude measure of public awareness of so-sion to wear seat belts is approached on two are then compared to provisie in-cial benefits. This measure was based ona per trip basis, "we might expect that tuitive judgment of acceptability. the relative level of advertising, the per-many motorists would find it irrational to This model is quite broad; it does notcentage of the population involved in thebear the cost, (however slight) of buck- specify the intuitive procedures for arriv-activity, and a subjective judgment of theling up in return for partial protection ing at either perceived risk or benefit, orusefulness of the activity. The survey byagainst an overwhelmingly unlikely acci- for their comparison. Even so, the awl-Fischhoffetal. ( /7)included a subjectivedent." They observed that "change of able evidence suggests that this modelranking of benefits, but no attempts wereperspective, towards consideration of may be int orrect. First, studies of in-made to relate perceived benefit with anyrisks faced during a lifetime of driving, tuitive decision-making in general (notcharacteristics of that benefit. may increase the perceived probabilities limited or applicable to physical risks of injury and death and, therefore, in- alone), have identified numerous deci- duce more people to wear seat belts.... sion-n ..ig rules that do not follow theProbability Perception Such differing perspectives may trigger model described above(22).Second, much of the conflict and mutual frustra- there is evidence to indicate that benefits By far the most studied and best un-tion between public officials and motor- are not intuitively evaluated indepen-derstood component of intuitive risk-ists, each believing (with some justice) dently from risks. benefit analysis is risk perception andthat their analysis of the situation is cor- In the survey of subjective risk andevaluation. There is excellent literaturerect.'Similarly, Jacobson(27)referred benefit by Fischhoffetal. ( /7),perceivedon the subjective estimation of probabili-to carcinogenic "chemicals which pose risk and perceived benefit were negative- ty(23). minuscule hazards to individuals, but ly correlated, due principally to the sub- One aspect of the interpretation ofsignificant hazards to the population as a jective evaluation of a number of thingsprobability that has been noted repeat-whole." This last point supports our as high in risk and low in benefit (hand-edly is the intuitive handling of very lowpremise that much conflict over tech- guns, cigarettes, motorcycles, alcoholicprobabilities. As Mishan (7) noted:One nological risk is due to differences be- b .rages, nuclear power). When sub-chance in 50,000 of winning a lottery, ortween intuitive and analytical risk-bene- jects were asked to judgethe sociallyof having one's house burned down,fit analyses. If the hypothesis that per- acceptable level of risk," those who firstseems a wetter chance, or greater risk,ceived probability is effectively zero for 1 R 9 184

some risks is valid, then the perceivedpossible to anticipate the kinds of riskthe fact that in several cases, a zero-risk risk of a short automobile trip withoutlikely to generate controversy. Cata-goal has been established. This denies scat belts or of one cigarette may be ze-strophic potential and lack of individualthe concept of a trade-off between risk ro. control, particularly once as accident oc-and benefit, and ignores the difficulty or This nonlinearity in probability per-curs or a risk is identified, are apparentlyimpossibility of reaching zero n: k. Fur- ception indicates that even somethingthe most important risk characteristics.ther, improvements in technology have apparently as basic as the unit of ex-When the uncertainty associated withpermitted identification and estimation posure used to evaluate risk can be in-risks is great, data concerning the uncer-of risk at levels far below those that were fluential. In his analysis, Starr (/8) com-taility not forthcoming, and expert opin-possible when specific zero-risk laws mented, "The hour-of-exposure unit wasion apparently divided, apprehension bywere passed; risks we might consider chosea becauseit was deemed morethe public is understandable. Haefeleaegiigible are not treated in the regula- closely relatedto an individual'sin- (30)termed these risks hypothetical, andtory process differently from much high- tuitive process in choosing an activitydescribed nuclear power as the "path-er risks. As Hutt(38)argued, than a year of exposure would be." finder" for these risks. Certainly there Until qiiite recently, a no-risk food safety pol- Accepting, at least tentatively, the re-are many risks with the characteristicsicy was widely thought to be an achievable lation between perceived and actualdescribed above (for example, toxicgoal. .. It is now clear that it is literally improbability (Fig. 3), we can see a basisch.emicals and recombinant DNA re- possible to eliminate all carcinogens from our for the controversy over catastrophicsearch). Whether decisions can be madefood. Moreover, many of the substances risks. As mentioned above, hIgh-con-about these risks without the high degreewhich pose a potential risk are part of long- accepted components of food, and any at- sequence, low-probabi'.ity risks are ofof controversy and the resulting high so-tempt to prohibit their use would raise the particular concern if their probabilitiescial cost associated with the nuclear dc most serious questions both of practicality in areoverestimatedsubjectively.Butbate remains to be seen. Implementation and of individual free choice when part of the public believes the in the marketplace. probability is low, and another part be- A suggested way of handling this prob- lieves it to be negligible, these beliefsQuantitative Criteria for lem would be to set a level below which lead to radically different evaluations.Risk Acceptance risks would be ignored, provided some This may be the case with nuclear power benefit were associated with the risk. and other risks of this type, and may be a In May 1979, the Advisory CommitteeThis low level would serve as a quan- key reason for the controver&as overon Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) recom-titative staneard for acceptability of the these risks. mended "that consideration be givenrisk. by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission A second criticism of regulatory ap- 1NR1 to the eslaNishment Gf quan- pi 6411.11CS IS that decisions are often made Risks Distr. ,ver Time titative safety goals for overall safety ofarbitrarily. Such a charge is not surpris- nuclear power reactors" (3/ ). The ACRSing considering that several regulatory Given the ,rent nonlinearities infurther recommended that "Congress beagencies have a mandate to protect the risk evaluation depending on the unit ofasked to express its views on the suit-public from "unreasonable" risk, with- measurement, itseems reasonable toability of such goals and criteria in rela-out congressional guidance on how to Innk fnr other nerrentnal fartnrS reInted ion to other relevant aspects of our tcch-judge 1 easonabieness. The objections are to the units in which risks are expressed.nological society... ." A similar sug-enhanced when regulators are believed A number of distinctions can be consid-gestion. accompanied by proposed cri-to be overly accommodating or hostile to ered: risks can be immediate or delayed,teria, was made by Farmer (32) in 1967;the regulated industry. Certainly, one cumulative or ephemeral, and can affectthe criteria were expressed by a curveway to reduce the influence of bias and future generations or cur own or both.relating acceptable accident frequencyarbitrariness is to institute a numerical There is little evidence to indicate howwith accident magnitude. Subsequentdefinition of "reasonable." Perhaps the these factors are handled. Fuchs(28) proposed criteria for acceptable risks,time required for risk decisions would al- cited evidence that individual discountnot necessarily limited to nuclear power,so be reduced by the availability of clear, rates for financial and physical risk arehave been made by Starr (/8), Bowenrelatively simple criteria. positively correlated. But the fact re- (33),Rowe04),Okrent and Whipple Often, regulatory authorities pecify mains that benefits and risk may be dis- (35), Wilson (36), and Comar (37). Cur-the technology for meeting risk Lrgets, counted at different rates. For decisionsrently efforts are under way within therather tha. the targets themselves. The with very long-term implications, the useNRC, 'he ACRS, and elsewhere to de-drawback of .his approach is that there of a variable discount rate, decliningvelop quantitative criteria for risk ac-are no incentives to davelop more effi- with time, may more accurately reflectceptance and to consider the many is-cient methods of controlling risk. The es- the value given to future risks and bene- sues raised oy this approach. tablishment of risk targets alone could fits that. a constant discount rate(29). stimulate the development of a variety of This is an area that seems particularly creative methods or risk control. worthy of attention, for many risk con- Incentives to Develop Quantitative Finally, another criticism of current troversies are about risks that are per- Criteria for Acceptable Risks risk management is that the effort re- sistent or cumulative, such as carcino- quired to control risk (as measured by gens. The dissatisfaction with cu went regu-the cost per life saved) varies consid- latory systems for risk managcia.. at pro-erably from one risk to another; this Predicting Risk Controversies vides impetus to develop new methods.wastes both lives and money(9).Assum- Theoretically, quantitative criteria foring that the total funds allocated for risk Because of the work to define the fac-acceptability would resolve many specif-reduction could be transferred freely be- tors influencing perceived risk, it is nowic criticisms. One criticism stems fromtween different risk reduction opportuni-

I S 0 185 ties ( which is certainly not always pos-ternatives. For example, in the often Conclusion sible), the maximum number of lives thatheated debates over the selection of en- could be saved rationally is found whenergy production technologies, it is gener- Analytical approaches to decide risk- the marginal coof saving a life is uni-ally assumed that, "nder any proposedbenefit issues ideally come closer to form among tne opportunities. Thus thepolicy, energy services will be providedmaximizing net social benefits than any comparative marginal cost-effectiveness(such servicesinclude conservation).other approach. The usefulness of these of each opportunity for saving livesFor this decision, the dominant issuesmethods in making assumptions and val- would become the guiding principle itare the costs and risks associated withues explicit justifies their application. the allocation of resources, and the valueeach alternative. The difficulty in makingBut a necessary condition for applying of life would be implicit in the total na-these choices is often due to the qualita-their results to specific decisions is a so- tional allocation of funds. There would,tively dissimilar character of the riskscial consensus on the relative benefits of course, need to be a national alloca-(for example:, air pollution risks fromand costs of the proposed actions. For tion of resources to such "life-saving"coal mining and burning versus nuclearspecific types of risk, in which intuitive endeavors, but as with military budgets,reactor accident risks). It is difficult toevaluations of risk and benefit contradict a common-sense consensus judgment issee a role fot quantitative criteria in mak-analyticalevaluations,thenecessary likely to be as reliable as any analyticing compari.ons of the type needed. Oneconsensus may not develop, but rather a formula. could estab ish a maximum permissibleconflict requiring political resolution is risk level that would serve to screen outlikely to result. excessively risky alternatives, but the When the conflict arises from a dis- Applications for Risk Criteria selection of a technology generally de-agreement over the level of risk rather pends on some aggregation, either ex-than the value assigned to that risk, ef- One of the pitfalls in trying to developplicitly or implicitly, of the componentsforts to reduce the cost of conflict by in- regulatory approaches for managing riskof the social cost of each alternative.corporating values into an expected util- is the desire to use the same method toPresumably, after one alternative is se-ity approach will be unsuccessful. Quan- tackle a number of different risks. Therelected, the decision is reduced to the de-titative risk criteria appear quite attrac- are different types of risk decisions, andtermination of the preferred operatingtive in this respect, because the key to no single regulatory method seems appli-point discussed above. the acceptability of a technology under cable to all of them. A complete risk-benefit decision re-the proposed method is the level of risk. The use of cost-effectiveness criteriaquires that the relative social cost of theAssuming that the estimated risk became serves as an example. This issue arisesrisk be compared with the associate.the central point in the debate, the public when, a priori, the technology is foundbenefit. A pragmatic application of quan- might have mo-e confidence in the regu- acceptable but the specific operatingtitative criteria for these cases was sug-latory systetat if their concern were di- point is left to be decided. An example ofgested by Starr (/9) and by Starr et al. rectly addressed. this type of decision is the determination(8), and is illustrated in Fig. 4. This risk- We see significant value in trying to of allowable levels of a pollutant in auto-benefit curve reveals the commonly pro-understand the intuitive risk-benefit pro- mobile exhaust. In this case the issue in-posed characteristics for risk criteria: acess. The evaluation of its outcome volved is not the relative risk and benefitlower limit for concern about risk (in thiscould reduce anxiety and cost if used as of transportation, nor the selection of acase, the natural-hazards mortality rate).a tool in the design of technical systems. transportation technology (automobilean upper limit for acceptability (set byThis is already the case, as when we use versus mass transit). For this simplifiedthe average disease rate), and provisionmore stringent criteria for nuclear power type of decision the only issue is the mar-for risk-benefit trade-off between theseand commercial aviation than for a more ginal trade-off between the social cost oflimits. commonplace risk (39. 40). The balance the risk and the cost of controlling it. For We should not overestimate the capac-between individual and group risk-bene- these cases, two kinds of quantitativeity of simple criteria, such as those illus-fit decision methods is fundamental to criteria can be considered: the first is thetrated in Fig. 4, to reduce risk conflictthe development If national policies on standard for judging co-t-effectivenesscosts. Many, if not most, risk estimatesriskacceptance. It iscustomarily described above. There is nothing new inincludesignificantlosigmentalinputs. achieved through the political process. this approach; itis simply cost-benefitMere w,c :.ften substantial dis-and is not amenable to quantitative anal- analysis in which the metric for judgingagreements over risk estimates,theysis. the social cost of risk has been specified._methods used to arrive at risk estimates, The second quantitative criterion is moreand the competency, integrity, and moti- References and Notes pragmatic: it is a lower risk limit belowvation of the experts providing sub- w. W. Lowrance. Of Acceptable Risk (Kauf- mann, Los Altos. Calif., 1976). which no regulatory action would bejective risk estimates. What is needed for 2. SymposumlWorkshop on Nuclear and Non.Nu taken. This could be useful in allocatingthe application of quantitative criteria for clear Energy SystemsRisk Assessment and Governmental Decision Making (Mitre Corp., a regulator's time and would help pre-risk acceptance is a standard of proof for Bedford, Mass.. 1979). vent the highly visible cases in which the 3. L. Lave. in (2), p. 181. determining whether the criteria have 4. S. Jellinek, in (2), p. 59. nuisance aspects of regulation are in-been met. Although many different ap- 5. M. Green. "The faked case against regulation," tuitively greater than the benefits of thatproaches to this issue have been recom- Washington Post, 21 January 1979. 6. P. H Schuck. "On the chicken little13. school C-S. of regulation. mended (including peer review, scien- regulation, Washington Post. 28 January 1979. p. C-8. The next level of difficulty in risk deci-tific courts, and quantitative methods for 7. E. J. Mishan, Cost-Benefit Analysts (Praeger. sions is the choice of the best method forresolving differences between experts), New York. 1976). O. C Starr. R. Rudman, C. Whipple, Anna. Rev. obtaining a specific benefit. In these cas-the ultimate responsibility for judging the Energy 1. 629 (1976). es the benefits need not be analyzed, it iscompetency of risk analysis still resides 9. R. Zeckhauser, Pubs,c Policy 23 (No. 4, 419 (1975). presumed that the benefits are suffi-with the regulatory agency responsible 10. R. Wilson and W. J. Jones, Energy, Ecology. ciently great to justify any of several al- and the Environment (Academic Press. New for managing the specific risk. York. 1974).

1.9.E 186

II. K. Arrow. in Energy and the Environment: A 21. E. W. Lawless, Technology and Social Shock plication: Some Papers Preseuted at the Engi- Risk - Benefit Approach. H. Ashley et al.. Eds. (Rutgers Univ. Press, New Brunswick. N..1.. neering Foundation Workshop. September 22- (Perpmon, Elmsford. N.Y.. 1976), p 113. 1977). 26. 1975. Asilomar. California. D. (fluent, Ed. 12. National Planning Associates, Social Decision- 22. I. Janis and L. Mann. Decision Making (Free (Rep. PB-261920, School of Engineering and Making for High Consequence, Low Probability Press, New York, 1977). Applied Science. University of California, Los Occsorences (PB- 292735, National Technical In- 23. See, for example, A. Tversky and D. Kahne- Angeles, 1975). pp. 581-590. formation Service, Springfield. Va., 1978). man, Science 185. 1124 (1974). 34. W. D. Rowe, An Anatomy of Risk (Wiley, New 13. R. Howard. in Societal Risk A ent: How 24. J. Selvidge, thesis, Harvard University (1972). York, 1977). Safe is Safe Enough?, R. C. Schwing and W. A. 25. S. Lichtenstein, P. Slovic, B. Fischhoff, M. 35. D. Okrent and C. Whipple. An Approach to So- Albers. Eds. (Plenum. New York, in press). Layman, B. Combs, J. Exp. Psychol. Hum. cietal Risk Acceptance Criteria end Risk Man- 14. W. Haefele, in (1r), p. 141. Learn. Mem. 4, 551 (1978). aFemen: (Rep. UCLA/ENG-7746,se, 0.31of En- 15. H. Otway, J. Br. Nucl. Energy Soc. 14, 327 26. P. Slovic, B. Fischhoff, S. Lichtenstein. Ac-" gineering and Applied Science, Urivesity of (1977). Anal. Prey. 111, 281 (1978). California, Los Angeles, 19771. 16. S. Montague and E. Beardsworth, unpublished 27. M. F. Jacobson, Science 207, 258 (1980). 36. R.Wilson, testimony before Occupational manuscript. 28. V. Fuchs, **The economics of health in a post. Safety and HealthAdministration hearings, 17. B. Fischhoff, P. Slovic, S. Lichtenstein, S. it Austria!society," Public In tt No. 56 Washinton. D.C., February 1978. OSHA dock- Read, B. Combr Policy Sci. 9. 127 (1978). (1979), p. 3. et H.0). 18. C. Starr, Science 165. 1232 (1969). 29. J. M. English. in Trends in Financial Decision 37. C. L.C%orner,Science 203, 319 (1979). 19. in Perspectives on Benefit-Risk Decision Making, C. van Dam, Ed. (Nijhoff, The Hague, 38. P. B. Hutt, Food Drug Cosmet. Law J. 33, 558 Making (National Academy of Engineering. Holland, 1978), pp. 229-247. (1978). Washington. D.C.. 1972). p. 17. 30. W. Haefele, Minerva 1$. 302 (1974). 39. C.Sinclair. P.Marstrand, P. Newick, In- 20. P. Slovic, B. Fischhoff, S. Lichtenstein. in So- 31. M. W. Carbon, letter to J. M. Hendrie, 16 May novation and Human Risk (Centre kir the Study cietal Risk A ent: How We is We 1979. of Industrial Innovation, London, 1972). Enough?. R. C. Schwing and W. A. Albers. 32. F. R. Farmer, Nuci. Sqf. IL 539 (1967). 40. R. Schsieng, Gen. Mat. Res. Lab. Rep GMR- Eds. (Plenum. New York. in press). 33. J. Bowen, in Risk-Benefit Methodology and Ap- 235.. (19 7).

Difficulty of Technological Regulation

Before considering the shortcomings of present regulatory policy, it is essential to recognize the inherent diffirulty of technological regulation. To begin with, defining accurately what hazrr-!- Pre t l- erable is essentially impossi unwanted ills conceivaLy present are too numerous and not always quantifiable. Even if for every activity we could measure every possible menace. we would not iearn thereby what threshold itwei of impairment is acceptable. What we define as tolerable n ust depend or. how Success in satisfying the requirements tion abound. They complain that themuch we are willing to r.sk losing. What and aspirations of the American citizen- regulation often does not provide need-degree of lowering of our life expectan- ry depends greatly on the wise employed, minimum protection; over-regulationcies or vigor or joy of natural surround- ment of advancing science and technolo- is frequent; (....mgress has created badings are we willing to countenance? gy. The potential gains from proper use regulatorylegislation:the courts areSince people differ in value judgments of these tools include reduced costs of called upon to do what they cannot andeven if they agree on the facts. how can production, the discovery of new re- should not be asked to do; agencieswe specify the limit of harm? Should we sources and invention of substitutes for sometimes have conflicts of intei :st: reg-merely insist that the disbenefit be neg:i- those in shrinking supply, and the design ulators often make inadequate investiga- of new products whose manufacture gible, how shall we define negligible? tions and stall to playitsafe: value Just as identifying detriments is a be- would create needed jobs. Unfortunate- iudgments are confused with economicginning to sound regulation, so is a listing ly, there is a deterrent 'o cur full realiza- or scientificfactors. an unintegratedof rewards. How much of a gain should tion of the fruits of technology. It is that hodgepodge of disconnected decisionswe insist on before we are willing to technological activities produce nega- dominates: balanced decisions. with theaccept a giver. risk? Industry's dollar tives along with positives. Build any risks and benefits of all alternatives com-costs of meeting regulations are eventu- machine or set up any process and, along pared, are rarely made. Whether these ally paid by all of us, and most such costs withthebenefits. detrimental conse-criticisms are justified is itself a valuecan be estimated. But we cannot readily quences also may result. Appreciation ofjudgment. my own being that all have put economic worths on improvements possib:1 disbenefits is now so wide-considerable validity. in health or prevention of accidents. No spread that government regulation of In this article Iwi'l discuss the na-marketplaen sets a prig .. for an extra year technological activities is a permanenttion's present p -ern of regulating tech-of life or a month's sup! ly of breathable policy. even if in practice it is an ambigu- nology-based atiyities, arguing that it is airKnowing that the decision-making ous one, difficult to implement. overly beset with shortcomings. Iwill required of us ivolves listing the pluses Critics of present technological regula- propose a new approach whichoelieve :ad n.inuses for each alternative, the merits consideration or two reasons: (i) lists perpetually incomplete, the i!ems it satisfies some of the criteria fundamen- often unmeasu' we sit in the ridicu- The author is director of TRW Inc., On Space tal to any more satisfactory system. and lous position of pitting cne alternative. Park, Redondo Beach, California 90278 He was (ii)it constitutes beginning theoreticalagainst another. How are we to balance greatly aided in the preparation 3f this article by many specific suggestions contnbuted by Alan Mar- support for the belief that superior sys-the gains against the risks with limited tin Ramo, member of the State Bar of California. tems are inventable. knowledge of each and no clew. weighing

1 Fi2 187 scale? Despite this quandary, we have reaucracy matching the government's. can balance nuclear reactor hazards created regulatory agencies to limit haz- Meanwhile, regulatory action some-against energy needs unless it is assigned ards. times appears to have results exactlythe duty and given the means to deter- Has regulation protected us from seri- opposite to those intended. For instance,mine how much energy the nation re- ous harm? Tens of thousands of chemi- the current clean air offset requirement quires and is expert on alternatives such cals are being manufactured and a thou- mandates that "old pollution' has to beas coal and solar, on the politically ac- sand new ones are added every year. cut down before superior plants can beceptable level of oil imports, and on the Billions of pounds of some are produced built in the same area. Since it is not pot( !!:,,di of more conservation effort? annually. Analyses have suggested thatal rays practical to make an old plant The NRC often has counseled the suppli- more of these substances might be haz-pollute less, this rule means that up-toers and utilities and can claim never to ardous than we have recognized. Beforedate, efficient, tow-pollution plants arehave had to turn down a request for a ethylene dichloride was found to be adiscriminated against in an establishedlicense. When it also take:, upon itself strong carcinogen, 100 billion pounds ofregion and will not be created there, the role of safety expert and the public's it was produced. Vinyl chloride reached while old plants that pollute heavily are protector, the perplexity is natural. Im- a rate of 5 billion pounds a year before allowed to remain. This discourages in- mediately after the Three Mile Island tests showed it to cause cancer. A 1975 vestment in new technologies that under- event other utilities operating similar re- report of the National Academy of Sci- lie cleaner plants. actors considered closing down tempo- ences stated that 1 billion pounds of Two decades ago it took 5 years and $1 rarily. The NRC was looked to for a toxic matter was being introduced yearlymillion to work an average new drugdecision about a shutdown. Here the for pest control and that the govern-through the regulatory mill. Today themission of the NRC as a protector was ment's knowledge of the potential harmtypical cost is nearer $20 million and the understandably perceived by some to be was superficial. The Environmental Pro-time is approaching 10 years. In thisin conflict with its also being a party to tection Agency (EPA) has completed ex-period the rate of new drug introductions providing uninterrupted electric power. amination of only a token part of theby U.S. firms has fallen by 50 percent. There is an opposite side to this con- 50,000 chemicals for which testing isShould we be thankful that we are payingflict of interest coin. Those wishing to required by the Toxic Substances Con-the added price in time and money toget on with technological activities are trol Act. Uranium mining has claimed preventhastyintroductionsof bad frequently frustrated by the negating ac- the lives of miners because of radon gasdrugs? Or are we allowing needless suf-tivities and indecisiveness of govern- induced lung cancer. fering and deaths that new good drugsment agencies. Sometimes the critics of In principle, most cancer of environ-might prevent? We do not know, be-an agency are politically powerful, and mental originshould be presentable.cause no group has the function of an-the ultimate effect of their criticism is to One tough problem in identifying envi-swering these questions. During thecause the agency to depart from its mis- ronmental carcinogens is that it may take 1970's, U.S. drug companies increasedsion of protection and seek to appear to 25 years before the influences are felt. their annual R & D budgets in foreign be using a more even approach. In so This is true not only of many industrialcountries from under $50 million to overdoing, it compromises its role as a pro- chemicals but of low levels of radiation, $250 million. Trials with volunteers aretector. Consider, for example, the politi- radiun, coal mine environments, asbes- permitted by other countries, who viewcal difficulties of the Occupational Safety tos, and others. Another problem is in differently the balance between the dan-and Health Administration (OSHA). It instituting practical controls even whengers of new drugs and the values they was not created either to promote indus- we have positively identified hazards might provide. If pharmaceutical R t4, Dtrial development or to slow it. Industry for example, smoking (lung cancer), fat moves abroad, then foreign countries,is disturbed by the costs of meeting in the diet (colon and breast cancer),not we, will be penalized by the hazards, OSHA's standards and the large staffs and charcoal-broiled steaks (containing but they will be the early beneficiaries ofneeded to deal with OSHA. The criti- charred protein, a mutagen). the health benefits and financial returns.cism has become so great that OSHA is Clearly, the investigatory task of iden- Perhaps it has worked out that our pat-now on the defensive. It may have to tifying and measuring hazards is an enor- tern has afforded us great protection andcreate for itself an image of balanced mous one. Regulation is unsatisfactory cost us little in missed gains. If so, thatdecision-making or face lower funding partly because we have not faced up to would be largely accidental, because noand restricted jurisdiction. This handi- the science and technology part of the group is clearly charged with comparingcaps OSHA in fulfilling its mission of task. Usually the technical experts and these broad alternatives. worker protection. At the same time, its laboratory facilities required are more actions will hardly be viewed by industry than the agencies are in a position to as contributing to expansion. Thus, all assemble. Inadequate budgets and in- Conflicting Roles of Regulatory Agencies concernedworkers, industry, and gov- spection powers often limit the making ernmentwill continue to be unhappy of studies leading to good regulations Can a regulatory agency be an ade-with OSHA. and the policing needed to ensure adher- quate investigator of negatives if itis ence to them. Restricted in investigatory simultaneously an arranger of a flow of capability, but anxious to protect against positives? For instance, is the Nuclear Trade-offs Between Benefits and Harms hazards, agencies sometimes hold back Regulatory Commission (NRC) in busi- on approvals. Delays may curb harmful ness partly to see that the nation obtains Decision-making on technological op- effects of new developments but also nuclear energy, or does it exist solely toerations can hardly be sound unless it may deny us benefits. Regulation fre- protect us against the negatives of theincludes examining alternatives. Also, quentlyinvolves voluminous,costly nuclear approach? If both, does it notthe decisions, once made, must be en- dot.umentation on minor issues and long have a conflict of interest? Moreover, isforced. There is no such thing as zero negotiations, the required industrial bu- it reasonable to assume that the NRCrisk, so to seek it can only generate an 188

expensive bureaucracy with no chancelater, reacting to actions by the oil-ex- benefit has been attained. To this day, of succeeding. Comparing imperfect op-porting nations, it required greater use ofwe do not know whether auto standards tions and balancing risks and gains, both coal. The government introduced strongare in the right range, everything consid- in arriving at rules and policing adher-air pollution restrictions on automobilesered. enct, to item, is key. Severity ia regula-without considering the impending oil A different kind of example isthe tion is not necessarily an error on theshortage. The EPA's isolated auto emis-Georges Bank project, off the coast of safe side, because it can also have asion rules raised the demand for unlead- Massachusetts, where the Labrador Cur- negative impact on productivity and em- ed gasoline and lowered MPG (miles perrent and the Gulf Stream converge and ployment. It can hurt our ability to com- gallon) performance. Less gasolineis stir up nutrients. The fish catch there pete in the world market, lower return on produced from a barrel of crude in mak- over the next 20 years is believed to be investment, raise prices, discourage new ing unleaded fuel, so more refinery ca-worth $3 billion to $4 billion. Geologists investment, and decrease average in-pacity was needed. At the same time, estimate that during the same period $10 comes. People who are made poorernew restrictions were placed on refiner- billion of oil and gas can be obtained suffer from health problems just as sure-ies. While one agency thus pushed the from the area. The government is about ly as do those who are not protected demand for oil upward, another discour-to sell petroleum leases amidst contro- from health hazards. aged the expansion of capacity. Govern-versy over potential harm to the fishing. Starting with the Pure Food and Drugment policy in energy has preached con- Many agencies are involved and the pat- Act of 1906, we have added laws govern- servation, encouraged dissipation (by tern for setting standards is confused. ing therapeutic drugs, cosmetics, medi-keeping conventional fuel prices low),No one group has the responsibility to cal devices, occupational environments,made development of new domestic en-compare alternatives. pesticides, children's sleepwear, auto-ergy sources through private investment motive safety, nuclear emissions, andless attractive, then started government- pollutants in water and the atmosphere.funded programs to pursue new energyDelays due to Indecision All this regulatory effort is narrowly fo- alternatives. cused and disconnected. Effects of spe- The automobile pollution problem is a The eastern United States has a refin- cific regulations on other government good example of the need to consider theery capacity for less than a quarter of the programs and overall national economic, inevitable impact of a ruling or inaction oilit consumes. No new refinery has physical, and social health would enter on the rest of the economy. The automo-been built on the East Coast for more the deliberationsif responsibilityfor tive industry employs more people, con-than 20 years, and petroleum products comparing alternatives broadly accom- stitutes a higher fraction of our grossmust be shipped from a distance, using panied government regulation. In some national product, uses more materials, energy and adding pollution from its dis- instances agency policies include findingconsumes more energy, and influencessipation. Those seeking to locate a new evidence of positive benefits before al-our way of life more than any other refinery on the East Coast have contest- lowing a new product on the market.industry. Regulations affecting the de-ed for many years with those striving to However, usually the legislation settingsign of a car have an enormous effect notprevent it. Involved, in addition to those up regulating agencies is silent on defin- only on air pollution and accidents butwho would operate the facility, are nu- ing trade-offs. Congress has actually alsoon unemployment, thenational merous citizen groups, the Department sometimes forbidden balanced decisionseconomy, and our international competi- of Energy, the Department of Interior, by the agencies and required unbalanced tiveness.Government controlshave the National Oceanic and Atmospheric ones. The Clean Air Act specifically much to do with the price of cars. The Administration, the Commerce Depart- precludes the deliberate weighing ofprice influences the rate at which the ment,localgovernment groups,the benefits against harms. The so-calledpublic shifts from older (lower MPG, Army, the General Accounting Office of Delaney Amendment to the Food andmore polluting, less safe) cars to moreCongress, the EPA, the Coast Guard, Drug Act tells the Food and Drug Ad-desirableones.Governmentactions and others. None has decision power. ministration that it must not consider thedominate manufacturers' decisions as to To secure approval for a pipeline from cost impact when making regulations. where to put available fundsto meetCalifornia to Texas, the Sohio Company The trade-off between improving theregulations, enhance productivity, or im-spent 5 years obtaining 700 separate per- environment and increasing the energyprove the product. Yet little evidencemits from regulatory authorities. Then, supply is typical. The economy's beingexists to suggest that federal regulation seeing no end of legal challenges, the slowed by too low an energy supply isof the industry has been based on weigh- company gave up. But perhaps we badly bad; allowing more pollution and acci- ing overall national gains and costs. need the pipeline. Who knows, and who dents is also bad. With no one in charge Seat belts, safety glass, collision-proofis to say? of balancing positives and negatives, the door latches, and the energy-absorbent Another example particularly shows government has taken several unrelated steering column were the first mandatory how our decision-making affects us inter- and conflicting actions.If coal use issafety requirements. The regulatory bu-nationally. California competes with Ja- expanded, then energy shortages may be reaucracy then invented 5-mile-per-hour pan for liquefied natural gas (LNG) from eased,but environmental impairmentbumpers, the airbag, and interlocking ofSouth Alaska, Indonesia, Chile, Malay- and safety hazards will increase. The seat belts with the ignition. The publicsia, Australia, and other Pacific loca- government first set a low ceiling price vetoed the last two. The new bumperstions. Anticipating a decline in U.S. gas on natural gas, discouraging further ex- perhaps reduced repair bills after some supplies, California gas companies com- ploraiion and simultaneously increasingaccidents, but they cost consumers $1 menced arrangements 10 years ago for demand. In an unrelated act,itthen billion for the adornment and requiredLNG deliveries from sources offering imposed drastic controls on coal. To cut hundreds of millions of gallons of extratwo or three decades of supply, well air pollution, it mandated changeovers to gasoline annually to handle the addedbefore the Japanese made similar con- oil and as for utilities using coal. A littleweight. It is not evident that any safety tracts. The gas started flowing to Japan

1 Fi 4 189 in 1977. The earliest the United Statesquent that regulations are often rendered dering on the impossible, such as essen- can now receive this gas is 1983, theacademic, their application requiring thetially eliminating a risk. The laws gov- period having been used up to get ap-step of winning in court. The U.S. Courterning the agencies do not tell them proval on a terminal site for the tankers. of Appeals recently struck down a regu-whether to tolerate a trivial hazard when Similarly, the Alaskan North Slope gaslation by OSHA on the handling of ben- the cost of removing it is enormous while pipeline project was blessed by the Ca-zene.Regulations originatingseveralbanning it may deny us a great benefit. nadian Prime Minister, the U.S. Con-decades ago limited the allowable molec- By creating many narrow agencies and gress, and the President in 1977. Manyular concentration of benzene in indus- ignoring the impacts ,f an agency's regu- more years will be needed to completetrial establishments to 100 parts per mil-lations on the rest of the nation's activi- approvals. Perhaps this slowness giveslion. This was later lowered to 10 parts ties, Congress has almost neglected its us worthwhile protection. It would beper million. Then OSHA ruled that the constitutional role as overall policy-mak- easier to be convinced of thatif theconcentration should be decreased to 1 er and has created a base for isolated, decision process appeared so thorough part per million. Would adhering to these piecemeal, and inconsistent decisions. as to require the time for selection of themore severe standards save 100 lives, or No really effective legal foundation for wisest alternative. It seems instead to beeven one life, annually? OSHA had not control exists over most regulatory agen- a hodgepodge of fragmented confronta-performed tests to answer such ques-cies. Each new empire is constructed to tions. tions; it was going on the assumption be independent of elected officials, those Itis interesting to compare Canadathat if holding benzene in the air to a low who must answer to the voters. Al- and the United States on similar tech-value is good, then reducing it to P towerthough Congress has committees to nological projects, Canadian tar sandsvalue must be better. On the other hand oversee the work of regulatory agencies, and U.S. oil shale. Both are huge energyit was quickly ascertained that OSHA'sthese committees seem not to spot over- resources but need additional develop-new standard would lead to industryregulation or under-regulation readily, or ment. Two commercial plants are in op- expenditures of more than $500 million.an agency's lack of motivation or re- eration in Canada, a cooperative effortImmediately a value issue arose: somesponsibility to compare alternatives, if by government and private industry. certain and large economic penalties ver-that is what Congress intended, or the There is nothing comparable in the Unit-sus some possible, but perhaps totallyfact that an agency is inadequately funded States. Canada began passing envi- absent, health benefits. OSHA assumeded to obtain facts essential for sound ronmental protection legislation yearsthat industry spending to meet regula-regulation.It has been estimated that before similar U.S. action, so they aretions is not to be a criterion when the$100 billion to $200 billion per year is not ignoring the problem, but they seem agency seeks to protect human lives. Butspent by industry to meet government able to match reasonable environmental surely some priceisprohibitive and regulations, an amount comparable with protection with desired use of the re-some of the expected benefits must be the nation's annual capital investment or sources. Permits required in the Unitedmeasurable, the court decided, ruling the federal tax revenues from business. States for a single project in oil shalethat OSHA could not apply the moreThus Congress could be excused for number in the hundreds. One disapprov-severe standards. (The case recently wasspending roughly as much time studying al is enough to halt action. Again, if our heard by the Supreme Court, whichregulatory costs, to make sure they a e procedure results in well-balanced deci-backed up the decision of the Court ofjustified, as pondering taxes. With a bu,1- sions, it will be partly fortuitous. Appeals.) get in mind to meet regulations, Con- The Department of Agriculture esti- The inadequacies of the regulationgress could apply its own value ji.dg- mates thatif pesticides were banned,process, while making the role of thements to the comparison of costs with crops would decline 30 percent and food courts more important, has also caused benefits. prices would rise 75 percent. Millions oftheir function to be less distinct. Indus- Admittedly, some benefits result when people around the world would go try often complains that the courts undu- regulatory matters get to the courts. In hungry because U.S. food would noly delay and interfere with industrialbringing unresolved matters there, in- longer be available to them. Unregulateddevelopment. Labor and environmental- dustry, environmentalists, and numer- use of pesticides is unthinkable, but theists argue that the courts defer valid ous other government and private groups standards should be based not alone onprosecutions b: regulatory agencies andhelp bring to the surface a very critical the dangers of their use but also on theare too subservient to industry groups. issue in technological regulation: the sur- disbenefit of their nonuse. A recentlyAccusations are common that judges,vival of democratic institutions in a tech- introduced herbicide is said to be envi-without adequate knowledge of the high-nological age. This is more important ronmentally superior to existing ones. Itly technical matters involved, misuse than the courts' curbing bureaucratic ex- was the result of 20 years of research andtheir injunctive power, available at thecesses or catching inadequacy of exper- approval effort. Should the regulatorybeck and call of environmentalists attise. If Congress did its job properly, process be accelerated, the gains expect-times and of industry groups at othercreating an adequate organization to ed to exceed the potential harm of pre-times. handle technological regulation, the role mature approvals? To weigh probable While fundamental questions exist asof the courts would become less cloudy. benefits against risks is not now a re-to the appropriate role of the judiciary in The courts could then concentrate on quired regulatory procedure. technological regulation, the legislation being the guarantor of the rights of the produced by Congress is in any case a individual in a technological democracy. key factor in the frequency and sub- Present court activity in technological Role of the Judiciary stance of actions before the courts. Con- regulation does not have this focus. Re- gress has set up a new agency almost flecting the unsatisfactory state of court Interested parties now commonly seekevery time a new harm has surfaced, the actions on technological activities, Da- appeal from regulations through theempowering legislation occasionally di- vid Bazelon, Appellate Judge of the courts. Litigation has become so fre-recting the agency to do something bor- Washington, D.C., Circuit Court of Ap- 1 9 5 190 peals, recently suggested (I) that in casession may hinge on this point. ronment requires for discovery and eval- involving technological and scientific Take only one example, the nuclear uation an array of measurement equip- hazards the courts should restrict them-energy option.It can be given some ment, laboratory facilities, field offices, selves to the role of watchdog over theuseful evaluation through cost-effective- and expertise in chemistry, physics, biol- expert. The courts should ensure, heness analysis, but it also involves mat- ogy, engineering, toxicology, statistics, wrote, that the experts have fully consid-ters that cannot be judged in terms ofand other disciplines.Efficiency and ered all the evidence, but should refrainnumbers. The analysis is likely to dis- flexibility of organization would result if from inserting themselves as the finalclose only what is good for the majority. the experts were all in one strong unit. arbiters of complex scientific questions.What the nuclear route does to a minor-No need would exist for Congress con- This may be what, in practice, the judgeity may always have to be for the courts tinually to perceive a new danger and must do in certain cases, but it does notto ponder and is definitely not a matter launch still another agency to handle it. mean that the courts can shy away whenfor technical experts alone (3). Inall technological activities, some experts testify. Any proposed technolog- entity presumably always exists, such as ical activity must meet the test of justice a drug manufacturing firm or an electric and fairness to the individual, whichA Proposed New Approach utility, that wants to move forward with every judge swears to uphold, or our a product or a project. These groups and concept of democracy will not survive. With the foregoing description of thethe proposed technological FBI may of- Society's interests, whether or not anproblems of teamological regulation in ten be opposing parties, one interested in issue is based on technological matters,mind, let us consider a regulatory organi-the advantages of some activity it wishes may occasionally deserve to outweigh anzation that may be superior to present to engage in, the other ready to say what individual's rights. But the presumption approaches as to timeliness of action, the detriments the activity will bring. Per- underlying the Bill of Rights and thereaping of benefits from technological haps these two interested parties will Constitution is still the supremacy of theadvance, protection against hazards, and agree that the activity is safe or, con- individual. Historically, it has been thethe minimizing of court actions on items versely, should be held up until identi- courts' duty to uphold fundamental val-best handled through legislation. fied disbenefits can be diminished. If ues on which the majority or the power- One route to improvement lies in deci- they do not agree, then a decision board ful may be seeking to trample. In admin-sively separating two duties of the gov- is needed to settle the issue. istering justice, the court is the expert.ernment in regulation of technology: (i) We see at this point that the FBI No matter how we organize technologi-to investigate and make recommenda- model for our proposed agency to handle cal regulation, society will feel frustra-tions concerning negatives and (ii) totechnological negatives isinadequate, tion with court decisions much morebalance the good against the bad aspects and that in some respects the Depart- deeply if the courts fail to articulate andof various alternatives and make deci- ment of Justice, which includes the FBI, implement basic concepts of justice thansions. The proposed approach startsoffers a more complete analogy. This is if they fall short in ensuring that deci-with a competent organization to discov- because the new agency would be ex- sions are scientifically accurate. er, study, assess, provide recommenda- pected to bring actions before the deci- This may be all the more evident oncetions, and prcamt cases regarding all sion board. It would present its evidence it is fully accepted that a decision con-hazards to safety, health, and the envi- of hazards and recommend action by the cerning a technology-based issue is notronment. To remove conflicts of inter-board to disapprove or mandate the merely a matter of risk assessment. If itest, we would relieve this investigatory modification of technological activities. were, we could turn it over to expert unit of any responsibility for considenngIn this analogy the agency would resem- calculators. Broad problems arising outpositives and attempting balanced deci- ble the office of the U.S. Attorney, of scientific and technological advancesions. Decision-making would not be its which decides whether to take a case to are never matters of science and technol-business. When it comes to clean air and court and, if it does, then prosecutes it. ogy alone. Instead, like all other impor-water, nuclear safety, toxic chemicals,The party carrying on the technological tant issues, they are dominated by theiroccupational health and safety, purity inactivity would be analogous to the de- social, ethical, and political dimensionsfood or drugs, and the rest, the groupfendant, and the decision board would be (2). Jeremy Bentham, in the early days ofshould be equipped with the experts,like the judge. (If this analogy is applied the industrial revolution, enunciated atools, and budgets needed to track downcrudely to a present regulatory agency, it political theory of social policy based onall the detriments of existing or proposed would say that the agency acts as both the idea that one could compare theactivities. The operations of the Federal the prosecutor and the judge.) It would number of people benefited with theBureau of Investigation (FBI) are a use- be hoped that most often the investiga- number harmed to arrive at an appropri-ful guide. The FBI is an investigatory tory agency and the technological opera- ate decision. He hoped that legislationagency; it investigates crime and finds tor would "settle out of court." could be based on such a quantitativecriminals.It does not try or sentence The decision board, unlike the investi- criterion. (Bentham believed his systemlawbreakers. It does not decide whether gatory agency, should have the role of would protect the working class since nocapital punishment is proper or whether comparing alternatives, balancing the policy affecting laborers adversely couldjails should punish or rehabilitate. When good against the bad, and the duty to prevail, the large number harmed ex-it finds culprits it turns them and the connect the case before it to other na- ceeding the small number of companyevidence it has found over to anothertional interests. It should have the un- owners.) But now it is clear that a pro-part of the government. questioned responsibility for banning or gram might benefit a large number but If we accept the value_a separate,. approving the challenged technological cause the death of a few. Is this justunambiguous mission to investigate dis- operation. The pluses and minuses of the according to our ethical and legal stan-benefits, it is sensible to bring all such activity and the alternative for regulating dards? In many technology-related is-activities together in one agency. Everyit would be argued as thoroughly as sues to come before the courts, the deci-potential harm to humans and the envi-possible in the board's hearings, after .1c6 191 which the board would make its deci-ered to call on a decision board to handleissues. sion. While a single agency may be thea question.Other private or public The need for the decis'on boards and best way to manage the disccvery andgroups or individuals could also requestthe investigatory agency described, or evaluation of hazards and the presenta- the board's consideration of an issue (4). some superior approach, can be summa- tion of recommended means to handle Because the boards would be expectedrized by quoting the words of John G. them, we should not try to solve all to ponder every case on a broad basis, Kes.ieny, president of Dartmouth Col- society-technology interactions with onethey would be expected to overlap fre-lege and chairman of the presidential decision board, because of the expected quently, one board being assigned thecommission on the accident at Three num'ler of cases and the wide array ofdecision responsibility but typically call- Mile Island (5). "Our decision-making value judgments to be included. ing on another board for advice. Theprocess is breaking down. The problem The decision boards should be regard-legislation setting up the boards wouldis whether our current political process ed asextensionsof theExecutive provide the first approximation to defin-can handle the complex issues of modern Branchthat is, of the Presidenta con- ing their jurisdictions and would namesocietyhighly technical questions of clusion arrived at by focusing on thethe activities (such as a nuclear reactorscience and technology that also involve intended board's missions. We want the installation) specifically requiring theirvalue judgments. ...I am still a believer boards to (i) constitute a credible and approval. In case of doubt as to whichin democracy, but I think some changes effective representation of the elector-board should handle a particular issue,will have to happen in the practice of it. ate, (ii) integrate the members' values to the assignment should be made by theWe have to have a forum for effective form criteria for judging the options and President. discussion of highly technological issues, use these value judgments for decision- As the boards go abnut their tasks ofso that there is a clear consensus on what making, and (iii) compare the alterna- renderingdecisions,thecourtswill science and technology say about an tives, seeking to balance benefits and sometimes be sought out by interestedissue. Then the political process can risks. The President should appoint the parties. If the legislation setting up themake the value judgment." is their members with the consent of the Senate, boards competently written, References and Notes decisions will be interfered with by the naming citizens of outstanding compe- I. D. Bazelon, in The Outlook for Nuclear Power tence and character, with staggered, sub-judicial only when they overstep their (National Academy of Engineenng, Washing- ton, D.C., 1980), p. 26. stantial terms of office. This process will charter or ignore other pertinent legisla- 2. C. Starr and C. Whipple, Science 208, 1114 cause the boards to be inherently politi- tion or fail to be just and fair. For exam- (1980); A. J. Large, Wall Street Journal, II June 1980, p. 22. cal, as they should be, responsive to the ple, a board may make a decision it 3. For example, in New Mexico, the source of 50 country's goals and priorities, thus ful- regards as superior to any alternative for percent of U.S. reactor uranium, the mining may benefit the majonty of Americans but be filling (i) and (ii). By the congressional the good of the nation, but may overlook hazardous to the Navahos who live there (A. legislation setting up each board, by oth-an injustice to some citizens caused by Ramo, Los Angeles Times, 1 June 1980, part 5, P. 5). er pertinent legislation affecting the is-that decision. The Constitution and the 4. This article is focused on federal regulation, but state and local regulation is also important. The sues the boards will ponder, and by thecourts will always be with us, and deci- latter will be aided by improved federal policy, boards' op,:rating competently, (iii) willsions reached in any way may end up in organization, and performance To some extent, the lower levels can also emulate the improve. be satisfied. the courts. But we can do batter than to ment at the federal level. The President, Congress, or the newencourage the present trend of relying 5. 1 G Kemeny, Newsweek, 19 November 1979. investigatory agency would be empow-on litigation to settle most important

or reduce risk are not purely scientific ones, they are policy choices as well, enveloped in the controversy that usually accompanies policy disagreements. In carrying out this rule-making function, regulatory agencies are frequently required to postulate answers to transscientific questions. These include the extrapolation to low doses of results obtained at high doses of a substance; the interpretation of carcinogenic poten- cies measured in different animal species to infer possible effects on humans; the meaning of benign tumors; the use of epidemiologic, in vivo, and in vitro stud- Currently, more than ten federal stat- ment should have in energy or environ- ies as evidence for establishing health utes contain statements about risk and mental policy is neither clear nor settled. benefit assessment; the process of set-One reason is that many of the questions ting environmental standards increasing- that a.:se in attempting to evaluate risk Paolo F. Ricci is a project manager at the Electric ly rests on the analysis of risk. The are what Weinberg (I) has called "ques- Power Research Institute. Palo Alto. California 94303 Lawrence S Molton is an attorney specializ- courts have made numerous references tions which can be asked of science and ing in medical and environmental policy, 3172 Mid- to risk-benefit analysis in reviewing theyet which cannot be answered by sci- dlefield. Palo Alto. California 94306 This article is part of a series on topics common to science. actions of regulatory agencies. Yet the ence ... theytranscend science." An- technology, and law. the first article in the series issue of what role risk-benefit assess- other is that decisions on how to measure was published in the issue of 21 August 177 192

effects; the choice of a dose-response rigorousadministrativeproceedings. el or adopt a model of carcinogenesis; model. Under the "hard look" doctrine of ad- the opinion does not mention the prob- Regulatory agencies, such as the Envi-ministrative law, the agency must ana-lem of extrapolation from animal tests ronmental Protection Agency (EPA) and lyze the evidence, describe its method-(10). Another court in 1978 upheld the the Occupational Safety and Health Ad- ology, and explain the rationale for its standard for coke oven emissions, ac- ministration (OSHA), promulgate stan- decision (5). knowledging that no safe level of expo- dards that reflect their policies on health In this article we discuss the treatment sure could be shown (11). A strong risk. In doing so, they must consider the in law of several key issues in risk as-expression of this approach came in a enabling statute, the intent of Congress, sessment: the meaning of the 1980 Su- 1976 opinion by J. Skelly Wright, now and the procedural requirements of thepreme Court ruling that OSHA must Chief Judge of the D.C. Circuit, uphold- Administrative ProceJere Act. The stat- demonstrate that a standard is needed toing an EPA regulation restricting lead as utes vary greatly in their description ofremedy a "significant risk," the burdena gasoline additive. He said that "a de- the risk analysis that the agency must of proof of the significance of risk under termination of endangerment to public perform. Because of the frequent ambi-conditions of scientific uncertainty, andhealth is necessarily a question of policy guity of the statutory language and the the resolution of the conflict between the that is to be based on an assessment of discretion given to agencies in choosing desire for accuracy and the need to re-risks and that should not be bound by oljectives and methods of implementa- duce hazardous exposures. We then re-either the procedural or the substantive tion, litigation and judicial review are view approaches that have been taken inrigor proper for questions of fact" (11). often the ultimate source of regulatorybalancing the economic costs against the The agency was left free to adopt risk- policy. benefits of risk reduction. averse regulations. The statutes have thus created an "un- In contrast, the Supreme Court ruling easy partnership" (2) between adminis- in Industrial Union (6) requires OSHA to trative agencies and the U.S. Courts ofSignificance and Risk develop better evidence of the risks of Appeal. The courts must scrutinize the exposure. The Occupational Safety and procedures used by the agencies in form- In the 1980 Supreme Court ruling inHealth Act calls for safe employment, ing regulations and also examine the Industrial Union v. American Petroleum and the court noted that " 'safe' is not substance of the agency policy. AgencyInstitute (6), the court required OSHA to the equivalent of 'risk-free.' There are findings of fact must be supported by demonstrate, before it issues a standard, many activities that we engage in every evidence in the record. Environmentalthat "it is reasonably necessary and ap- daysuch as driving a car or even regulation is a difficult area for courts to propriate to remedy a significant risk ofbreathing city airthat entail some risk oversee because of its technical content, materialhealthimpairment." Lower ... nevertheless, few people would con- and judges do not agree on the role of the courts had recognized that not all risks sider these activities 'unsafe.' Similarly, courts in reviewing energy or environ- can be eliminated by regulation; some a workplace can hardly be considered mental decisions. The positions of twoare too slight (de minimis) to be consid- 'unsafe' unless it threatens the workers judicial scholars of administrative law ered. with a significant risk of harm." illustrate this. The late Judge Leventhal In a case involving the use of acryloni- The court based its decision primarily of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals trile in beverage containers (7), the court on economic considerations, that is, a believed that the courts have a "central interpreted the legal definition of addi- recognition that regulation of low-level role of ensuring the principled integra- tive as requiring that a substance migrate exposures is very costly. It pointed out tion and balanced assessment of bothinto food "in more than insignificantthat under OSHA's rules, once a sub- environmental and non-environmental amounts." Although the court said the stance was determined by specific evi- considerations in federal agency deci-second law of thermodynamics guaran-dence to induce cancer in animals, or in sion-making" (3). In his view, the deci- tees that some acrylonitrile will enter thehumans who experienced extremely high sions taken by the agency are reviewedbeverage, it decided that this fact aloneexposures, it must he regulated. Since by competent judges, who apply uniform does not make acrylonitrile an additive. the National institute of Occupational standards of review, thus limiting the In cases under the Clean Air Act andSafety and Health (NIOSH) had 2415 dependence of results on the court thatthe Toxic Substances Control Act the substances on its list of suspected carcin- hears the case. A different view wascourts recognized that the regulatoryogens and OSHA listed 269 of them as expressed by Judge Bazelon, also of the agency has the power, "inherent in mostcarcinogens subject to regulation, fol- D.C. Circuit, who stated: "Because sub- statutory schemes, to overlook circum- lowing this course "would give OSHA stantive review of mathematical and sci- stances that in context may fairly be power to impose enormous costs that entific evidence by technically illiterateconsidered de minimis" (8). However, ifmight produce little,, if any, discernible judges is dangerously unreliable, I con-the EPA wishes to ignore low levels ofa benefit." The court concluded that Con- tinue to believe we will do more tosubstance, it must find "the concentra-gress did not intend to give OSHA such improve administrative decision-making tion at which there are only trivial bene- broad power. After a review of the legis- by concentrating our efforts on strength-fits to be derived from regulation"(9). lative history of the Occupational Safety ening administrative procedures" (4). In previous OSHA cases the lowerand Health Act, the court rejected the Considering the technical complexitycourts did not apply close scrutiny toview thatthe mere possibility that of the assessment of health risks, it is agency regulation of uncertain risks. For some employee somewhere in the coun- understandable that courts would be example, in a 1915 case the court upheld try may confront some risk of cancer is a cautious about interposing their judg- a reduction in the standard for workplace sufficient basis for... the expenditure ments on these issues. Nevertheless, theexposure to vinyl chloride from 50 to 1 of hundreds of millions of dollars to last decade has brought closer judicialpart per million. It did not request that minimize that risk." It then proceeded scrutiny of environmental policy,asOSHA calculate the number of cancers further: if OSHA were correct in arguing courts have required more formal andto be expected from either exposure lev- that it need not characterize a risk as

I Ci 8 793 significant, the statute might be uncon- some future time be proved severe, but the exact probability of harm, Therefore stitutional as an overly :"sweeping dele- did not find that possibility sufficient Lo OSHA may regulate carcinogens by estigation of legislative power" (13). justify refusing a license. As the court mating the risk, and characterizing it as Conclusively showing the significance added in a later case, "even the absolute significant, on the basis of the most of risks from low-level exposures would certainty of de mininds harm might not conservative dose-response models. Al- require resolution of issues that range justify government action ... whether a lowing the agency to choose answers to from the choice of a dose-response mod- particular combination of slight risk and transscientific questions that are not nec- el to the definition of "acceptable" risk. great harm, or great risk and slight harm, essarily the most popular or most logical, OSHA's rule-making allowed it to avoid constitutes a danger must depend on the but are supported by some experts, this problem; it did not establish a safefacts of each case" (16). would allow OSHA to assume signifi- exposure level of a substance. OSHA cance even where a preponderance of required standards to be set at the lowest the evidence does not support such a level feasible, But this approach incorpo- Burden of Proof finding. rated other assumptions about carcinogenesis, such as the no-threshold hy- When the risk is uncertain, what is the pothesis. The extent io which a finding burden of proof that an agency must Factual Accuracy of significance may rest on such assump- satisfy to demonstrate significance? The tionsis unclear. The Supreme Court law usually requires that a fact or an Risk assessment by regulatory agen- refused to consider what factual findings overall finding (such as civil liability) becies reflects a tension between two basic are necessary to establish significance. supported by a "preponderance of the goals of regulation. McGarity ( 17) has In footnotes to its opinion (6), it stated evidence" or "more likely than not" (51described these as factual accuracy and that animal studies could support "a percent). The normal rule of administra- result orientation. To achieve the first conclusion on the significance of the tive law is that "it is the proponent of agoal, the agency should wait until suffi- risk" and that epidemiologic evidence, rule or order who has the burden of proof cient data have been accumulated before even if insufficient to generate a dose- in administrative proceedings" (6). Wit:,imposing regulations. The second goal response model, "would at least be help- the exception of the Federal Insecticide,requires agencies to implement policies ful" in deciding whether a risk is signifi- Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FI-that Congress considers socially desir- cant. FRA), which places the burden on theable. An agency may choose to endorse However, with animal studies there registrant to prove that a pesticide isa particular result and acknowledge that are still the questions of extrapolation safe, environmental statutes follow thisfactual accuracy is impossible, or it may and interspecies comparison, and appro- principle. In earlier cases OSHA was notregulate only where it can be accurate. priate epidemiologic studies may be non- required to demonstrate the significance To avoid this choice, an agency faced existent, so the evidence suggested byof a risk. But in the benzene case thewith a risk of uncertain magnitude may the court may still not resolve the con- Supreme Court held that "the burden choose to defer regulatory action until troversy. was on the agency to show, on the basis more studies are completed that will On some occasions, however, OSHA of substantial evidence, that it is at least better define the risk. If the agency has regulates a well-defined risk. The Su- more likely than not that long-term expo- underestimated the risk, delay will prove preme Court considered what level ofsure to 10 ppm of benzene presents a to have unnecessarily injured some; if it known risk is significant by bounding the significant risk of material health impair- has overestimated it, delay wil: avert the concept. It noted that a one per billion ment" (6). imposition of excessive cots. In a case risk of cancer from chlorinated water While this principle applies to the where the agency lacked complete evi- would not be significant, while a one per overall finding of Significance, it does not dence of the environmental impact of its thousand risk of death from inhaling gas-apply to the components of the analysis. action, the D.C. Circuit held that the oline vapor would be. Somewhere inThe basic principles of scientific proofagency must give "full and careful con- between liessignificance; where that must be followed wherever there is asideration" to delay, but may proceed if point lies must require case-by-case de- consensus among scientists. For a spe- it decides that delay "is outweighed by termination. cific piece of evidence to be valid, such the benefits of proceeding" (18). Under other statutes, courts confront- as the induction of tumors in mice by When further research is unlikely to ed with a known risk have often ruled chemical X ingested under conditions Y, produce additional knowledge, delay is that if the probability or severity of harm the findings must be replicable and be inappropriate. Thus a court contemplat- is vey low, the risk should not be regu- statistically significant at commonly pre- ing the risks of low-level radiation from a lated. In nuclear power plant licensing, scribed levels. A finding of carcinogene- nuclear plant refused to consider that the the courts have noted that there is a sis must be "proven" with 95 percent exposure might be proved hazardous be- small probability of a major accident confidence or greater. However, there cause "There is no indication that either from a meltdown, butbecausethe are some issues in the measurement of possibility could be rendered other than chance of such an occurrence is so low, risk about which there is no scientific speculative during the foreseeable fu- it need not be factored into the environ- consensus. Here the agency is held to a ture" (18). mental impact statement (14). Similarly, lower burden of proof than "a prepon- Sometimes delay is inappropriate be- a nuclear plant exposes some persons to derance of the evidence." cause Congress has clearly chosen the low-level radiation; this guarantees that The Supreme Court ruling allowed result-oriented approach in the relevant some risk exists, but itis of such IcwOSHA to adopt conservative assump- statute. The EPA must establish ambient severity that courts and agencies havetions about carcinogenesis "so long as air quality standards for pollutants even found it "clearly acceptable under exist- they are supported by a body of reputa- where the current state of knowledge ing conditions" (15). The D.C. Circuit ble scientific thought" (6). It also stated makes this difficult; it must make do with acknowledged that this risk might at that the agency has no duty to calculate the best information available (19). But

ifi 9 194

in other cases, such as occupational ex-called "Learned Hand's algebra" aftertion of health risk. Considerations of posure to suspected carcinogens about the great jurist of the 1920's, has threeeconomic or technological infeasibility which little research has been done, it is components: the burden of the regula-cannot Ix used in formulating thcse stan- difficult to decide whether to delay. Thus tions, the probability of harm occurringdards(25). far, the courts have given no clear guid- from the product or conduct at issue, and 4) itis the OccupationalSafetyand ance. the severity of the harm if it occurs. AHealth Act that has been the main focus The Supreme Court appeared to en- regulation is valid if the severity of the of the debate over balancing. Regulation dorse both factual accuracy and resultinjury, factored by its probability, out-un,'er this act raises very difficult ques- orientation in the benzene case. As de-weighs the burden of regulation. Thistions about the assessment and accept- scribed in the opinion, if the agency isallows the courts to make a subjectiveability of health risk, and the answersto explicit in its choice of models, it may assessment of the imposition on the con-the probli. ins of low-level occupational attempt to eliminate almost all cancer sumer. exposure to toxic substances will influ- risks by adopting a "one-hit" theory of 2) A second approach to balancingence policies in many other areas. Sec- carcinogenesis. But the court has alsocosts and benefits appears in the Cleantion 6(b)(5) of the statute provides that called for stronger evidence, better doc- Water Act. The EPA must considerstandards must assure "to the extent umentation, and clearer proof that a risk costs, but they are much less central tofeasible" that "no employee will suffer exists; it found the evidence of low-dose the decision than under the first ap-material impairment of health." The benzene carcinogenicity inadequate (20). proach. In establishing phase I(1977) Courts of Appeal had interpreted the effluent standards, the agency must con-word "feasible to require only that the sider the total cost of standards, includ-technology existed and could he installed Balancing ing potential unemployment and disloca-without destroying the industry. In 1974 tion.It need not make a quantitativethe D.C. Circuit ruled that standards A critical question is the extent to comparison of cost and benefit, and it iswere feasible even though they were which economic costs should be weighed to impose the standard unless the mar-financially burdensome to the employer against the benefits of risk reduction.ginal level of effluent reduction is "whol-and reduced his profit margin: evena Statutes dealing with the environment ly out of proportion" to the cost. Forstandard that bankrupted some individ- and energy differ in their approach to this phase II (1987) standards, the total costual employers could be feasible (26). But issue, and the courts are wrestling with need not be compared to benefit, but ina groundbreaking1978ruling on it. There are four types of statutory only considered. One court of appeal hasOSHA's benzene standard, the Fifth Cir- frameworks, as described below. required a cost-effectiveness analysis ofcuitendorsedcost-benefitbalancing 1) One class of statutes requires that alternative strategies to implement phase(27).It held that the benefits of a stan- the agency balance cost and benefits. H controls. dard must bear a "reasonable relation- Some statutes explicitly require cost- When an individual polluter wishes aship" to its costs, because the statutory benefit analysis. The most important ex- variance from the effluent standards, thedefinition of health standards as "pro- ampleis the National Environmental result is different. The U.S. Supremecesses reasonably necessary to provide Policy Act (NEPA), which mandates Court ruled in 1980 that the economicsafe or healthful employment" implieda "balancing of the environmental costs of capability of an individual plant to bearbalancing of costs and benefits. Howev- a project against its economic and tech- the costs of a phase I standard may noter. in other contexts the phrase "reason- nological benefits"; a numerical cost- be considered(24).But under phase IIabl necessary" only requires that the benefitanalysis isrequiredin cases individual economic hardship will justifyagent. y action bear a rational relationship where other methods provide inadequate a variance. The reasoning is that phase Ito tilt. statutory purpose (28). In 1979 the detail. More recently, the Outer Conti- standards already incorporate costs, be-D.C. Circuit upheld OSHA's cotton dust nental Shelf Lands Act, amended in cause they are calculated on the basis ofstandard and held that OSHA neednot 1978, requires offshore drilling to be the best control system now in use;balance costs and benefits (29). done with the safest technology, exceptsegments of industry that have not at- When the benzene case reached the when "the incrementalbenefitsare tained this level should be required to doSupreme Court in 1980, the main opinion clearly insufficient to justify the incre- so. Individual consideration is appropri-avoided the issue of balancing Thenin mental costs of using such technologies" ate for phase 11 bee iuse such cost analy- 1981 the court ruled in Amonan 1etile (21). Similarly, F1FRA requires suspen-sis has not yet been performed. Mannlactaren Institute(AlMI;that bal- sion of pesticides when there is -unrea- 3) A third approach is to ignore costs ancing was inappropriate under its read- sonable risk to man or the environment,and focus on the issue of health risk. The ing of the legislative history of the Occu- taking into account the economic, social, Delaney clause of federal Food.pational Safety and Health Act. The and environmental costs and benefits"Drug, and Cosmetic Act. which provides court held that Congress had performed of the pesticide. Similar language ap-that no additive can be approved "if it isbalancing and intended to place "the pears in the Toxic Substances Controlfound to induce cancer.' is an example. 'benefit' of worker health above all other Act (22). In theory, once tests demonstrate theconsiderations save those making attain- When the "unreasonable risk" lan-carcinogenicity of a substance, no con- ment of this 'benefit' unachievable. Any guage appears, the courts have imposedsideration of its benefits or the costs ofstandard based on a balancing of costs balancing as a prerequisite to reguiation. its removal is relevant: the additive is and benefits by the Secretary that strikes Under the Consumer Products Safetybanned. This approach is used in othera different balance than that struck t) Act (CPSA) and the Federal Hazardousstatutes. although not with the same Congress would be inconsistent with the Substances Act (FHSA), the courts have clean-cut rejection of balancing. For in- command set forth in §6(b)(5)' (3(1).I he held that such language "necessarily in-stance, the Clean Air Act requires thecourt also held that interpretation of the volves a balancing test like that familiarestablishment of primary national ambi- phrase "reasonably ne.-essary" to re- in tort law"(23).This balancing formula,ent air quality standards solely as a func-quire balancing of costs and benefits 2G0 195

"would eviscerate the to the extent fea- the "reasonably necessary" language velopment. Better methodology and bet- sible requirement.' might require cost-benefit balancing for ter procedures in the agencies and courts The court ruled that feasibility, not other hazards. The feasibility principle are urgently needed. The distributive ef- cost-benefit consideration, is the only of section 6(h)(5) only reflects the intent fects of regulation (which groups are factor that takes precedence over worker of Congress to regulate toxic material, as benefited and burdened by a policy), and health. It defined feasible as "capable of much as possible. it does not necessarily the trade-offs between present and future being done." It refined the definition of apply to safety or noise standards. for generations should be considered. Re- economic feasibility. but still left some example. Therefore standards in those cent articles have called for new proce- aspects uncertain. For instance OSHA areas might require ''some form of cost- dures inpolicy-making: genericrule- conducted studies to estimate the cost of benefit analysis." Again, the court did making on transscientific issues, full dis- complying with the new standards and not decide this issue. closure of the uncertainties contained in concluded that the cost would not seri- However the problems are resolved. if all risk decisions, and the use of perma- ously threaten the textile industry and balancing is to play a role in env ironmen- nent special masters to advise appellate that the industry would maintain "long- tal law. some attempt must made to courts in these cases (34). More accurate term pnfitability and competitiveness." value human life and health. Society. and just results may be possible in the The court refused to decide whether a either implicitly or explicitly, place, a future. dollar value on the preservation or sav- standard that threatens this status is fea- References and Notes sible. ing of a life. The most dramatic example I A Weinberg. Almeria 10. 209 (1972) Obviously. an analysis of these eco- Is the jury award. Juries make death 2 This phrase originated with Judge H. Friendly in Assat toted Inductile% o/ Nett Statev nomic questions requires estimates of award, in auto accidents. product liabil- Department of Labor. 487 Fed Rep . 2nd set costs. fhe precision needed for these ity suits, and medical malpractice cases. 341. 354 (2nd Cur .19731 The partnership is designed to "check extrasagant exercises of the estimates is not certain. In AlAll, the Statutory compensation systems such as agency s authority to regulate risk' (29. p. 649) cost studies were based on a hypotheti- the federal black lung disease program or 3 H Lesenthal. UnitPO Lon RN122. 509 (19741. p 555 cal dust standard that was less strict than state workers' compensation also put a 4 D Hanlon. Ethyl Corp vEnt tronmental the one actually adopted: thus the cost price on injuryor death.Legislative Bon Agents, 541 Fed Rep2nd serI. 67 (D.0 Cur 19761( Hanlon. Circuit Judge coneui- estimates were too low. The studies also decisions to finance programs whose ef- ring1. fect, are documented also value life be- For a description of the history of standards in overestimated the cost by miscalculating review. see National Lone A%41(10/14111 v bill- the amount of syntheticfibers used. cause they expect to say e a certain num- rontnental Prole( tam Agent s. 627 Fed Rep 2nd scr. 416, 451 (D C Cur 1980)fhe phrase OSHA claimeditcould not generate ber of lives for a certain number of 'hard Isk" originated Nub Judge Lesenthal in more precise figures unless Industry was dollars. Examples are mobile cardiac Greater Boston 7elei mhos ( orp v h.deral Co»ununu alums Cottuntssum (FCC). 444 Fed willing to release proprietary data.It emergencyunits anddrinking water Rep . 2nd ser 841 C Cur 1970) and /Wes treatment plants (32). Human life is not Peal, Broad( toting Cos PCC. 422 Fed Rep then assumed that the overestimate of 2na ser 671 (I) C Cur.. 1%91 The doctrine is cost routhly equaled the underestimate the only aspect that is difficult to evalu- defined and dessribcd in detail in W Rodgers. ate. and balancing under environmental Geo Last J 67. 699 11979). pp 70-707 due to the hypothetical standard. The 6 Industrial Unton Deportment. Al v Lourt admitted that a cost estimate based statutes Mtn Involves comparing intan- Amen, an Pt ttoloon Inshhtte. 100 S CI 2844 66 L . 2nd 268 (1980) on the actual standard "surely %4 ould be gible costs and benefits.Itis through 7 Monsanto silenneds, 611 F cd Rep . 2nd ser preferable:. butheld thatthe lower balancing thatthe courts attempt to 947. 955 ID L.Cur . 19791 8blItIMIOnenifli Defense fund v LPA. 616 Fed court had the power to accept OSHA', weigh such factors as scenic beauty Rep2nd ser1267. 1281 t) (Cur .1980) estimate under the circumstances. The preservation of animal life, and quality of 9/bidp 1284 10 So, iets o/ the Pletto% Itoluqm v0.SIIA. 509 court concluded that OSHA "acted rea- life Fed Rep . 2nd set1301 (2nd Cur .1975) 11 Anternan Iron and ..Steel Institute v OSIIA. 577 sonably and that the lower court had Fed Rep 2nd scr 825 (Ird Cn .19781 not "misapprehended or grossly, misap- 12 [As/ Corp v 541 Fed Rep .2nd ser1. 24 Prospects for Risk Assessment ID C Cur . 19761 plied the test for substantial evidence. 13 The delegation doctrine is a basis principle of The ATM1 case should resolve the constitutional Paw that blocks Congress from delegating too mush ulits am horny to °thin meaning of "to the extent feasible foi There is no doubt that agencies and brandies of government Key New Deal legisla- this issue, but feasible has itdifferent courts will continue to he tiotibled by tiim Nay insalidated by the south betause it gas c thecm:cometoomuch authority meaning in other contexts. I'hc feasibil- risk questions,1 he easiest administra- .Si bet liter Poulin Cogss United Statc%, 295 ity of a standard. as just discussed, is not tive policyeradication of risk to the L' S 495 (19351 (National Industrial Recovery. Act unconstitutional)In general. courts inter- the same as the feasibility of various greatest extent possiblehas hecn de- pret a statute narsowly if this will avoid a finding of unconstitutionalityJustice Stevens methods employed to achieve the stan- clining in popularity as we have become plurality opinion in the ben7ene case raised the dard.lwo Court, of Appeal implied that aware of the finite nature of our re- possibility that an open-ended grant of authority to OSHA might violate the nondelegation princi- this provision necessitates a cost-effec- sources. The cost, of environmental reg- plelanuting OSHA's .0 avoided the tiveness analysis of possible solution,. ulation seemed less burdensome at a 14 Carohno Env/momenta/ Studs (hoop v United Thus the employer might avoid expen- time when the United States had greater States. 510 Fed Rep . 2nd ser 796 ID C Cur . economic advantage,. Yet the calculus 19751 (class 9 reactor accidents "almost totally sive engineering controls by demonstrat- unworthy of consideration in environmental ing that they are not feasible because of risk involves basic values that will impact statement) 15 (,terns for Safe Poster v Nat fear Regulaton they are not cost-effective (31). In A Th fl always be weighted differently by differ- onuntsston INRC 1.524 Ped Rep . 2nd ser the Supreme Court noted thatif two ent individuals. Decision-makers select a 1291. 1300 (1) C Cu 1975) tlotn-level radiation from Maine Yankee plant aceptable) methods that achieved the same reduc- policythatimplicitlyweighshealth. 16. Erin/ Cow s. f.P.1. 541 F ed Rep 2nd serI. 18 tion of health risk were both feasible, the quality of life. economic opportunity. (DC Cir. . 1976) 17 T. McGarity. Geo Liu J 67. 729 (1979) more burdensome method might not he and environmental amenities. Consensus 18Alaska sAndrus. 580 Fed Rep . 2nd set 465, is almost impossible. yet we have no 473 (D.0 Cir1978) (cost of proceeding without "reasonably necessary." So it appear, more data may be outweighed by benefits Na- thatcost-effectivenessisneeded for alternative but to seek increasingly rational Lnsironmental Polity Ast fails to spesib level of certainty needed for environmental esti OSHA standards. tional approaches (33). mates). Citt;etts far Safe Poster v. NBC .S24 The ATMI decision also implied that Risk-benefit assessment is still in de- Fed Rep . 2nd ser 1291. 1300 ID C Cur . 1975) 201 196

Matting plant until studies settle issue would (FHSA). sec Aqua Slide "NDive ( PSC. relate to the purpose of the statute 'Maiming v "bring essential economic development to a 569 Fed Rep .2i,d ser831 15th . 19781 Family Pablo cairns Seel ic e. 411 U S. 356. 369 standstill") (CPSA) (1972)1. Whether in the Consumer Products 19 Natural Resinor cc Defence (Mau d vTrain. 24The "wholly out of proportion" phrase originat- Safety Commission or Occupational Safety ant 545 Fed Rcp . 2nd ser 320 (2nd Cir . 1976) The ed with Senator Muslim IA Legitimate Victors Health Administration. "reasonably necessary fact that current knowledge makes this difficult of the Water Pollution Control Ac t Amendments probably was not intended to limit agency au- is "irrelevant." Scc note 5 in the court's opin. of 1972 (93rd Congress. 1st Session). p.1701. thority . ion. EPA v. National Crushed Stone Ascociation. 49 29 An..tio sMarshall. 617 Fed Rep 2, ser 20 The Supreme Court examined the record in U S. Law Week 4008 (1980). The case dealt only 636. 665 (D.0 Cur 1979) detail Studies of U S rubber workers exposed with vanances from phase 1 standards, howev- 30 Amen( an reside Monufai arm Ascii( lai1011 % to purc benzene as a solvent in the 1940's and er, the court indicated (note10 of Justice Donovan. 49 U.S. Law' Week 4720 11981) 1950's showed a ninefold increesc in leukemia White's opinion) that it supported the view that 31. International Harvester v Otuapatuonal Safety A NIOSH study of workers at two plants in cost-benefit analysis is unnecessary for phase and Health Retie?, (-impassion. 628 Fed. Rep. Ohio in the 1940's showed a significantly higher II 2nd ser. 982. 988 (7th Cir., 1980). citing Turret incidence of leukemiaHowever. exposures 25In construing the National Ambient Air Quality v Sec retail of Labor. 561 Fed Rep.. 2nd ser. were usually in excess of 100 parts per million. Standards provision, the Supreme Court held 82 17th Cur .1977). RAH Seiretary of and OSHA concluded that no dose - response that "claims of economic or technological infea- Labor. 594 Fed, Rep . 2nd scr. 566 (6th Cur. relation could be determined Only one study of sibility may not be considered by the Adminis- 19791 requires ad hoc balancing to determine low-level csrxisure was found. a Dow Chemical trator in evaluating a state requirement that whether the means selected to meet the standard study that showed three leukemia deaths in the primary ambient air quality standards be met in us feasible work force (02 expected) The three had been the mandatory three years11./nron Elei fru ( a 32 For examples of the costs per life saved of these exposed to 2 to 9 parts per million benzene v EPA. 427 U.S 246. 265 (1976)1. and other funding decisions, see W. Rodgers. Because the three workers were probably ex- 26.Industrial Union Department. AFL-CIO v Harvard Emm' Law Rec 4. 191 (1980). pp. posed to other occupational carcinogens and no Hodgson. 499 Fed Rep . 2nd ser. 467 (D.0 194-195. leukemia deaths appeared in other groups of Cir.. 1974) A later court expended on this, 33, Executive Order 12291, signed by President workers with higher exposures. OSHA did not noting that massive dislocation or "cripplingof Reaga.c in early 1981. us intended, among other claim that this study demonstrated cause and an industry would he unacceptable. but a upheld things. to "reduce the burdens of existing and effect The Supreme Court concluded that evi- coke oven regulations estimated to cause a 13 future regulations, increase agency accountabil- dence in the record of "adserse effects of ben- percent drop in earnings for industry 'Amer:it:1i ity for regulatory actions. with certain specific zene exposure at 10 parts per million is sketchy Iron and Steel Institute vOSIIA. 577 Fed exclusions, through regulatory impact analysis at best" and said OSHA had not shown signifi- Rep.. 2nd ser. 825 (3rd Cir.. 1978) Such impact analysis should contain information cant risk, 27.Amen( an Petroleum?, Institute v. OSHA. 581 on potential net benefits to include "evaluation 21 Columbia Basin Land Pride( tam Aumi ratan c Fed Rep . 2nd scr 493 (5th Cir.. 1978) affirmed of effects that cannot be quantified in monetary Satiksrnger, 643 Fed Rep . 2nd scr 585. 594 on other grounds, sub nom. Industrial Union terms" and the identification of distributional t9th Cir . 1981). Outer Continental Shell Lands Department. AFL -C10 vAnteric an Petroleum effects, Act. 43 U.S Code. sect1347(h) Institute 16). 34. T McGarity 117): D. L Hanlon. &teat' 211. 22 RI:RA. 7 U S Code. sect Toxic Sub- 28Means-end analysis is common in judging the 792 (19811.1 Yellin. Ilaread Lan Rel. 94. 489 stances Control Act.15 U SCode.sect. constitutionality or validity of regulations. The 0981). 2605(a) Supreme Court held (in a case under the Truth- IS We wish to thank Patricia Dunne for her typing 23 The quotation is from l'orecter vCommoner in-Lending Act) that a statute allowing such and proofing of the manusciipt We are also Prods« tc Safety ('ommiccion (CPSC). 559 Fed rules "as may be necessary" only requires that grateful to Glenn Hilst. Chris Whipple, and Rep .2nd ser 774 789 ID C Cu . 1977) the means chosen by the agency reasonably Monte Zengerle for their helpful suggestions.

hensiye than the reforms that freed Nnglo- American law from the teLhnkalmes of writs and those that freed science from the grip of Aristotle. Some scholars have argued that scientific and technical disputes fall outside the limits of judicial competence and that courts should therefore he content with a greatly reduced role in such controversies, limiting themselves to reviewing the adequacy of procedures for collecting and analyzing socntifi evidence Judge Bazelon, for example. has suggested that courts reviewing actions of administra- Resolution of scientific and technolog- nical evidence in order to prove the tive agencies can do no more than verify ical controversies occupies anincreas- rationality of administrative decisions orthat major technical issues are addressed ingly important position in the agenda of to establish the legitimacy of innovative in agency decision-making, that deci- the federal courts. Government efforts to research practices. sions are based on a consideration of all regulate problems related to technologi- The resulting surge of science-related the relevant factors, and that the data cal advances have given rise to anew disputes into the jut,1,11 arena has pro- and reasoning supporting administrative brand of litigation that focuses directly duced a set of difficult and highly visible decisions are entered into the public recon issues debated among scientific ex- problems for the courts. and jt is widely ord 12) Others seek a more substantive perts.Legislation to control environ- believed that the traditional processes of role for the courts. pointing out that it is mental and health risks. such as the adjudication are no longer capable ofvirtually impossible in practice to avoid National Environmental Policy Act, the handling many of these disputes. Intro- scientific and technical issues, because Clean Air Act, and the Toxic Substances ducing a panel on science and the law atcourts have to acquire some understand- Control Act, require decisions basedon the 1978 annual meeting of the American ing of the basis of agency decisions sim- the "best scientific information" as well Bar Association.alegalscholarre- Sheila Jasanoll is a senior h ewerc h associaie in the as relevant social and economic consid- marked (1): Program on Science. feLhnolop and Souct% ('ornell Um% ersityIthaca. New York 14851 Dom- erations. Science itself has become a Traditional legal techniques. education and thy Nelkin is .i piolessor in the [Wolin' on Science focus of litigation as advances in biomed- institutions. may soon he the same kind of Technology and Society and in the Department of Sociology at ('ornell This article is part of .i wiles ical science lead to controversialre- anachronism in an age of science-based tech- on topics common to science. 11:antilop . and law search and clinical practices that are nology that canon law institutions became commissioned by the National ( initcrence of I aw- with the decline of temporal religious author- yCN and Scientists. .join .entire of AAAS and the challenged in the courts. Thus, scientists Amelican Bar Association()the'al ticks in the ity.... What may he rewired is a reform of series wen: published in the issues of 21 August and are frequently called on to provide tech- existing structures which is no less compre- 4 December 202 197 ply to evaluate the adequacy of the un- research as attempts are made case-by- the same disease, could have led to a derlying administrative procedure, Oh case to define limits through administra- remission lasting up to 13 months. Tipy Lawyers and scientists subscribing to tive appeals and. increasingly. through judge, decided. after balancing the fac- this view have put forward a variety of litigation. Opponents of particular appli- tors for and against treatment. that the proposals designed to increase the scien- cations seek judicial support for their plaintiff, acting through his guardian ad tificcompetence of judicialdecision- moral or religious positions by invoking htem. could properly refuse such proce- makers and provide better technical In- the traditional power of the courts to dures. The central question in the case put into the judicial process. prevent or compensate for injurious ac- concerned the extent of an incompetent In this article we consider some recent tivity. person's right to refuse life-prolonging litigation in an effort to understand why In this kind of litigation the conflicting treatment, taking into consideration the controversies with a large scientific or values that underlie a dispute are often state's countervailing interest in preserv- technical component seem to place an masked by scientific i,ues, and the ing human life by any available means. unusual burden on theadjudicatory dynamics of adversary litigation seldom Whatever one thinks of the particular process. These controversies fall into permit a separation or clear identifica- balance struck by the court, it must be two major classes: lil those in which tion of the values at stake. This is what recognized that the weighing of compet- ethical issue, have been raised by scien- happened. for example, in the Del Zio ing interests carried out inthis case tific advances. particularly in the biologi- case, in which a plaintiff sued Columbia constituted an appropriate functioning of cal sciences, and fiil those involving so University. Presbyterian Hospital, and the adjudicatory process. cietal risks and perceived deficiencies in the chairman of Columbia's department Most "right to die" cases that reach the government', effort to mitigate these of obstetrics for refusing her permission the courtspresent considerablyless risks through regulatory action. In part. to undergo a voluntary in vitro fertiliza- clear-cut issues for adjudication. Typi- the problems encountered by the court, tion procedure. During thetrial,the cally. these cases arise when physicians stem from the scale and complexity of qualifications and scientific credentials refuse to discontinue treatment of termi- the issue, involved. A "good" decision of doctors who had agreed to perform nally ill patients until they are assured by is hard to reach without evaluating trade- the procedure became the subject of a court of law that the decision may he offs whose ultimate consequence, the debate. Attention was focused not only taken without fear of prosecution. Judi- courts are ill-equipped to consider in the on their past performance as researcher, cial approval is sought even though both framework of a conventional adjudica- but also on particular technical deci- the doctors and the patient,' representa- tory proceeding. The high level of uncer- sions: such as the use of temperature tive, agree from the outset that further tainty invoked in the regulation of scien- charts to determine the time of ovulation treatment would he futile. One result is tificandtechnologicaldevelopments and of test tubes rather than petri dishes that the courts are converted into forums compound, the difficulty . Disagreement, for fertilization. Relativelylittle atten- where littgants seekto estab. .hthe exist about the magnitude of risk. the tion was paid to w hat some have seen as meaning of death inscientific term,. appropriatenessofmeasuringtech- the basic issue in the case. the conflict Moreover, it has been argued that resort niques. and the reliability of data. 13e- between Mr,. Del Zio's desire to have a to the courts in these cases is socially cause of its great visibility. the problem baby. even with the aid of controversial destructive. because court-ordered im- of technical uncertainty has become the scientific techniques. and Columbia Um- munity from prosecution in effect per- main focus of proposals intended to miti- versity 's prior agreement with the feder- mit, the medical profession to escape the gate the difficulty of adjudicating scien- ail not to permit human ex- responsibility it should assume in making tific and technical dispute,. We have perimentation without adequate review life or death decisions (6). examined some of these proposed re- (4). The litigation reduced the ethical No doubt the existence of legally valid forms and conclude that they frequently issues involved in in vitro fertilization to definitions of life and death would make concentrate on the question of technical a debate about w hat constitute, compe- such decisions considerably les, painful uncertainty to the exclusion of the content clintcal work. This is ironic in view for doctor, and for the families of pa- ceptual and policy issue, at stake. of the fact that adjudication is probably tient,. butitis questionable whether far better suited to weighing competing litigation is an appropriate avenue for Scientific Dispute, That Strain the value, and interest, than to settling dis- establishing such definitions. For one putes among scientific expert,. thing, it would be unreasonable to expect Adjudicator). Process A similar blurring of scientific. social. sporadic litigation to aid the develop- Theoretical and technical advances. and moral concerns is ev ident in many of ment of generally recognized biological especially inthebiologicalsciences. the "right to die" cases that are making criteria for defining concept, such as have made possible clinical applications their way into the court,. That court, brain death. A scientific consensus could and research procedures that are contro- have a legitimate role to play in this area only he reached if the medical communi- versial on religious or moral grounds. is apparent from a careful reading of the ty worked actively toward establishing Activities such as fetal research. in vitro Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court's such criteria and ratified them through fertilization. resuscitation of teinunally decision in the case of the Supermen- consistent professional practice. There is illpatient,. and the creation of II% mg den! of Bch herimin Stale S( Iwo! every indication that the court, would microorganismsthroughrecombinant Saikeith z (5). Here. the plaintiff was a respect the results of such an effort and DNA technique, are peiceived by some 67-year-old, severely retarded man scof- would not compel treatment beyond a as having the potential to change the fering from a fatal form of leukemia The point where responsible medical opinion normal" state of nature, alter the ge- issue before the court was whether life- would declare the use of life-prolonging netic structure of man. threaten cher- prolonging treatment should be adminis- techi.'ques to he useless (M. However. .shed values, or even violate natural tered to Saikewicz. Chemotherapy. the untilt consensus exist,. itis perhaps law. Opposition frequently ci) stailizes treatment routinely available to and ac- inevitable that a certain number of life- around particular application, of such cepted by most competent person, with termination decision, will be challenged 263 198

in the courts. In the meantime. by seek- siting decisions and the environmental makes fascinating reading. but one does ing protection against the threat of law- impact statements they are based on, not have to engage in sophisticated legal suits, doctors may actually delay the methodologies such as cost-benefit anal- reasoning to see why it co'ild not carry attainment of a scientific consensus. ysis used to evaluate trade-offs. are all the da) in court. In its audacious reliance With respect to the ethical issues, al- subject to challenge in the courts. And on litigation to effect large-scale social though moral, social. or religious scru- when technological failures occur. as at change, the /ionic Ix, case drastically. ples may underlie the positions adopted Love Canal or Three Mile Island, numer- and perhaps intentionally. overstepped by parties to a lawsuit, the technical ous and varied claims arc filed against the dividing line between adjudicatton rules of litigation virtually ensure that public and private entities by persons and policy -making. Not unexpectedly. these will not themselves become the seeking compensation. the Supreme Court rejected Homeker's subjectof courtroom debate.Most In the American legal system. basic petition against the Nuclear Regulatory "right to die" cases essentially ignore rules of adjudication. such as those forCommission without comment. reaffirm- the social or religious aspects of dying determining standing or for assigning li- ingitsearlier.constitutionallybased and focus instead on the technical defini- ability. have largely evolved out of ajudgment that a policy decision concern- tions of death. In the Del Zio case, the framework of two-party litigation. Theseing nuclear power must ultimately he left social and ethical questions related to in procedures tend to break down in mod- to Congress and the states. vitro fei tilization did not surface during ern technology-related litigation. where litigation. Similarly, in the recent contro- the complexity of the issues makes it versy over the patentability of living difficultto determineprecisely who Evidentiary Problems microorganisms, legal arguments have those affected are, how they have been necessarily focused on the intended cov- injured, and by what agency. Liability is The strains created by litigants wish- erage of the patent laws and the distinc- hard to apportion because of the confu-ing to compel policy formulation through tion between an invention rind a living sion of public and pris ate responsibilitythe adjudicator) process are compound- organism, not on the morality of extend- in the management of large technologicaled by the uncertainty that pervades sci- ing the concept of proprietary rights to enterprises. In the welter of !het,, as- entific and technological controversies. the creation and commercial use of new sumptions. and values represented in Efforts by the government to prevent or life forms (7). such litigation, it is almost impossible for reduce harm from scientific and techno- Technological developments in areas judges to perform the painstaking analy- logical densities requ.re decisions to he outside the biological sciences do not sis and bak ming of conflicting values made at the frontiers of scientific knowl- directly interfere with the processes ofappropriate to the adjudicatory process. edge. often on the basis of incomplete life and death, but frequently pose risks The conceptual difficulties created forevidence. Chalienges to these decisions to human health. safety . and welfare that the courts byscientific and technical bring into the courts disputes concerning generate controversiesEns ironmental controversies are mirrored in the novel the quality and interpretation of data that groups and individuals have increasingly legal theories des eloped by the plaintiffs. cannot he resolved definitively on the turned to litigation to present or mini- For example. demonstrators at nuclear basis of current scientific knowledge. mize such risks. but for a variety of power plant sites have attempted to de-Examples of sw-h questions abound. reasons this type of litigation strains the fend themselves arinst trespass chargesWhat is a "safe'' standard for human adjudicatoryprocessalmosttothe by resurrecting the old "lesser of two exposure to loss -level radiation? How breaking point. evils" doctrine. In the course of judicial can data from animal toxicity tests he To begin with. such cases give rise proceedings they have argued. with oc- extrapolatedto human beings! How to problems that have little to do with casional success, that the crime of ties - does noise affect human health and well- their scientific or technical dimensions. passing is less evil than the dangers ofbeing' Courts are confronted with voluminous nuclear power and that trespassing is Although issues like these are fre- records and lengthy procedural w ran-therefore justified as a means of drama- quently raised rn litigation. itis impor- slings. just as they arc in large antitrust tizing the greater evil. 13y ins oking such tant to recognize that courts reviewing cases or other litigation involving major a defense, litigants seek to ensure that administrative decisionsdealing with corporate entities and multiple parties. some discussion of values will he injeLt- such questions are not themselves in the The special flavor of recent technology ed into an otherwise routine proceedingbusiness of coming un with the "right" related litigation, however. derives from for dealing with a minor infraction of the answer. It is not the correctness of the its unique policy context Government law. In another example. opposition to decision that is at issue. but the substan- regulation of major technologies has to the use of nuclear energy resulted in tive and procedural adequacy of the rec- take into account a conflicting array ofnothing less than a "lawsuit to end atom- ord that supports it. The major function scientific, social, and economic consid- ic power." In !Ionic 4er s. Ile ndra . the of the court is thus to ensure that the erations and of public and private inter- plaintiff's lawyers prepared a brief argu- decision-making body . usually a federal ests The trade-offs considered in the ing that the harmful effects of ionizingregulatory agency. has not engaged in course of regulation are so complex that radiation justify closing down all nucleararbitrary and capriLlous action (9 and industry, private citiLens, and specialfuel cycle operations immediatelyX. that due process has been afforded to all interest groups all find :-mple opnortuni- Legal support for this position was de- parties. t-,, to raise questions about the scientific rived from an array of national and inter- Bask. authority to develop a scientific or technical validity and procedural fair- national sources of law. principles adopt- record and to make the necessary tactual ness of individual decisions, as well as ed during the Nuremberg trials. cove- determinations in such t...is.:, is lodged in the underlying social values they seem to nants of the United Nations, provisions the administrative agency. which has at represent. Litigation growing out of thisof the U.S. Constitution. As a social its disposal powerful procedures for gen- contexttakes many forms. Exposuremanifesto, and even as an indictment of erating evidence. As Judge Bazelon limits 'or particular toxic substances,nuclear power, the resulting document commented in resiewing the Atomic En-

2r;z11

4111111111111i0iMigilliillior, 199 ergy Commission's rule-making process vances. Thus recommendations for im- judges, and their clerks. Special masters on nuclear waste disposal (JO): proving the adjudication of scientific or or science advisers would be set up in ad technical disputes focus more and mere hoc positions, depending on the need for Many procedural devices for creating a genu- on thetechnical competence of the special expertise. One proposal would ine dialogue on these issues were available to courts extend a system now used in the Court of the agencyincluding informal conferences Customs and Patent Appeals to all the between intervenors and staff, document discovery, interrogatories.technical advisors federal courts, buttressing them with a committees comprised of outside experts with Some Proposed Reforms staff of technical advisers trained in both differing perspectives, limited cross-examina- science and the law (15). In effect, all tion, funding independent research by inter- The courts face a diversity of prob- these recommendations would equip the venors, detailed annotation of technical reports, surveys of existing literature. memo- lems as the.), ate drawn into the resolu- courts with sufficient expertise to con- randa explaining methodology. tion of problems related to scientific and sider scientific and technical claims more technological advances. Technical un- intelligently. The role of the court is not to dictate the certainty, a diversity of regulatory poli- Such attempts to improve the compe- choice of particular procedures, but to cies. and a complex array of social, tence of the courts, however, do not make sure that the agency uses all the moral, and religious questions compli- confront a common problem. namely, means at its disposal to generate a full cate the judicial resolution of such dis- that the technical evidence presented for record of relevant facts in support of its putes. Yet almost all recent proposals for consideraOn is often inader..mre, con- regulatory decision. Although it may of-judicial reform are narrowly directed to- fused, and controversial. Accordingly, ten he difficult for the courts to deter- ward improving the scientific literacy of proposals have a:so been developed for mine what facts are most relevant and lawyers and judges and clarifying techal- clarifying technical issues and scientific whether a "genuine dialogue" has been cal information used as a basis for judi- argumens before they enter the courts. created by the agency, it seems cleat that cial decisions. Their object is to create a scientifically the reviewing court does not need inde- Proposals to enhance the technical sound basis (or decisions. to develop pendent access to the same fact-finding competence of the courts range from criteria by which to assess the adequacy mechanisms that are available to the those suggesting basic changes in the and competence of information, and to agency. adjudicatory process to those calling for arrive at a consensus on controversial Too great an emphasis on the uncer- the introduction of scientific advisory technical questions that represents the tainty of technological impacts can lead and training programs. It has been ar- best judgment of the scientific communi- both scientists and regulators to recom- gued thatthestructure of litigation ty. mend inaction, pending the development should be changed to recognize the cru- The science court, a well-publicized of better evidence of risk and causation. cial role of expertise: that because tech- proposal for dealing with technical dis- But decisions to protect human health nical knowledge is necessary to evaluate putes, was intended as an adversary fo- and welfare need not invariably depend risks and technical causation, interaction rum in which scientists with different on scientific plod of harm. It is possible between lawyers and experts should take views on controversial issues would ar- to obtain relief at common law from place at every stage in the process of gue in structured debates before unbi- odors, noise, and other nuisances even litigation.The authors of one proposal for ased scientific judges. Debate would be when their effects on health or well-being reform, in tit,: area of product liability, limited to questions of fact: judges would are not scientificallywell understood. seek a "seriated" trial format in which give opinions only on factual matters. The California Supreme Court recog- thequestionoftechnicalcausation leaving social value questions for the nized thislastyear in upholding an would be debated before any claim for political or traditional 1(.0'11 arena. It was award of damages for distress caused by damages is considered. This would allow assumed, however, that the opinions of airportnoise. Compensation was ap- the theory of liability to develop consist- these judges wouldbeauthoritative proved for "a sense or feeling of annoy- ently with an "expert" evaluation of the enough to provide a basis for adjudica- ance, strain, worry, anger, frustration, technical data: the intention is to make tory decisions. Indeed. proponents of nervousness, fear, and irritability' pro- the litigation process "more responsive the science court claimed that this proce- duced in neighbors of the airport (II). By to technological realities" (12). dure would make itpossible "to find refusing to insist on medical evidence In another call for structural change, truth among the conflicting claims made that exposure to noise causes ill health, Judge Leventhal proposed setting up a by sophisticated advocates when there is the court confirmed that, at least in cases cadre of scientific experts who would act serious controversy within the techno- involving demonstrable harm prom tech- as aidesto appellate judges; helping logical community" (16). Similar beliefs nological enterprises, a scientific ratio- them to understand problems of scien- have generated calls for a "technological nale does not have to he provided to tific methodology and to assess substan- magistrature" and for a new profession justify relief. In this case. judicial power tive data (13). More extreme reformers of "certifiedpublicscientists"who was ext_rcised to prevent an adjudicable would establisha system of special would make independent technical eval- conflict over values from being convert- courts equipped to deal with technical uations of scientific disputes (17). ed into a scientific dilemma. matters and run by expert judges able to Alternatively, legal scholars have prb- However, the element of technical and deal with questions of statistical reliabil- posed a systematic use of scientific bod- scientific uncertainty often seems to en- ity and the performance of complex tech- ies, such as the National Academy of courage litigants to translate questions of nologies (14). Sciences, to resolve controversial tech- social value into a technical discourse. It Other suggestions for improving the nical questions. Their scientific findings is assumed that the resolution of uncer- ability of the courts to deal with techni- and risk assessments would serve as a tainty will automatically clarify social cal information include the appointment basis for judicial decisions. choices and resolve value conflicts relat of science advisers and special masters A somewhat different approach, but ed to scientific and technological ad- or changes in the training of lawyers, one also intended to improve the techni- 2115 200 cal information available to the courts, categorization. The empirical or logical guise of two-party adversarial litigation. seeks to accommodate technical uncer- deductive methods of science have little Equipping the courts with scientific and tainty rather than resolve it. Advocatesto do with such issues and may even technical support may facilitate the adju- of this approach stress that uncertainty "squeeze out" important values by sub- dication of these issues; however, it may requires open ventilation of the differ-jecting them to precise definition. In also divert attention from the public re- ences in expert opinion. For example, such cases, using science to resolve dis- sponsibility for major policy decisions the decision in Calvert Cliffs' Coordinat-putes will not satisfy the partiesin- and encourage the conversion of moral ing Committee. Inc. v. United States volved. and political questions into technical de- Atomic Energy Commission pointed out Some proposals also seem to ignorebates among experts. As our strongest that poorly financed intervenors maythe fact that the technical uncertainty institution for defending fragile values, lack the wherewithal to marshal techni-underlying many disputes is genuine: in the courts should guard against such cal evidence and thus be at a disadvan- many cases the evidentiary basis foroverextension of scientificexpertise. tage in administrative proceedings and in definitive resolution simply does not ex- However, the fundamental choices in- the courts (/8). The problem could be ist. In these cases, scientists operate less volved are not simply matters to be ameliorated by distributing resources soas neutral parties than as advocate., resolved by adjudication; they call for as to allow all sides to air their concernsproviding evidence on both sides of tech- setting priorities and evaluating the pub- and to present expert data in support ofnical disputes. Proposals that enhance lic will, clearly a political, not a judicial, their positions. Measures for promoting the role of scientists in adjudicatory pro- role. this include the funding of technical in- cedures may bring areas of technical tervenors and the distribution of scien- disagreement into sharper focus, but will Frzferences and Notes tific resources to citizen groups. I. G. Ahrens. paper presented at the annual meet- not necessarily lead to resolution. ing of the American Bar Association. New The use of expert forums in settling York. 4 August 1978. 2. D. Bazelon. "'Coping with Technology Through legal disputes can be questioned from the Legal Process."' address at Cornell Univer- Analysis still another perspective. The belief that sity Law School. 29 November 1976. 3. H. Leventhal. in Eths1 Corp. v, Environmental scientificexpertiseisinherentlyre- (P1r9o716erion Agent v. 541 Fed. Rep.. 2nd ser.I Are such reforms likely to resolve the moved from value considerations and 4. T. Hastings Cent. Rep. 8 (No. 5). 15 problem of judicial competence? Will that scientists are therefore political celi- they enhance the ability of the courts tobates is an anachronistic and even dan- 5. Superintendent of Belt henotin Suite St howl v. Saikewiez. 373 Mass. 728 (1977). G 1Annas. deal with the characteristics of sciencegerous one. Expert forums may limit the Hastings Cent. Rep 8 (No 1). 21 (1978) and technology that have strained therole of dissent by giving a dominant 6. (619.7.18.).Annas. Hastings Cent. Rep. 8 (No. 3). 16 adjudicatory process? Although the pro- place to establishment views on contro- 7 Patent Lau Ascot, 7 (Nos 3 and 4) (1979). this posals described above would certainly is a special issue devoted entirely to the question versial topics. Such consensus-building of patenting of new life forms improve the technical competence of the procedures may also perpetuate miscon- 8 U.S. District Court. Middle Distnct of Tennes- see. No. 78-3371 See Honk Aer v. Hendne. ti courts, we believe that they hold little ceptions about the relation between facts Lawsuit to End Atom Potter IA Bates. Ed promise of solving the more basic prob-and values in controversial areas where (Book Publishing Co.. Seattle. Wash.. 19781 for a review of the documents in the case. lems involved in scientific and techno-questions of value are difficult to distin- 9. Administrant(' Prot edure At t. 5 U.S. Code. logical litigation. sect. 706. guish from questions of fact. Further- 10 Natural Resoun es Defense Omni d v. U S We have suggested that advances in more, the need for urgent action in con- Nut lear Regal:HortComousston, 547 Fed science and technology, especially in the Rep . 2nd ser. 633. 653 (D C. Cir 1976) troversial areas may lead to undue reli- I I. R J. Smith. St lent e 207. 1189 11980). biological sciences, have created newance on expert opinion. When policy- 12 H R. Pichler. A. D A. S Weinstein. W. A. Donaher. dad 186. 1089 (1974). conceptual problems that cannot be re- makers andthecourtsneed quick 13H. Leventhal. Unit. Pa Lau Ret122. 509 solved by analogy to existing legal prece- answers, tentative scientific judgments 11974). 14 See proposal in Federal Watcr Pollution Control dents. Proposals to enhance technicalmay be treated as definitive conclusions Act Amendments of 1972 (Public Law 92-500. competence do not confront these new sect9) for special courts having jurisdiction and the qualifications intended by scien- over environmental matters. problems. Furthermore. proposals that tists may be lost (20). 15 This and other proposals were discussed at a Conference on the Use of Scientific and Techni- seek to develop factual justification for In the end, proposals to bolster judi- cal Evidence in Formal Judicial Proceedings. ethical decisions often represent an ex-cial competence in technical areas fall Washington. D C . September 1977 sec Work- Paper by D Nyhart. Sloan School. Massa- tension of scientific rationality to inap-short, for the problems faced by the chusettsInstituteof Technology(mimeo- propriate areas. In an effort to providecourts in dealing with controversies in 16 A. Kantrowitz. Am .Sit63. 505 (September legitimacy for judicial decisions, scien-these areas cannot be attributed simply October 1975) tific data are used to resolve questions 17See, for example. 1 C Glick. Aim Y Aead to lack of judicial expertise. They also Si:. 265. 189 11976) that have little to do with science at all.reflect the failure of the policy process to 18 Cohen Cliffs Coordinating Commuter Intv Questions of aesthetics, of human digni- United States Aroma &ergs C.: mammn. 449 recognize fully the public and multifac- Fed Rep.. 2nd ser 1109. 1118 (1) C Cir. 1971) ty, and of religious belief underlie manyeted character of modern scientific and 19L. H Tribe. When aloes Confht 1. L. H Tribe. allegedly scientific disputes. Practices C S Schelling..1 Voss. Eos (Ballinger. Cam- technological development. In the ab- bridge. Mass.. 1975). pp 61-92 such as involuntary sterilization or fetalsence of controlling policy principles. 20 For a review of critique,. of the science court research threaten what Tribe (19) hasbroad questions that follow from scien- concept, sec A Mazur Afoicri 15.I(spring 1977): D Nelkin, St tTel hind ;himValues called "fragile values"values that are tific and technological activities will con- No /8 klanuary 19771, pp. 20-31 nonquantifiable, intangible, resistant totinue to reach the courts in the artificial

2r6 201

the possible release of materials and energy, to human exposure, and eventually to harmful consequences (Fig.1). To differentiate among types of hazards, we defined 12 measures for individual hazards and applied them to the appropriate stage in this chain. We selected descriptors (Fig. 1 and Table 1) that would be applicable to all technological hazards, comprehensible to ordinary people, and could be expressed by common units or distinctions. One variable describes the degree to which hazards are intentional, four char- Each year the hazards associated with involving potentially harmful releases ofacterize the release of energy and materi- technology lead to illness and death, as energy and materials. We characterizedals, two deal with exposure, and five well as varying environmental, social.the stages of hazard causation by 12 apply to consequences (Fig. 1). Only one and economic impacts; these effects cor- physical, biological, and social descrip- descr;ptor, annual human mortality, is respond to a significant fraction of the tors that can be measured quantitatively; closely related to the traditional idea of gross national product (1, 2). Despite thewe then scored 93 technological hazards risk as the probability of dying; the oth- burden imposed by technological haz-and analyzed the structure of correla- ers considerably expand and delineate ards and the broad regulatory effort de-tions among them. In this article we the quality of hazardousness. Four devoted to their control, there have beenpresent a highly condensed account ofscriptors require categorical distinctions few studies comparing the nature ofour analysis (12). and eight use logarithmic scales (Table technological hazards in terms of generic 1). Logarithmic scales are practical for characteristics. Most investigators have cases where successive occurrences produced case studies (3), comparative Measures of Hazardousness range over a factor of 10 or more in risk assessments of alternative technolo- magnitude and where estimated errors gies (4, 5). comparative lists of hazard We should first distinguish betweeneasily differ by the same amount. Loga- consequences (6,7),or comparativethe terms hazard and risk. Hazards are rithmic scales may also match human costs of reducing loss (8-10). threats to humans and what they value, perception better than linear scales, as A first step in ordering the domain ofwhereas risks are quantitative measures seen by the success of the decibel scale hazards should classification. Today of hazard consequences that can be ex-for sound intensity and the Richter scale technological hazards are classified bypressed as conditional probabilities offor earthquake intensity. the source (automotive emissions), use experiencing harm. Thus, we think of Hazards were selected from a variety (medical x-rays), potential for harm (ex- automobile usage as a hazard but sayof sources (3, 8, 13) and, after scoring. plosions). population exposed (asbestos that the lifetime risk of dying in an auto were found to be well distributed on the workers). environmental pathways (air accident is 2 to 3 percent of all ways of 12 scales (Fig. 2). Where appropriate, pollution), or varied consequences (can- dying. hazards were scored by reference to the cer. property loss). One scheme is cho- We conceive of technological hazardsscientific literature. Many cases were sen, usually as a function of historical or as a sequence of causally connecteddiscussed by two or more individuals, or professional choice and the relevant reg- events leading from human needs andreferred to specialists for clarification. ulatory organizations. even though most wants to the selection of a technology, toWhen the results of this scoring were technological hazards fall into several categories.For example, aspecific chemical may be a toxic substance. a consumer product. an air or land pollutant, a threat to worker health, or a Direction of causal sec, ence prescriptiondrug.Indeed,amajor Release of Exposure to Human and achievement has been the cross-listing of Choice of Human Human11. materials materials biological several of these domains of hazardous needs wants technology or energy or energy consequences substances hy their environmental pathways (//). 1. Intentionality 2. Spatial Population 8. Annual We have sought to identify common extent at risk mortality differentiating characteristics of techno- 3. Concentra- Delayof 9.Maximum tion consequence potentially logical hazards in order to simplify anal- killed ysis and management of them. Techno- 4. Persistence 10. Transgenera- logical hazards may be thought of as Hazard descriptors 5. Recurrence tional 11. Nonhuman mortality (potential)

12. Nonhuman C. Hohenemser is in the Department of Physics mortality and R. W. Kates in the School of Geography and the (experienced) Center for Technology. Environment, and Develop- ment at Clark University. Worcester. Massachusetts Fig. 1. Causal structure of technological hazards illustrated by a simplified causal sequence. 01610. P. Slovic is at Decision Research, a branch of Perceptronics. Eugene, Oregon 97401. Hazard descripioxs used for classifying hazards are shown below the stage to which they apply. 2/17 202

Table t. Hazard descriptor scales. entirely ou the causal st-ucture descrip- Technolog: descriptor tors defined in 'cable I. 1.Intentionality. Measurs the degree to which technology is intendedto harm by a Energy versus materials hazards.A categorical scale: 3, not interdeu to harm living organisms; 6, intended to !arm nonhur Ian living simple, but significant, distinction is the organisms; 9, intended to harm humans. division of hazards into those resulting Release descriptors from energy releases and those from 2. Spatial extent. Measures the maximum distance over whicha single event has significant impact on a logarithmic scale, 1

2r,8 203 Because policies governing various 1 types of hazards are determined to a intentionality :: Spat:el Concentration Persistence extent '- large extent by people who are not scien- . tists or hazard assessment experts, it is T :--.7 "7 important to know whether lay people ..-:..:. :. .... *-*.- 'r .: , %. are able to understand and judge our hazard descriptors and whether these O descriptors capture their concerns. The results of a pilot study that we conducted -...... with 34 college-educated people (24 men c.%°- ''.... Delay Human -.... Recurrence Population ... and 10 women, mean age 24) living in at risk -.,- ,.. mortality O (annual) Eugene, Oregon, are interesting. :- 0 t.".. ". To test the perceptions of these people N :: ..-. .c we created nontechnical definitions and simple scoring instructions for the causal a *.- descriptors of hazards and asked the aNisafill K*.11/ -.11::ill._ subjects to score our sample of 93 haz- .c ards(12).After an initial trial, concentra- 0 Human Transpenerational Nonhuman Nonhuman tion was judged to be too difficult for our mortality motality mortality -spondents to score. For similar rea- (maximum) (potteina; :::: (experi- E --. '.:enced) sons, 12 of the less familiar hazards were z .-. :-: . .. omitted. The subjects then scored 81 ... r- ...... hazards on 11 measures from our in- - .. . . . structions and their general knowledge, .. :: . reasoning, and intuition. 0 5 10 5 10 5 10 5 10 The results indicate reasonably high Descriptor score correlations between the scores derived Fig. 2. Descriptor frequency distributions for 93 hazards. from the scientificliterature and the mean judgments of our laysample (r = .65to .96)(12).But despite these scoring errors are made. Thus an initially scores on one factor; the third group, high correlation coefficients (Fig. 3), de- chosen set of 66 hazards yielded thehazards, contains al! the other cases. viations of a factor of 1000 between same factor structure as the final 93;The group into which a hazard falls de- scientific and lay estimates were encoun- changing 10 percent of the scores by 1 topends, of course, on the cutoff for the tered, suggesting that there were strong 3 scale points had no significant effect. designation extreme. Although the loca-biases among our subjects for some de- Furthermore. removal of 24 hazards with tion of the cutoff is ultimately a policyscriptors and some hazards. The sub- the most extreme factor scores produced question, our preliminary definition isjects also tended to compress the hazard only minor changes in factor structure. arbitrary(21). scale,systematically overvaluing low an unexpected finding since extreme How appropriate and usefulis ourscoring hazards and undervaluing high scores often dominate the analysis. approach to hazard classification? To scoring hazards. Because this effect ap- Scores of the 93 hazards and the de- succeed it must describe the essentialpeared in the scores of individual sub- rived factor structure are summarized in elements that make specifichazardsjects. it was not an artifact of regression Table 3.Individual descriptor scoresthreatening to humans and what they toward the mean. Similar effects were have been grouped by factor into a 12- value, reflect the concerns of society,reported by Lichtensteinet al. (23)in digitdescriptorcode,andextreme and offer new tools for managing haz-..Jmparisons of perceived risk with sci- scores on each factor have been identi-ards. On the first point, we invite theentific estimates of annual mortality. fied through a five digit factor code, with review and evaluation of specialists; on To test whether our descriptors by the use of truncated factor scores( 12). the second and third points, we havecauses of hazards would capture our Inspection of Table 3 permits quick additional evidence that vie discuss be- subjects' overall concern with risk. we identification of dimensions that domi- low. collected judgments of perceived risk, a nate hazardousness in specific cases. global risk measure whose determinants Forexample,commercialaviation have been explored in other psychomet- (crashes) is high in the catastrophic fac- Comparing Perceptions ric studies ( /3. /9). Subjects were asked tor and nondistinctive in the other four; to consider "the risk of dying across all power mower accidents are extreme in Although the scores for 93 hazards are of U.S. society," as a consequence of none of the five factors; nuclear warthe result of judgments, we relied onthe hazard in question. and to express (radiation effects) is extreme in four. explicit methods, a scientific framework, their judgment on a relative scale of I to The results of the coding in Table 3 led and deliberate efforts to control bias. 100. Modest positive correlations be- naturally to a seven-class taxonomy with These attributes are not necessarily part tween perceived risk and our descriptor three major groupings (Table 4). The firstof the judgments made by the generalscores were obtained in 9 of 12 cases major group, multiple extreme hazards.public. Indeed many scientists believe(Table 5). Each hazard descriptor thus includes cases with extreme scores inthat lay judgments about hazards vary explains only a small portion of the vari- two or more factors; the second, ex- widely from scientifically derived judg- ance in perceived risk. treme hazards, has cases with extreme ments(22). The five factors from Table 2 also

2(19 204

Table 3. Descriptor and factor codes for 93 hazards. The descriptor code for each hazard consists of a digit for each descriptor, and scales defined in Table 1, represents scores on the To help visualize the factor structure, descriptors have been groupedby factor in the order defined in Table 2. The factor code consists of a single digit for each factor, and identifies extreme scores by "1" andnon- extreme scores by "0", and also follows the order defined in Table 2. Hazards with two or more extreme factors are identified with . HAZARD FACTOR DESCRIPTOR CODE FACTOR CODE HAZARD DESCRIPTOR CODE CODE ENERGY HAZARDS 46, Caffeine - chronic effects 333-566-11-1-95-1 00000 1. Appliances - fire 333-333-42-3-95-2 47. 00000 Coal burning - NOx pollution 693-566-11-3-95-7 10000 2. Appliances - shock 333-113-21-3-95-1 00000 48. Coal burning - SO2 pollution 693-563-11-4-94-7 10010 3.Auto - crashes 49, 333-113-11-5-96-2 00010 Coal mining - black lung 333-483-11-4-64-3 00010 4. Aviation - commercial - crashes 50. 333- 113- 63 -3 -97- 00100 Contraceptive IUD's - side eff. 333-763-11-2-67-1 00000 S. Aviation - commercial - noise 51. 333- 213- 11- 1 -85 -5 00000 Contraceptive pills side eff. 333-586-1:-3-74-1 00000 6. Aviation - private - crashes 333-113-32-4-97-4 00010 52, Darvon - overdose 333-556-11-4-77-1 00010 7. Aviation - SST noise 333-313-41-1-76-5 00000 53. DDT - toxic effects 996-886-32-1-87-5 11000 8. Bicycles - crashes 333-113-11-3-84-2 00000 54. Deforestation CO2 release 696-993-11-1-91-9 10001 9. Bridges - collapse 333-113-53-1-95-3 00000 55. DES - animal feed - human 333 -586-11-1-93-1 00001 10. Chainsaws - accidents 666-113-11-1-74-2 10000 toxicity 11.Coal mining - accidents 333-233-53-3-64-3 00000 56. Fertilizer - NOx pollution 393-686-11-1-93-9 00001 12.Dams - failure 693-423-74-2-85-5 10100 57. Fluorocarbons - ozone depletion393-883-11-1-97-9 00000 13.Downhill skiing - falls 333-113-21-2-63-1 00000 S. Fossil fuels - CO2 release 393-993-11-1-92-9 00001 14.Dynamite blasts - accidents 333-113-32-2-65-3 00000 59.Hair dyes - coal tar exposure 333-286-11-1-87-1 00000 15. Elevators - falls 333-113-52-2-96-200000 60. Hexachlorophene toxic effects666-363-11-2-87-1 10000 16. Fireworks - accidents 333-113-31-1-83-2 00000 61. Home pools - drowning 333-223-41-3-83-1 00000 17. Handguns - shootings 369-113-41-4-96-1 10010 62. Laetrile - toxic effects 333-553-11-1-55-1 00000 18.High construction - falls 333-113-71-1-28-2 00000 63. Lead paint - human toxicity 333-773-11-3-75-2 00000 19. High voltage wires - electric 333-173-11-1-74-3 00000 64. Mercury - toxic effects 663-986-13-2-85-5 01000 fields 65. Mires pesticide - toxic effects696-886-22-1-67-5 11000 20. INC - explosions 363-213-85-1-86-5 00100 66. Nerve gas - accidents 669-836-73-1-77-5 10100 21. Medical x-rays - radiation 333-189-11-4-92-2 00011 67. Nerve gas - war use 699-836-87-3-97-7 10100 22.Microwave ovens - radiation 333-173-11-1-84-2 00000 68. Nitrite preservative.toxic eff.336-786-11-1-91-1 00001 23. Motorcycles - accidents 333-113-11-4-76-2 00010 69. Nuclear reactor - radiation 363-969-86-1-96-7 01100 24. Motor vehicles - noise 333-213-11-1-83-3 00000 release 25. Motor vehicles - racing crashes 333-113-52-2-67-2 00000 70. Nuclear tests - fallout 663-989-73-3-91-9 01101* 26. Nuclear war - blast 699-213-87-4-98-610110 71. Nuclear war - radiati)n effects699-989-88-4-97-9 11110 27. Power mowers - accidents 333-113-21-2-73-2 00000 72.Nuclear waste - radiation 363-989-15-1-82-6 01001 28. Skateboards - falls 333-113-11-3-73-1 00000 effects 29. Skydiving - accidents 333-113-51-2-48-1 00000 73. Oil tankers - spills 663-7o3-61-1-15-6 00000 30. Skyscrapers - fire 333-423-53-3-85-4 00000 74. PCB's - toxic effects 663-976-13-1-97-6 01000 31. Smoking - fires 333-433-32-3-85-1 00000 75. Pesticides - human toxicity 996- 886- 12- 2 -97 -5 11000 32. Snowmobiles - collisions 333-113-41-2-73-2 00000 76. PVC- human toxicity 333-486-11-2-77-4 00000 33. Space vehicles - crashes 333-313-84-1-98-5 00100 77. Recombinant ONA - harmful 393-869-97-1-97-9 01100 34. Tractors - accidents 333-113-41-2-74-2 00000 release 35. Trains - crashes 333 - 213- 53- 3 -84 -3 00000 78. Recreational boating - drowning333-223-51-4-83-2 00010 36. Trampolines - falls 333-113-51-1-74-2 00000 79. Rubber manufacture - toxic exp. 333-986-11-3-57-4 01000 80. Saccharin - cancer 333-466-11-1-87-1 00000 MATERIALS HAZARDS 81. Smoking - chronic effects 333-486-11-6-85-1 00010 82. SST - ozone depletion 37. Alcohol - accidents 333-313-11-4-95-2 393-893-11-1-93-9 00001 00010 83. 38. Alcohol - chronic effects 333-486-11-5-85-1 00010 Taconite mining-mater pollution663-983-11-1-67-6 00000 84. Thalidomide - side effects 39. Antibiotics - bacterial resis- 666-563-11-3-97-1 10000 a33-456-51-1-17-1 00000 tance 85. Trichloroethylene.toxic effects 333-983-11-1-87-4 00000 40. 86. Two,4,5 -T herbicide - toxic eff.696-886-22-1-77-5 11000 Asbestos insulation - toxic 333-583-11-3-56-300000 effects 87. Underwater construction - 333-223-61-1-44-3 00000 41. Asbestos spray - toxic effects 333-583-11-1-83-3 00000 accidents 42. 88. Uranium mining-radiation Aspirin , overdose 333-456-11-3-97-1 00000 333-989-12-2-64-5 01000 43. 89. Vaccines - side effects Auto - CO pollution 333-346-11-2-94-4 00000 696-556-11-2-84-1 10000 44. 90. Valium - misuse Auto - lead pollution 663-976-11-2-95-5 01000 333-566-11-3-87-1 00000 45. Cadmium - toxic effects 663-986-11-2-74-6 01000 91. Warfarin - human toxicity 666-653-11-1-87-1 10000 92. Water chlorination-toxic eff. 666-583-11-1-97-5 10000 93. Water fluoridation -toxic eff. 333-786-11-1-82-5 00001

showedmodest positivecorrelations50 percent) of the variance in perceivedApplications to Managing Hazards with perceived risk. Because the factors risk. It appears, therefore. that the haz- are linearly independent, the summedard descriptors were well understood by In addition to improving our under- variance of the factors may be used toour nonexpert subjects and that theystanding of hazards, our conceptualiza- determine the total variance explained. captured most of the global concern withtion of hazardousness may help society With the sample of 34 Oregonians werisk that is expressed in the variableselect social and technical controls to find that our descriptors account forperceived risk. Larger and more repre-ease the burden of hazards. Though de- about 50 percent of the variance in per-sentative groups must be tested beforetailed discussion of hazard management ceived risk. the results can be generalized. is beyond the scope of this article, we Perhaps the most striking aspect of these results is that perceived risk shows no significant correlation with the factor Table 4 A seven-class taxonomy. mortality. Thus. the variable most fre- qu-ntly chosen by scientists to represent Class Examples rise( appears not to be a strong factor in Multiple extreme hazards Nuclear war (radiation). recombinant DNA. pesticides the judgment of our subjects. Extreme hazards When average ratings from the 34 sub- Intentional biocides Chain saws, antibiotics. vaccines jects were used instead of descriptor Persistent teratogens Uranium mining. rubber manufacture scores, correlations with perceived risk Rare catastrophes LNG explosions. commercial aviation (crashes) increasedsubstantially,and factor Common killers Auto crashes. coal mining (black lung) scores derived from the subjects' de- Diffuse global threats Fossil fuel (CO2 release). SST (ozone depletion) scriptor ratings explained 85 percent (not Hazards Saccharin, aspirin, appliances, skateboards. bicycles 210 205

10.0 I I I

0 1 1 10 100 1000 Spatial extent Deaths/1000 MWyear B x Nonhuman mortality x (experienced) Nonhuman mortality I Biocide!1.-.. (potential) Intentionality 5.0 - x I Persistence ; Delay Delay Transgenerational * x IIII1 Recurrence Catastrophic I Human mortality II=E (maximum) 0.0 Human mortality Mortality CE=Iim (annu,,I) o Recurrence Population at risk Global Diffuseness

4 O 1 2 3 4 o Standardized der criptor score 5.0 -i (units of standard deviation) x I a r1I 1

Fig. 3 (left). Scatter plots with linear regression lines indicating the correlation between mean lay judgments and our estimates of hazard descriptors. The three cases illustrate the 0.0 generally high degree of correspondence between the two types of judgment. occasional deviations by as much as a factor of 1000, and except in the case of spatial extent. a significant compression of the scale of lay judgments. (x) Materials hazards: (0) energy hazards. Fig. 4 (above). Human mortality Comparison of nuclear (light bars) and coal-fired (black bars) (U.S., annual) electric power by using Inhaber's analysis (A) and our hazardousness factors and descriptors (B).

5.0 O

I i 0.0 I 0 0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10 0 Scientific estimates can suggest three ways of improving this mated that mortality rates associatedardousness offer a partial solution by process. with coal technology are 50 times thoseallowing a multidimensional hazard pro- Comparingtechnologies.Basicto for nuclear power technology (Fig. 4A). file to be applied to coal and nuclear hazard management are comparisons Such one-dimensional comparisons havepower (Fig. 4B). This profile was ob- and choices among competing technolo- createdconsiderable dissatisfaction be-tained from combined descriptor scores gies. For example, for electricity genera- cause they ignore other important differ-for each of several hazard chains that tion. coal and nuclear power are fre- ences, including other aspects of hazard-make up the total hazard of coal and quently compared, and the hazards ofousness, between the two technologiesnuclear power( /2).Coal still exceeds each are invariably couched in terms of (24). nuclear in human mortality, as expected mortality estimates. Inhaber (4) has esti- Our factors and descriptors for haz-from Inhaber's analysis, and it also ex- 2ii 206

Table 5. Correlation of causal structure de- We tested this use of the profile by profiles of hazardousness that considera- scriptors with psychometrically determined scoring a new hazard. tampons-toxic values of perceived risk for 81 hazards. Only bly extend the conventional concept of values of r at greater than 95 percent confi- shock syndrome. The profile of this haz- risk as annual human mortality. Ourpro- dence level are given. ard was most similar in structure to that files of hazardousness appear to be com- of the profiles of contraceptive intrauter- Descriptor prehensible to lay people and to capture ine devices (IUD's)-side effects; anda significant traction of our subjects' Technology descriptor then to aspirin- overdose; Valium-mis- concern with hazardousness. This sug- Intentionality 28 use; and Darvon-overdose.Indeed, gests that some conflict between experts Release descriptors subsequent regulatory response to the and lay people may be resolved by clari- Spatial extent .57 hazard associated with tampons has par- fying the definition of hazardousness. Concentration alleled that to IUD's, the hazard in our Persistence 42 We expect that our approach can im- Recurrence inventory closest in structure to tam-prove the quality and effectiveness of Exposure descriptors pons. hazard management. In particular,it Population at risk 42 Triage. As a society we cannot make may help in comparing the hazards ex- Delay .30 extraordinary efforts on each of the pected from competing technologies as Consequence descriptors 100,000 chemicals or 20,000 consumerwell as provide a quicker, more orderly Human mortality (annual) products in commerce. If our causal Human mortality (maximum) .53 response to new hazards and offer socie- Transgenerational .43 structure and descriptors reflect key as- ty a rational approach to triage. Yet to be Nonhuman mortality (potential) .53 pects of hazards-threats to humans andresolved is the assignment of weights to Nonhuman mortality (experienced) .30 what they value-then our taxonomy the different descriptors of hazard. Factors provides a way of identifying those haz- Biocidal .32 ards worthy of special attention. Cases Delay .41 with multiple extreme scores (Table 3) References and Notes Catastrophic .32 lead naturally to a proposal for triage: iR. C Harms, C. Hohenemser, R. W. Kates, Mortality Environment 20, 6 (1978). Global .30 extraordinary attention for multiple ex- 2. J. Tuller. in Perilous Progress. Technology as Hazard, R. W. Kates, C Hohenemser, J. X. Variance explained (1?-) .50 treme hazards, distinctive effort for each Kasperson, Eds. (Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain, of the groups of extreme hazards, and an Cambridge, Mass., in preparation). 3. E. W. Lawless, Technolog> and Social Shock ordered, routine response for the re- (Rutgers UnivPress, New Brunswick. N J mainder. 1977). 4. H. Inhaber. "Risk of energy production" (Re- ceeds nuclear in nonhuman mortality, Although we regard the suggestion of port AECB 1119. Atomic Energy Control that is, environmental effects. Nuclear triage as an important outcome of our Board. Ottawa. ed. 4, 1979) 5. National Research Council Committee on Nu- power, on the other hand, dominates in analysis,itis well to remember that clear and Alternative Energy Systems. Energ possibletransgenerational effects and in Transition, 1985-2010 (Freeman, San Francis- many of the extreme hazards, such as co, 1980). the catastrophic factor. The two technol- nuclear weapons, are among a group that 6. R. Wilson. Technol Rev 81.40 (1979). 7B. L. Cohen and 1 S Lee. Health Phs 36. 707 ogies show little difference in persist- has defied solution for a long time and (1979). ence, delay, population at risk, and dif- that special efforts expended on them 8 Department of Transportation. National High- way Safety Needs Report (Washington. D.C., fuseness. may produce few concrete results. This 1976). The profile of hazardousness devel- 9 R C Schwing. Technol Forecast So( Change leads some to argue that society should 13. 333 (1979) oped from the12 hazard descriptors focus its effort on cases of proven cost- 10 L. B. Lave, Science 212, 893 (1981). seems to capture the complexity of 11 D. R Greenwood. G L Kingsbury. J G effectiveness-cases with the maximum Cleland, A Handbook of Key Federal Regula- choice in energy risk assessment and reduction in hazardousness per unit ex- tions and Criteria for Multimedia Ensironmen- management better than the common tal Control (EPA-600/7-79-175. Environmental penditure. Protection Agency. Washington. D.0,1979) mortality index. The problem of choice We regard neither triage nor adher- 12 C Hohenemser et al A Taxonomy of Techno- logical Hazards (Center for Technology, Envi- remains, as does the question of how ence to cost-effectiveness criteria as ade- ronment. and Development. Clark University. should society weight the different di- quate foundations for managing hazard.. Worcester. Mass . 1983) 13 P Slovic. P. Fischhoff. S. Lichtenstein, Envi- mensions of hazardousness. rather, we see them as the horns of a ronment 21, 14 (1979); in Perilous Progress Hazard of the week. Analysis of na- Technology as Hazard. R. W Kates. C. Hohen- familiar dilemma-whether to work ':.ii emser. JX. Kasperson, Eds (Oelgeschlager. tional news media shows that 40 to 50the big questions where success is limit- Gunn & Hain, Cambridge, Mass.. in prepara- hazards receive widespread attention tion). ed, or to work on the normal, where 14C. Starr. Science 165, 1232 (1969) each year (25).In theory, each new success is expected. 15 1 Burton. R. W. Kates. G F White. "The human ecology of extreme geographical events" hazard goes through a sequence that (Natural Hazard working paper 2. Department includes problem recognition, assess- of Geography. University of Toronto. 19681. 16 W W Lowrance. Of AC( eptable Risk Science ment, and managerial action. Often there and the Determination of Safety (Kaufmann. is need for early managerial response of Los Altos, Calif., 1976). Summary and Conclusions 17. W. D. Rowe, An Anatonn of Risk (Wiley. New some kind. Our descriptors of hazard- York. 1977) ousness provide a quick profile that al- 18 N C Rasmussen. D. Lanning, D. Litai. in All taxonomies are based on explicit Analysis of Actual vs. Percen ed Risks. V. Co- lows new hazards to be grouped and or implicit assumptions, and ours is no vello. G Flamm, J. Rodricks. R. Tardiff. Eds (Plenum. New York. in press) compared with others that have similar different. We assume that technological 19 P Slovic, B. Fischhoff, S. Lichtenstein. in Soo. profiles. Such comparisons may provide hazards form a single domain, that they eta: Risk Assessment. HOH SafeisSafe Enough?. R. C. Schwing and W A Albers, industrialor governmental managers are defined by causal sequences, and Eds. (Plenum. New York, 1980). pp 181-216. some immediate precedents, as well as a 20 Factor analysis was done using the package that these are usefully measured by a few BiomedicalComputer Program. Program warning of unexpected problems,a physical, biological, and social descrip- BMDP P4M. in BMDP, P-series. 1979, W J range of suggested managerial options, Dixon and M B. Brown, Eds (Univ of Califor- tors. Our picture leads us to distinguish nia Press. Los Angeles, 1979). Orthogonal rota- and, at the very least, a measure ofbetween energy and materials releases tion was performed according to the varimax criterion, which maximize, the variance of the consistency in public policy. and provides a method for constructing squared factor loadings 2i2 207

21. We defined extreme hazards as those with trun- 25. R. W. Kates. in Managing Technological Haz- hob, M Layman, S. Lichtenstein. D. McGre- cated factor scores1 2 to 1.5 standard devi- ards. Research Needs and Opportunities, R. W gor. and P. Slovic at Decision Research (a ations above the mean. Kates. Ed. (Institute of Behavioral Science. branch of Perceptromcs). The research team 22. R. Kasper. in Societal Risk Assessment. How Univ. of Colorado Press. Boulder, 1977), p 7 received help in conceptualizing hazards from Safe Is Safe Enough'. R. C. Schwing and W. A 26. The research reported in this article was con- R C. Hamss. NASA Langley Research Center. Albers. Eds. (Plenum, New York. 1980). pp. 71- ducted by an interdisciplinary team including P. and T. C. Hollocher, Brandeis University. Re- 84. Collins. R. Goble, A. Goldman. B. Johnson. C. search support was provided by NSF grants 23. S. Lichtenstein et al., J. Exp. Psycho( 4. 551 Hohenemser. J. X. Kasperson. R E Kasper- ENV77-15334. PRA79-11934.and PRAM - (1978). son. R W. Kates. M P. Lavine. M. Morrison. 16925 24. J. P. Holdren. Technol. Rev. SS. 32 (1982) and B. Rubin at Clark University. and B. Fisch-

and margins of safety for sensitive populations.If this were the case for all pollutants. we could breathe more easily (in both senses of the phrase): but it is not so. More than 10 years ago. EPA had the Clean Air Act. the Clean Water Act, a solid waste law, a pesticide law, and laws to control radiation and noise. Yet to come were the myriad of laws to control toxic substances from their manufacture to their disposalbut that they We are now in a troubled and emotion- the Environmental Protection Agency would be passed was obvious even then. alperiodfor pollution control; many EPA is an instrument of public policy. When I departed EPA a decade ago, communities are gripped by something whose mission is to protect the public the struggle over whether the federal approaching panic and the public discus- health and the environment in the man-government was to have a major role in sion is dominated by personalities rather ner laid down by its statutes. That man- protecting our health, safety,. and envi- than substance.It is not important to ner is to set standards and enforce them, ronment was ended. The American peo- assign blame for this.I appreciate that and our enforcement powers are strong ple had spoken. The laws had been people are worried about public health and pervasive. But the standards we set. passed; the regulations were being writ- and about economic survival, and legiti- whether technology- or health-related,ten. The only remaining question was mately so. but we must all reject the must have a sound scientific base. whether the statutory framework we had emotionalism that surrounds the current Science and the law are thus partners created made sense or whether, over discourse and rescue ourselves from the at EPA, out uneasy partners. The maintime, we would adjust it. paralysis of honest public policy that it reason for the uneasiness lies, I think. in breeds. the conflict between the way science Scientific Realities I believe that part of the solution to really works and the public's thirst for our distress lies with the idea that disci-certitude that is written into EPA's laws. Ten years ago I thought I knew the plined minds can grapple with ignorance Science thrives on uncertainty. The best answer to that question as well.Ibe- and sometimes win: the idea of science. young scientists flock into fields where lieved it would become apparent to all We willnot recover our equilibriumgreat questions have been asked but that we could virtually eliminate the without a concerted effort to more effec- nothing is known. The greatest triumph risks we call pollution if we wanted to ovely engage the scientific community. of a scientist is the crucial experiment spend enough money When it also be- Frankly, we are not going to be able to that shatters the certainties of the past came apparent that enough money for all emerge from our current troubles with- and opens up rich new pastures of igno- the pollutants was a lot of money. I came out a much improved level of public rance. to believe that we would begin examin- confidence. The polls show that scien- But EPA's laws often assume, indeed ing the risks very carefully and structure tists have more credibility than lawyers demand, a certainty of protection greater a system that would force us to balance or businessmen or politicians, and 1 am than science can provide with the cur- our desire to eliminate pollution against allthree of those.I need the help of rent state of knowledge. The laws do no the costs of its control. This would entail scientists. more than reflect what the public be- some adjustment of the laws, but not all This is not a naive plea for science to lieves and what it often hears from peo- that much. and it would happen by about save us from ourselves. Somehow. our ple with scientific credentials on the 6 1976I was wrong. democratic technological society musto'clock news. The public thinks we This time around as administrator of resolve the dissonance between science know what all the bad pollutants are. EPA, I am determined to improve our and the ce.-0=qn of public policy. No- precisely what adverse health or envi- country's ability to cope with the risk of where is this inure troublesome than in ronmental effects they cause, how to pollutants over where Ileft it10 years the formal assessment of riskthe esti- measure them exactly and control them ago. It will not be easy. because we must mation of the association between expo- absolutely. Of course, the public and now deal with a class of polutants for sure to a s.ibstance and the incidence of sometimes the law are wrong. but not all which it is difficult, if not impossible, to some disease, based on scientific data. wrong. We do know a great deal about establish a safe level. These pollutants some pollutants and we have controlled them effectively by using the tools of the william Ruckelshaii, Adinini,tralor of the Science x. e the Law at EPA Clean Air Act and ..e Clean Water Act. U S Environmental Protection Agency. W.1,1ting- ton. D C 204611 This article i% based on i talk he These are the pollutants for which the gave at the National Academy of Sciences Wa+h- Here is how the problem emerge A scie tific community can set safe levels ington. D C . on 22 June 1981 ?i3 208

interfere with genetic processes and are ciated with the transfer of the substance I would also like to revitalize our long- associated with the diseases we fearfrom one environmental medium to an- term research program to develop a base most: cancer and reproductive disor- other through pollution control prac- for more adequately protecting the pub- ders, including birth defects. The scien- tices. I recognize that legislative change lic health from toxic pollutants. I will be tific consensus isthat any exposure. in the current climate is difficult. It is up asking the outside scientific community however small, to a genetically active to those of us who seek change to make for advice on how best to focus those substance embodies some risk of an ef- the case for its advisability. research efforts. fect. Since these substances are wide- But my purpose here is not to plead for In the future, this being an imperfect spread in the environment. and since we statutory change; it is to speak of risk world, the rigor and thoroughness of our can detect them down to very low levels, assessment and risk management and the risk analyses will undoubtedly be affect- we must assume that life now takes place role of science in both. It is important to ed by many factors, including the toxici- in a minefield of risks from hundreds,distinguish these two essential functions, ty of the substances examined, the popu- perhaps thousands. of substances. We and Irely here on a recent National lations exposed. the pressure of theregu- can no longer tell the public that they Academy of Sciences report on the man- latory timetable, and the resources avail- have an adequate margin of safety. agement of risk in the federal govern- able.Despitethese oftenconflicting This worries all of us, and it should. ment. Scientists assess a risk to find out pressures. risk assessment at EPA must But when we examine the premises on what the problems are. The process ofhe based only on scientific evidence ind which such estimates of risk are based, deciding what to do about the problems scientific consensus. Nothing wille we find a confusing picture. In assessing is risk management. The second proce-public confidence faster than the suspi- a suspected carcinogen, for example,dure involves a much broader array ofcionthat policy considerations have there are uncertainties at every point disciplines and is aimed toward a deci- been allowed to influence the assessment where an assumption must be made: insion about control. of risk. calculating exposure; inextrapolating In risk management it is assumed that from high doses where we have seen an we have assessed the health risks of a effect to the low doses typical of environ- suspect chemical. We must then factor in Risk Management mental pollution; in what we may expect itsbenefits, the costs of the various when humans are subjected to much methods available for its control, and the Although there is an objective way to lower doses of a substance that, when statutory framework for decision. The assess risk, there is. of course. no purely given in high doses, caused tumors in NAS report recommends that these twoobjective way to manage it nor can we laboratory animals; and finally, in thefunctionsriskassessmentandrisk ignore the subjective perception of risk very mechanisms by which we suppose managementbe separated as much asin the ultimate management of a particu- the disease to work. possible within a regulatory agency. This lar substance. To do so would be to place One thing we clearly need to do isis what we now do at EPA and it makestoo much credence in our objective data ensure that our laws reflect these scien- sense. and ignore the possibility that occasion- tific realities. The administrator of EPA ally one's intuition is right. No amount of should not be forced to represent that a data is a substitute for judgment. margin of safety exists for a specific Risk Assessment Further, we must search for ways to substance at a specific level of exposure describe risk in terms that the average where none can be scientifically estab- We also need to strengthen our risk citizen can comprehend. Telling a family lished. This is particularly true where theassessment capabilities. We need more that lives close to a manufacturing facili- inability to so represent forces the cessa- research on the health effects of the ty that no further controls on the plant's tion of all use of a substance without any substances we regulate. I intend to do emissions are needed because, according further evaluation. everything in my power to make clearto our linear model, their risk is only the importance of this scientific analysis 10 -I', is not very reassuring. We need to at EPA. Given the necessity of acting in describe the suspect substances as clear- Functions of Regulatory Agencies the face of enormous scientific uncer- lyas possible.tellpeople what the tainties, it is more important than ever known or suspected health problems are. It is my strong belief that where EPA. that our scientific analysis be rigorous and help them compare that risk to those OSHA (the Occupational Safety and and the quality of our data be high. We with which they are more familiar. Health Administration), or any other so-must take great pains not to mislead To effectively manage the risk, we cial regulatory agency is charged with people about the risks to their health. We must seek new ways to involve the pub- protecting public health, safety. or the can help to avoid confusion be ensuring licinthedecision-makingprocess. environment, we should be given, to the both the quality of our science and the Whether we believe in participatory de- extent possible. a common statutory for- clarity of our language in explaining haz- mocracy or not. it is a part of our social mula for accomplishing our tasks. This ards. regulatory fabric. Rather than praise or statutory formula may well weigh public Iintend to allocate some of EPA's lament it, we should seek more imagina- health very heavily, as the American increased resources to pursuing these tive ways to involve the various seg- people certainly do. 4;nds. Our 1984 request contains signifi- ments of the public affected by the sub- The formula should be as precise ascant increases for risk assessment and stance at issue. They need to become possible and should include a responsi- associated work. We have requested $31 involved early, and they need to be in- bility for assessing the risk and weighing million in supplemental appropriations formed if their participationisto be it, not only against the benefits of contin- for research and development, and I meaningful. We will be searching for ued use of the substance under examina- expect that risk assessment will be more ways to make our participatory process tion, but against the risks associated with strongly supported as a result of this work better. substitute substances and the risks asso-increase as well. 24 For this to happen. scientists must be 209 willing to take a larger role in explaining we think [the people] not enlightened To push this one step further. I believe the risks to the publicincluding the enough to exercise their control with a it is in our nation's best interest to share uncertainties inherent in any risk assess- wholesome discretion, the remedy is not our knowledge of risks and our approach ment. Shouldering this burden is the to take it from them, but to inform their to managing them with the other devel- responsibility of all scientists. not just discretion." oped nations of the world. The environ- those with a particular policy end in mental movement has taught us the in- mind. In fact. all scientists should make Interagency and International terdependence of the world's ecosys- tems. In coping with the legitimate con- clear when they are speaking as scien- Coordination tists. ex cathedra. and when they are cerns raised by environmentalists, we recommending policy they believe Up to this point I have been suggestingmust not forget that we cope in a world should flow from scientific information. how risks should be assessed and man- with interdependent economies. If our What we need to hear more of from aged in EPA. Much needs to be done to approach to the management a risk is scientists is science. I am going to try to coordinate the various EPA programs tonot sufficiently in harmony with those of provide avenues at EPA for scientists to ensure a consistent approach.Ihave the other developed nations, we could become more involved in the public dia- established a task force with that char- save our health and risk our economy. I log in which scientific problems are deter. do not believe we need to abandon ei- scribed. I further believe we should make uni- ther. but to ensure that it does not hap- Lest anyone misunderstand. I am not form the way in which we manage riskpen, we need to work hard to share suggesting that all the elements of man- across the federal regulatory agencies. scientific data and understand how to aging risk can be reduced to a neat The public interest is not served by two harmonize our management techniques mathematical formula. Going through a federal agencies taking diametrically op- with those of our sister nations. disciplined approach can help to orga- posed positions on the health risks of a In sum, my goal is a government-wide nize our thoughts so that we include all toxic substance and then arguing about it process for assessing and managing envi- the elements that should be weighed. We in the press. We should be able to coor- ronmental risks. Achieving this will take will build up a set of precedents that will dinate our risk assessment procedures cooperation and goodwill within EPA, be useful for later decision-making and across all federal agencies. The nsk man- among Executive Branch agencies. and will provide more predictable outcomes agement strategies that flow from that between Congress and the Administra- for any social regulatory programs we assessment may indeed differ, depending tion, a state of affairs that may partake of adopt. on each agency's statutory mandate orthe miraculous. Still. it is worth trying, In a society in which democratic prin- the judgment of the ultimate decision- and the effort is worth the wholehearted ciples dominate, the perceptions of the maker. support of the scientific community. I public must be weighed. Instead of ob- But even at the management stagebelieve such an effort touches on the jective and subjective risks, the experts there is no reason why the approaches maintenance of our current society, in sometimes refer to "real" and "imagi-cannot be coordinated to achieve the hich a democratic polity is grounded in nary' risks. There is a certain arrogance goal of risk avoidanLe or minimization a high-technology industrial civilization. in thisan elitism that has ill served uswith the least societal disruption possi- Without a much more successful way of in the past. Rather than decry the igno- ble. I have been exploring w ith the White handling the risks associated with the rance of the public and seek to ignore House and the Office of Management creations of science. I fear we will have their concerns, our governmental pro- and Budget the possibility of effecting set up for ourselves a grim and unneces- cesses must accommodate the will of the better intragovernmental coordination of sary choice between the fruits of ad- people and recognize its occasional wis- the way in which we assess and manage s anced technology and the blessings of dom. As Thomas Jefferson observed, "Ifrisk. democracy.

5 How to balance the need for scientific openness against threats of nuclear war. It urges nations to renounce first use of nuclear to national security resulting from that openness is one of the weapons and to prevent further proliferation of these weapons as steps most difficult issues in the emerging relations among science, toward a true world peace. technology, and society. Controls over unclassified scientific com- William D. Carey's editorial on science and national security munication and publication have been proposed and justified by expresses a growing disenchantment with Defense Department poli- arguments resembling those articulated in the years following the cies that target the open communication processes of American sci Manhattan Project and World War II, when scientists and military ence as a source of vulnerability to U.S. national security interests. officials debated the ments of removing the cloak of secrecy from the His exchange of letters with then Deputy Secretary of Defense Frank field of atomic physics and nuclear research. Carlucci examines the pros and cons of proposed controls. Robert A. Most of the research areas currently being singled out for controls Rosenbaum et al., Mitchel B. Wallerstein, and Iknald Kennedy lie within the field of applied science, but restrictions have also been develop strong arguments for continued openness in science. The proposed for basic research projects, including some related to lasers, editorial by former defense research chief Richard D. DeLauer takes a code-related mathematics, high-energy physics, and materials re- more conciliatory approach to the issue and outlines a possible strat- search. Scientists rat ving research support from government agen- egy for limiting the extent of government controls. cies not directly linked to military objectives, such as the National Additional perspectives on the debate over the need for national Science Foundation, have occasionally been advised that their re- security controls on scientific communication are also offered. James search proposals and reports were routinely circulated to defense or R. Ferguson suggests that scientific communication may indeed not intelligence agencies for review and information. be entitled to full First Amendment protection since it is a form of The debate over national security controls on scientific com- action as well as speech. F.A. Long emphasizes the need for inno- munication may be an early warning of increasing strains developing vative U.S. technology and the consequent need for rapid dissemina- within the American sciencefederal government partnership. Ncw tion of technical information. He suggests that these approaches, calls from government officials for caution and restraint in the dis- rather than controls, should be the focal point of U.S. defense policy. semination of sensitive research findings, the scientific currency of While some scientists and government officials were arguing the the twenty-first center), , highlight an increased emphasis on protect- merits of government restrictions in science, others were emphasizing substantive national investments in sources of military and coming the importance of maintaining scientific exchange as a mercial advantage. confidence-building measure between the United States and Soviet Above all, the power of nuclear weapons continues to be a strong governments. Victor F. Weisskopf, Robert R. Wilson, and William reminder of the important role scientists play in developing new I). Carey examine the search for new principles to guide scientific instruments of war. This chapter includes a 1982 statement presented communication in the face of human rights violations and for stan- to Pope John Paul II by presidents of scientific academies and other dards of responsible conduct for scientists in dealing with incidents of scientists from all over the world. The statement expresses the belief repression and injustice. RC that science offers the world no real defense against the consequences

26 212

weakened in the near future because of the understandable reactions of many U.S. scientists against the recent happenings. How- ever, the U.S. National Academy of Scien- ces' official suspension of bilateral agreements is a step in the wrong direction. Re- strictions on scientific communication are not the right answer to the restrictions the Soviet government has imposed on some of their scientists. Repressive actions usually incite hostility, which often leads to misunderstandings, dislike, and retaliation. Not all of the Soviet scientists will understand the reasons for our actions when we no longer go Our scientific relations with the Sovietto themand to us. Another victim is there and talk to them openly and vigorous- Union are rapidly deteriorating. We have scientific progress. since we lose the per- ly, as many of us have done in the past. We almost reached the point of the cold war sonal contacts that are so important, particu-may have done the cause of human rights in situation 25 years ago The reasons are clear larly in those fields in which one side has the U.S.S.R. more of a disservice than a enough: the persistent violations by the more results than the other. service. Soviet government of the human rights of But there are deeper arguments against a The only appropriate way for the scientific scientists such as Or lov, Shcharansky. and boycott of scientific relationsScience is community to deal with any kind of prob- many others, the persecution of Sakharov, supranational and supraideologicalthe lem, scientific or human, is through reason and now the invasion of Afghanistan. concern of humankind as a whole. It should and discussion: one scientist speaks or writes Many scientists in this country and else- stand above political turmoil and serve, as it to another or addresses a meeting of scien- where, aghast at these outrages, have re has in the past, as a bridge for mutual under- tists, be it an official one or one organized b sorted to one of the measures available tostanding and peace in a divided world. Di- refuseniks. Collaborative experiments offer them: refusing to attend conferences and to rectly and indirectly, scientific contacts have unique opportunities for reaching a mutual participate in collaborative scientific proj- led to actual Li, ,armament measuresthc test understanding, especially through personal ects. It is assumed that the Soviet leaders are ban, for example. or the arms control talk+. contacts during the hours of relaxation. In so strongly interested in scientific contacts We should not lose contact with sonic oftimes of political tensions, we should extend with the West that they will change their the best elements of Soviet society, a group collaborationsnot cut them back. policy. We fear that it will not wnirk that that basically agrees with our value scale and The real problem is the danger of nuclear way. Most of the contacts took place in the may has c a significant influence on future war. If we cannot learn how to rationalize fundamental sciences or in applied fields re- developments in the Soviet Union. If. as we our differences, how to resolve them by moved from weapons technology These hope. the present situation will not lead to a argument rather than by threats and by cut- areas are not important enough to Soviet catastrophe. there is a chance that, sooner or ting off relations. then we are really lost. The leaders to make them yield to external pres- later, the character of the Soviet regime may least we scientists can do is show the power sures. The primary victims are our col- change again for the better. We should lease of reasoning. Despite its frustrtions. only leagues in the U.S.S.R.. for they lose a pre- our bridges intact for this eventuality. by reason will both human rights and peace cious window on the world that was opened Unavoidably, scientific ccrtacts will be flourish on this small planet.

increase. the risks of 0% erreat.tion with.. consequences are enharked There is. on this side, talk of retargeting schemes, of new attack weapons hatched from supenechnolo- gy, and mere than a hint of Star Wars. From the other side conies political adventurism and an internal tightening of the screws, but mostly a menacing silence As far as can be judged, not a single diplomatic card is being turned up by either side, or by third parties that could bring the prumpals together to cool the temperature of growing crisis Drift, governments need to be reminded, is the worst of all policies. The dismantling of meaningful scientificthe Soviet system the scientific elites not The evidence is that the boycott tech- exchanges with the Soviet scientific commu- only are extraordinarily salued pro- nique, as applied to scientific exchanges nity, provoked by the military occupation offessionally but also enjoy that rarest of with the Soviets, is availing next to nothing. Afghanistan and the subsequent internal ex- socialist graces. an edge of independence It has not relieved the besieged defenders of ile of Sakharov, calls for second thoughts. ItTurning a blind eye to that fact short- Afghanistan any more than it has restored is not as though the uses of the:scientific sighted. such civil and professional rights as Sakha- exhanges have zero value to diplomacy The temper of U.S.Soviet political rela- rov ever enjoyed. When an instrument of while advancing science. The fact is that in tions slides from bad to worse. As tensions policy turns up useless, the sooner it is put 2 213 down the better. But that is a hard thing to do however justified its outrage at Soviet bescientists on both sides are now signaling to when it has been invested with the authority havior, nevertheless has the greater burden one another, and for good reasons. of the establishment. Such is the price that is of striving to prevent the ultimate outrage, The position is that w' are very nearly out paid for going too far and leaving no exit. the dimensions of which are better known to of safety valves as the nuclear superpowers One does not have to eat crow, much less scientists on both sides than distracted anddrift toward impasse. If scientific responsi- condone the behavior of the Soviets in unprotected publics. bitity is more than an idle phrase, it requires repressing dissent through violence and It violates no confidences to report that participation in the pursuit of peace and con- police action, to press for a reopening ofleaders in science in both countries view the flict resolution. The quarantining of Soviet scientific traffic. The United States main-present tension with undisguised alarm. science, however principled, defeats the tains what pass for friendly relations with aAlthough the driving farces and emotions at chances for engaging a concerned and far large class of nations whose political virtue work are remote from science, the biow, from impotent cohort of opinion and in- does not meet the standards that we can when and if it comes, will be a confrontation fluence in a dialogue of reason. afford, and we stomach it for reasons of ex-between Western science and technology Disagree as we will with the actions and pediency. When it comes to the matter of the and its Eastern equivalent. Itis this tragic the philosophy of the Soviet system. we can Soviets, the difference is not trivial: it is cen-failure that is to be avoided, and when the find common ground in the shared dread of a tre,. The groundwater of a smoldering enio- politics of diplomacy are paralyzed, then a cogision of power We should get on with it, ty is heating up, and it cannot be allowed to form of science as diplomacy can no longer before time runs out. flash to steam. The conscience of science. wait to be exercised. This is what troubled

Soviet scientific capability is inferior to ours. We know better. The operati.e premise of our military leaders is that the U.S. window of vulnerability must be closed with all possible speed. That premise is buttressed by a substantial national consensus. But if, beyond rebuilding strategic and tactical military assets, it extends to clamping down on legitimate scientific conferences and symposia as well as the open literature of science, the quality of science's interface 'vith the mili- In an open society the relationship be- reports, and the "professional and open tary will go downhill swiftly and tragically. tween science and the military authorities is scientific literature." The military authorities Scientists are well aware that information of a touchy business at best. Science is rightly seem convinced that the infrastructure genuine national security value must be pro- expected to enhance the national security.suppocting the U.S. scientific and technical tected. That is not the point. What is at issue and it responds willingly. Equally, the mili- enterprise caters to Soviet military power is the balance between protection and over- tary authorities are expected to respect the and comprises a large pane in the window of protection. Difficult as that riddle may be to values, standards, and methods of science as vulnerability. untangle. it must be dealt with responsibly an open and productive process. Yet, when If all this actually reflects the view from and by no means solely from a military the climate of national security is overtaken the Pentagon, it calls for swift revision mind-set. One wants to believe that the De- by hyperanxicty this qualitative balance is What is sadly missing is the recognition, fense Science Board would have taken a dif- easily destabilized by judgmental mistakes, which strt'll' ChiStS in thoughtful quarters of ferent view of these matters had it been and that is what has now happened. the defense establishment, that lively but re- asked. The brochure on Soviet Military Powersponsible counnunication in science is es- The issues raised here ought to be pon- that has been released with much publicity sential to the growth and development in sci- dered, as wet, by the Commerce and State by the Department of Defense goes beyond ence on which both national security andDepartments, where work goes on behind documenting the U S.S R.'s formidable economic potential rely. -National security" closed doors on regulations to tighten con- military assets.It addresses what may be is not the simplistic proposition thatitis trols on the international transfer and ex- termed collateral sources of Soviet military made out to be, and it is in the best interests change of scientific and technics' mionna- know-how. These sources, in the de- of those directly responsible for it to realm: non. Slamming the window may indeed stop partment's opinion, include high technology that laying heavy hands upon scientific dis- the draft, but at the expense of fresh air and that has seen transferred by the in-course is counterproductive and self- light. More than 30 years Senator Brien dustrialized free ixorld. Also helpful to the denying. Even the maligned exchanges with McMahon. sponsor of the Atomic Energy Soviet military, we are informed. are bilater- the Soviets have their uses. and no one sup- Act of 1946. spoke eloquently of the need al scientific exchanges initiated under de- poses that they should or do involve sensitive for a sane balance between two necessary but tente. Next come "student exchanges." along information. To put it more strongly. it competing types of security.by conceal- with the inter-academy exchanges that pre- only sensible to carry on these exchanges ment" andby achievement...,urying date the governmcnt-to-govemment agree- where both sides hold first-class rank. in- knowledge in silos of set.recy serves the one ments. Omitting nothing. the Defence De- cluding such areas as condensed matter well, the other very badly. partment's distress blankets scientific con- physics and astrophysics. It is a profoundly ferences and symposia. unclassified research disturbing mistake to put out he notion that

218 mutual benefit of all parties concerned. In our considered view, however, the exchanges to date, in the main, have not been reciprocal. Rather, it is quite apparent the Soviets exploit scientific exchanges as well as a variety of other means in a highly orchestrated, centrally directed effort aimed at gathering the technical information required to enhance their military posture. Because of the importance I attach to this complex issue, I want to respond in some detail and thus ask yGur indul- gence.Illustrativeexamplesfollow On 9 October 1981, in a letter ad- These bilateral exchanges, as you must which, at least in part, indicate the basis dressed to The Honorable Frank Car- know, are legitimized by formal inter-for our concern. lucci, Deputy Secretary of the Depart- governmental agreements initiated by The energy bilateral agreement began ment of Defense, Mr. William D. Carey, resident Nixon and continued by hiswith 14 subtopics. The U.S. promised Executive Officer and Publisher of Sci- successors. Whether the Defense De- and delivered the large magnet and mag- ence, criticized statements by the De- partment likes them or not, they consti- netohydrodynamics (MHD) channel department of Defense concerningtute the present foreign policy of the tails as well as a great deal of information scientific exchanges, conferences. andUnited States. As to the merits, it is very on other topics. The Soviets promised the unclassified, open scientific litera- important to U.S. interests to be well- but did not deliver data on geothermal ture. Mr. Carey's letter and the reply heposted on the quality of Soviet scientific energy and energy resources, consump- received from Mr. Carlucci are printedresearch. The contact we have through tion, production, and forecasting. Con- here verbatim. the bilaterals has left no doubt as to sequently, the U.S. Department of Ener- Soviet excellence in fields that matter to gy has been curtailing its participation. I must tell you that the otherwiseus,includingmetallurgy,condensed The only topic still active is the one on excellent brochure onSoviet Military matter physics, theoretical physics, as- MHD. Power went uff the rails badly, in mytrophysics, geophysics, and cancer re- Under the S&T bilateral agreement, opinion, in contending (pp. 80-81) thatsearch. Nobody is arguing that the ex- the Soviets had been sending large num- U.S.sponsoredscientificexchanges changes should involve security-related bers of scientists to the U.S. in the field and scientific communication practicesfields of science. Elsewhere, in fields of chemical catalysis, but the U.S. was enhance Soviet military power. where both sides are equally good, it is gaining virtually nothing in return. Con- I am dismayed to find the Defenseto our country's advantage to pursue the sequently, in 1980 the U.S. terminated Department indicting inter-Academy ex-exchanges. The DOD paper shows an the one-sided exchange. It now appears, changes, student exchanges, scientificextremely disappointing grasp of what however, the Soviets will try to use the conferences and symposia, and the en-the exchanges are all about. inter-Academy exchange or other means tire "professional and open literature" If I seem exercised by the positionto acquire the information they deem as inherently adverse to U.S. militarytaken by the Defense Department inSo- vital. security interests. These normal andviet Military Power itis because Iam Another example of their persistence well-accepted fora for advancing scien-exercised. In particular, that position was demonstrated in the electrometal lur- tific progress constitute the primary in-strikes in a deadly way at the depen-gy subtopic of the science and technolo frastructure of U.S. and worldwide com- dence of scienti5c progress on opengy bilateralagreement. The Soviets munication in science, and without them communication and shared information. wanted to establish an exchange in the the U.S. technology base would go staleOur own military power will be dimin- fields of superplasticity and fracture me- very quickly. ished, not enhanced, if the wellheads ofchanics. A concerned U.S. government TheDefenseDepartmentshould scientific communication are sealed andscientist succeeded in stopping the ex- know, by this time, how scientific prac- new knowledge confined in silos of se- change in these militarily related topics. tice is conducted and how necessarycrecy and prior restraint. However, it was dismaying later to find unimpaired communication in science is that the Soviets had acquired the infor- to advancing the state of the art and mation under the auspices of a new sub- improviog our own essential capabilities. Mr. Carlucci's reply topic on corrosion. I find it deplorable to have our Defense This is in reply to your recent letter in One of the provisions common to Department taking a public and well- which you state that the Department of many of the government-to-government advertised stance that exchanges and theDefense (DOD) views the inter-Acade-bilateral agreements encourages the es- open scientific literature constitute stillmy exchanges, student exchanges, sci-tablishment of separate agreements be- another window of vulnerability and aentific conferences and symposia, and tween individual companies in the west free asset handed to our principal adver-the entire professional and open litera- and entities of the Soviet government, sary. ture as inherently adverse to U.S. mili- primarily the State Committee for Sci- Itis also somewhat astonishing totary security interests. ence and Technology and the Ministry of have the Defense Department charging Be assured the DOD is well aware of Power Engineering. These are somethat bilateral U.S.Soviet scientific andhow scientific practice is conducted and times referred to as the "Article IV" technical exchanges are giveaway chan-fully recognizes the importance of unim- Agreements and in the case of the U.S. nels benefiting Soviet military power.paired scientific communications to the involve a large number of companies that 2i 215 are among the world's leaders in areas in wing-in-ground effect machine for quite a Soviets continue to nominate scientists which we know the Soviets to be defi- number of years. to study and conduct research in topics cient. The degree of concern with this T. K. Bachman, a psychologist, came that are either embargoed or militarily situation was such that previous policy to study the interface between man and sensitive. Of 25 scientists nominated by was altered to the extent that the Export machine. In the opinion of U.S. re- the Soviets during 1980, 11 topics pro- Administration Act of 1979 now requires searchers, this field was directly applica- posed offered a significant potential for that companies file notice with the De- ble to the design of heads-up displays loss of critics U.S. technology. There partment of Commerce when such agree- which optimize the amount of data pre- was a somewhat lesser, but nevertheless ments are signed. sented visually to a military weapon sys- real, degree of concern over the remain- We also have evidence that the Sovi- tem operator. Bachman attended several ing 14 topics. ets are misusing scholarly exchanges. In very significant conferences on this topic With regard to scientific conferences the area of graduate student and young and was able to observe state of the art and symposia, the Department of De- faculty exchanges, administered by the demonstrations of such work funded by fense has become increasingly con- International Research and Exchange the Department of Defense. cerned over the type and volume of Board (IREX), the U.S. sends young This graduate student/young faculty defense-related information openly pro- master's and doctoral level students, exchange is such that each year itis vided. As you will undoubtedly recall, mostly in humanities, primarily to two recommended that at least one-half the the concern has been such that Soviet universities, Moscow St to and Lenin- ..Jviet nominees not be allowed to pur- Bloc scientists were prevented from at- grad State. For the most part, the USSR sue their desired topic of study at all ortending the First International Confer- sendssenior,experienced,technical that significant modifications be made inence on Bubble Memory Materials and people. Almost all possess Kandickt de- their study program. This is because theProcess Technology, and the Conferencs grees; some come from closed military information the Soviets seek is eitheron Laser and Electro-opticalSystemI research institutes, and attend any of a embargoed by law or militarily sensitive. Ineial Confinement Fusion early in hundred or so U.S. universities. In ac- Hence our concern. 1980. This denial was precipitated by the cordance with the openness of our socie- In the senior scholar exchange pro- revelationthatHungarianphysicist, ty, Soviet students are granted academic gram also administered by IREX, each Gyorgy Zimmer, provided the Soviets freedom arid, with almost automatic gov- side sends a number of scholars for athe scientific knowledge on magnetic ernment approval, can travel practically total of 50 man-months per year. As with bubble memories gained as a result of his at will. Conversely. American students the graduate student/young faculty pro- frequent visits to U.S. laboratories. A in the Soviet Union are much more iso- gram, the Soviets nominate physical sci- thorough review then followed which lated and restricted in their travel and entists, while the U.S. nominates schol- resulted in an official U.S. policy re- professional contacts. ars specializing in the arts, literature and stricting Soviet attendance at U.S. con- Soviet weakness is not in basic re- history. Until a few years ago, most ferences and symposia. This policy was ocarch, which, as you point out, is on the Soviets in this program conducted very widely publicized in a number of scien- whole excellent. Rather their weakness basicresearch. No objections were tific journals. is in putting technology into production. voiced to such courses of study. Cur- With regard to professional and open It is therefore not surprising to us that rently, practically all the Soviet nomi- literature, U.S. and western applied and the scientists the Soviets nominate are nees propose to study in fields having basic research papers are usually quite often directly involved in applied mili- military application. Some examples ofexplicit in explaining their purpose and tary research. For example, in 1976-77 proposed research topics in 1981 are: are published promptly and without cen- S. A. Gubin's course of study involved Properties of adhesive joints of poly- sorship. The author's affiliation and the the technology of fuel-air explosives. mers. sponsor of the research are almost al- Mr. Dubin studied this topic at one of Macromolecular materials and com- ways provided. This is contrasted with our leading universities under a profes- posite materials (two nominees). Soviet and other Communist country sor who was a consultant to the U.S. Preparation of micro-tunnel diodes publications where the purpose and goal Navy on fuel-air military explosive de- in gallium arsenide by annealing and/or are usually not mentioned or deliberately vices. As a parenthetical comment, one molecular beam epitaxy. obfuscated.Authors'affiliationsfre- must admire their ability to determine so Theory of computer science and quently are not provided and the sponsor precisely where to send their "stu- programming methodology. of the research is rarely identified. In dents." Gubin, incidentally, during his Thin-film metals in semiconductor addition all articles are subject to censor- stay ordered numerous documents per- technology. ship. taining to fuel-air explosives from the Semiconductor and infrared technol- I would also point out that it is and has U.S.National Technical Information ogy, ion implantation, radiation defect been for many years U.S. policy to make Service. Wnen he finished his study, he analysis and infrared detector techniques availableallunclassified government returned to his work in the USSR devel- and materials. sponsored research to anyone in the oping fuel-air explosive weapons. Machinability of difficult to machine world at very nominal cost through the In the case of K. H. Rozhdestvensky, materials. National Technical Information Services it was not until several months after his Largely as a result of dissident physi- (NTIS) of the Department of Commerce. departure that we learned his research cist Andrei Sakharov's ill treatment, theSimilar Soviet research holdings are paper was concerned with the "wing-in- U.S. Academy of Sciences imposed a maintained by the All-Union Institute of ground effect"aerodynamicvehicle. moratorium on joint symposia and cther Scientificand TechnicalInformation This vehicle has significant potential mil- high level contact with the Soviet Acade- (VINITI) which is jointly administered itary applications and indeed, the Sovi- my of Sciences. Nonetheless, individual by the State Committee for Science and ets have been attempting to develop a exchanges arestill permitted and the Technology and the Soviet Academy of 216

Sciences. The NTIS assisted the Sovietsin basic and fundamental science. How-our open and free society, we recognize in setting up VINITI under the auspicesever, since the military posture of this that we will never be able to halt fully the of the bilateral agreement on Science andnation relies so heavily on its technical flow of militarily critical technology to Technology, yet the holdings of VINITIleadership,theDefense Department the Soviet Union. Nevertheless, we be- are not released to anyone outside theviews with alarm the blatant and persist- lieve that it is possible to inhibit this flow Soviet Union. ent attempts, some of which have just without infringing upon legitimate scien- Other examples abound, but I trustbeen described, to siphon away our mili- tific discourse. I hope that this letter has that these will suffice to provide you withtarily related critical tecnno!ogies. I note allayed your concerns and look forward the context within which our views werethis is precisely your point when youto additional views you may wish to framed. The Department of Defense fa-state "nobody is arguing that the ex- offer. vors scientific, technical and educationalchanges should involve security-related exchanges and the free exchange of ideasfields of science." By the very nature of

will be studying the matter as well. The De- partment of State and the Department of Commerce are responsible for the regulations under which the current restrictions have been mandated. The State Department has revised its instructions on the handling of Soviet visitors, so that their academic hosts will not be required to shield them fromex- posure to particular unclassified projects. That department, which is responsible for the International Traffic in Arms Regula- - tions, has also adopted an appropriatelynar- row view of their scope. We are informed that the regulations will apply only to techni- Fundamental science in the United Statesuniversities restrict the access of foreign stu-cal data significantly and directly related to is a successful venture, but a peculiar one.dents and visitors to, and dissemination ofspecific items on the Munitions Listthe Its success is attested by the dramatic in-research results in, certain fields of study. limitation set out by the United States Court crease in scientific awards won by Amer-These restrictions are sought by applying toof Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in U.S. v. icans and by the contributions it makes to ourfundamental research regulations originallyEdler Industries. technological productivity. Its peculiarity intended for devices or industrial processes. These are promising signs of change, and lies in the organizational arrangements for its The universities have countered that if un-they should be encouraged; there are other sustenance. It is an acthity pursued in onepatrolled academic visits and the partici-ways to meet our national security objective. culture, supported out of another: more than pation of foreign students in research pro-If a Soviet scientist is viewed with such two-thirds of the nations's fundamental sci- grams contribute to technology leakage, they alarm that universities must be asked to ence is done in the research universities,do so minimally, and that interdicting aca-police his visit, then the Department of State with the government sponsoring nearly all of demic exhange would therefore yield trivialcan apply visa controls. And if a technology it. Given the contrast in style and values be-benefits to national security. We have alsohas such military value that exposure in an tween the two cultures, it is hardly surprising emphasized the potential damage to theopen environment presents clear risks to that this patronage arrangement sometimes scientific enterprise from government effortsnational security, the government can clas- generates quarrels. The current one is a de-to restrict its opennessespecially whensify the technologythereby permitting the bate over the government's efforts to regu-these coincide with efforts of private spon-universities to decide in advance whether late scholarly activities related to criticalsors to expand secrecy for proprietary rea-they can accept the restrictions that come technologies. sons. It surely will be difficult to resist thealong with the work. But to apply a burden- The problem is that the Communist bloc latter if we are forced to accept the former. some set of regulations to a venture that has nations have obtained and then copied U.S. There is, fortunately, encouraging prog-gained such great strength through its open- innovations in military technology Theress to report. The Department of Defenseness will cost the nation more than it can be solution proposed by the Administrationhas created a forum with the universities to worth. based on the hypothesis that these leaks part- examine research restrictions, among other ly involved academic exchangesis thatthings The National Academy of Sciences 217

tensions and the controversy of last winter, and an opportunity for balance to be struck between the needs for national security and the requirements for scientific and technical communication. The latest failure of restraint undeniably constitutes a setback to peacemaking efforts. The relationships between the government and the scientific and technical communities continue to be sorely troubled as the fixation on the "hemorrhage" of technology hardens. In the mellow last days of August, even as upon preemptive powers. Should this be so, Even as the pipeline war has unsettled the the National Academy of Sciences' panel on we are seeing a new face of the defense re- Atlantic diplomatic consensus, it appears Scientific Communication and National search funding system which, over many that the crucial domestic consensus between Security rolled up its sleeves to work on its decades, contributed on an enviable scale to science and national defense is being tested report, our military authorities launched a the open search for and sharing of knowl- severely. It becomes increasingly clear that a surprise strike resulting in the suppression of edge. formula must be found to set up an in- papers scheduled to be read at a major con- Such a transformation would go far tostitutional umpire with authority to see to it ference on optical instrumentation. undo the postwar terms of reference that that checks and balances are put in place and Exercising its oversight of Defense- assured comity and stability to relationships understood on both sides. It will not do to funded research and development contracts, between the scientific and technical com- continue to have a variety of government the military summarily embargoed the pre- munities and the defense establishment. Ifagencies taking matters into their own hands sentation of about 100 papers whose titles in acceptance henceforth of Defense Depart-without coordination indifferent to the con- a number of instances unwisely included lan- ment support for significant but unclassified sequences. guage suggestive of military applications. work must carry with it implicit or explicit There is one other, and quite vital, point Although the affair is being smoothed over, acquiescence in the suppression of dis- that must not be lost sight of. When a proper there can be little doubt that the continued closure, will scientists and engineers be pre- concern for the national security is burdened prospects for open discussion of leading- pared to travel that road with the specter ofby clumsy execution, something is sub- edge unclassified work now dwell in a no- ambushment no farther distant than the next tracted from the fundamental respect that is man's-land of confusion and disarray, sub- professional meeting? What conferenceowed the necessary goal of safeguarding de- ject to further incursions at any time. The planner will consider inviting foreign partici- fense secrets. Once confidence in the judg- humiliation visited on the sponsoring engi- pants lest they be suspected carriers of un- ment and the management of the security neering society is no small matter and one classified tidings to delight an insatiable process is shaken, its integrity is served bad- that will be taken to heart by other scientific KGB? ly. The defense authorities have very good and engineering organizations. Of more sig- It is not just the unfortunate handling ofreason to know that the scientific community nificance, if the raid at San Diego was more the affair at San Diego that is unnerving. The has proved its respect for the national secur- than an aberrant case of fractured communi- timing is no less to be deplored. What has ity through three hot wars and a long cold cations, is an emergent tilt toward reliance been needed is a breathing spell to reduce the war. That respect must be reciprocated.

yet unborn. is imperilledAt the same time, mutual LontaLts and means of understanding between peoples of the world have been increasing. This is why the yearning for peace is now stronger than ever. Mankind is confronted today with a threat unprecedented in history. arising from the massive and coiapetitive accumulation of nuclear weapons. The existing arsenals. if employed in a major war. could result in the immediate deaths of many hundreds of millions of people. and of untold millions more later through a variety of aftereffects. For the first time, it is possible to cause damage on On 24 September 1982, this statemnt warfare. such a catastrophic scale as to wipe out a was presented to Pis Holiness, Pope large part of civilization and to endanger John Paul 11, by an assembly of presi- I. Preamble. Throughout its history its very survival. The large-scale use of dents of scientific academies and other humankind has been confronted withsuch weapons could trigger major and scientists from all over the world con- war, but since 1945 the nature of warfareirreversible ecological and genetic vened by the Pontifical Academy of Sci- has changed so profoundly that the fu-changes. whose limits cannot be predict- ences to consider the issue of nuclear ture of the human race, of generationsed. 222 218

Science can offer the world no realweapons, but also those of chemical. instruments of warfare. Nuclear warfare defense against the consequences of nu- biological, and even conventional weap-would be a crime against humanity. clear war. There is no prospect of mak- ons are increasing by the steady accumu- It is of utmost importance that there ing defenses sufficiently effective to pro- lation of new knowledge. It is therefore be no armed conflict between nuclear tect cities since even a single penetrating to be expected that also the means ofpowers because of the danger that nucle- nuclear weapon can cause massive de- nonnuclear war. as horrible as they al- ar weapons would be used. struction. There is no prospect that the ready are. will become more destructive The use of force anywhere as a mass of the population could be protect- if nothing is done to prevent such awar. method of settling international conflicts ed against a major nuclear attack or that Human wisdom. however, remains com- can entail the risk of military confronta- devastation of the cultural. economic. paratively limited, in dramatic contrast tion of nuclear powers. and industrial base of society could be with the apparently inexorable growth of The proliferation of nuclear weap- prevented. The breakdown of social or- the power of destruction. It is the duty ofons to additional countries seriously in- ganization. and the magnitude of casual- scientists to help prevent the pery ersion creases the risk of nuclear war and could ties, will be so large that no medical of their achievements and to stress that lead to nuclear terrorism. system can be expected to cope with the future of mankind depends upon the The current arms race increases the more than a minute fraction of the vic- avzeptance by all nations of moral princi- risk of nuclear war. The race must be tims. ples transcendingallother consider- stopped. the development of new. more There are now some 50.000 nuclear ations. Recognizing the natural rights ofdestructive weapons must be curbed. weapons. some of which have yields a humans to survive and to live in dignity.. and nuclear forces must be reduced. with thousand times greater than the bomb science must he used to assist human-the ultimate goal of complete nuclear that destroyed Hiroshima. The total ex- kind towards a life of fulfillment and disarmament. The sole purpose of nucle- plosive content of these weapons is peace. ar weapons, as long as they exist. must equivalentto a millionHiroshima Considering these overwhelming dan- be to deter nuclear war. bombs. which corresponds to a yield of gers that confront all of us: it is the duty some 3 tons of TNT for every person on of every person of good will to face this HI. Recognizing that excessive con- earth. Yet these stockpiles continue to threat.All disputes that we are conventional forces increase mistrust and grow. Moreover, we face the increasing cerned with today. including political.could lead to confrontation with the risk danger that many additional countries economic.ideological.andreligiousof nuclear war, and that all differences will acquire nuclear weapons or develop ones. are small compared to the hazards and territorial disputes should he re- the capability of producing them. of nuclear war. It is imperative to reducesolved by negotiation, arbitration. or There is today an almost continuous distr :st and to increase hope and confi-other peaceful means. we call upon all range of explosive power from the small- dence through a succession of steps tonations: est battlefield nuclear weapons to the curb the development, production. test- Never to he the first to use nuclear most destructive megaton warhead. Nu- ing. and deployment of nuclear weapons weapons: clear weapons are regarded not only as a systems, and to reduce them to substan- To seek termination of hostilities deterrent, but there are plans for their tially lower levels with the ultimate hopeimmediately in the appalling event that tactical use and use in a general warof their complete elimination. nuclear weapons are ever used: under so-called controlled conditions. To avoid wars and achieve a meaning- To abide by the principle that force The immense and increasing stockpiles ful peace. not only the powers of intelli-or the threat of force will not he used of nuclear weapons. and their broad dis- gence are needed. but also the powers ofagainst the territorial integrity or politi- persal in the armed forces. increase the ethics, morality, and conviction. cal independence of another state: probability of their being used through The catastrophe of nuclear war can To renew and increase efforts to accident or miscalculation in times ofand must he prevented. Leaders and reach verifiable agreements curbing the heightened political or military tension. governments have a grave responsibility arms race and reducing the numbers of The risk is very great that any utilization to fulfill in this regard. But it is human- nuclear weapons and delivery systems. of nuclear weapons. however limited. kind as a whole which must act for itsThese agreements should be monitored would escalate to general nuclear war. survival. This is the greatest moral issue by the most effective technical means. The world situation has deteriorated. that humanity has ever faced, and there Political differences or territorialdis- Mistrust and suspicion between nations is no time to he lost. putes must not he allowed to interfere have grown. There is a breakdown of with this objective; serious dialogue between the East and if. In view of these threats of global To find more effective ways and West and between North and South. nuclear catastrophe. we declare. means to prevent the further prolifera- Serious inequities among nations and Nuclear weapons are fundamentally tion of nuclear weapons. The nuclear within nations, shortsighted national or different from conventional weapons. powers. and in particular the superpow- partisan ambitions, and lust for power They must not be regarded as acceptable ers. have a special obligatioa to set an are the seeds of conflict which may lead to general and nuclear warfare. The Participants in the Conference on Nuclear Wartare included L Amaldi. hall, I B.idran.F gv pt A Balevski. Bulgaria: A Hrkoe. International Council ol Scientific Unions. IBenvenuti. U ily. C Bernhard. scandal of poverty.- hunger. and degrada- Sweden. 0 Bikov. Soviet Union. B. Minsk'. Poland. C Chagas. Branl L De (magiItaly B Dinkov. tion is in itself becoming an increasing Bulgaria. G Hamhraeus. Sweden. T Hesburgh and H Hiatt. United States D H International Pugwash Conference. S Hsieh. Taipei. A Huxley. England. S tonna. Japan, S !son. Soviet Union P threat to peace. There appears to be a Jacquinot. France. w German Democratic Republic. M Kam. Pakistan. S Keen. United States. growing fatalistic acceptance that war is K Komarek and F Konig. Austria. 1t.ah,irhe. Belgium 1I. eteline and L.Leprince-Ringuel. nice K Levi Montalcini. Italy. M. Lora- Tamayu. Spain. I'Malone. United States. 6 Manor-Bettolo Italy, M inevitable and that wars will be fought Menon. India. G Montalenti. Italy. M Nixon). Bra/11.1Peters. Belgium. 6 Porter. I ngland hPress with nuclear weapons. In any such war United States. G Puppi. Italy. H RifaiIndonesia. W Rosenblith. United States P Rossano ItalyI' Rudomin. Mexico. B Rysavy. Czechoslovakia. I Saavedra. Chile. V Sardi. Venc/uela F Shin.Korea. E there will be no winners. Simpson: South Afnea: 1Sirotkovic. Yugoslavia. lSo,nov,ku. Poland. A Sturman. Argentina. 1 Szentagothai. Hungary: S Tanneberger. German Dernol.raln. Republic(I (miles. United States. U Not only the potentialities of nuclear Velikhov. Soviet Union. w Watts. Ireland. and V Welvdont. United States 223 219 example in reducing armaments and to IV. Finally, we appeal: forcefully and persistently the grave hu- create a climate conducive to nonprolif- 11 To national '.:aders, to take theman issues at stake so that these are eration. Moreover, all nations have theinitiative in seeking steps to reduce thefully understood and appreciated by so- duty to pri-, vent the diversion of peaceful risk of nuclear war, looking beyond nar- ciety. uses of nuclear energy to the prolifera- row concerns for national advantage; 4) To people everywhere, to reaffirm tion of nuclear weapons; and to reject military conflict as a meanstheir faith in the destiny of humankind, To take all practical measures that of resolving disputes. to insist that the avoidance of war is a reduce the possibility of nuclear war by 2) To scientists, to use their creativitycommon responsibility. to combat the accident, miscalculation, or irrational ac- for the betterment of human life, and tobelief that nuclear conflict is unavoid- tion. apply their ingenuity in exploring means able, and to labor unceasingly towards To continueto observe existingof avoiding nuclear war and developinginsuring the future of generations to arms limitation agreements while seek- practical methods of arms control. come. ing to negotiate broader and more effec- 3) To religious leaders and other cus- tive agreements. todians of moral principles. to proclaim

dom and acceptability of such arrangements. The American Association of UniversityProfessors(AAUP)has thought it inappropriate to condemn faculties and universities for making such arrangements per se, but it has regularly expressed concern that inconsistency with respect to academic freedom is a genuine danger that all academic institutions should weigh carefully in the research and restrictions they accept. The implication of the earlier report (I) was to favor a limited classification system, to the extent that it might minimize uncertainty and provide a less random A recent report (1) on the network of1982. The professor's research, support-threat to academic freedom. Ideally, a statutes and regulations which have been ed by a grant from the Air Force, was not clear and circumspect classification sys- invoked by government officials to re-classified, in accordance with the univer-tem should state what research and pub- strain unclassified research and travelsity's stated policy "to undertake onlylication must necessarily be treated in and publication by academic researchers those research projects in which the pur- confidence according to needs of nation- concluded that these restrictions abridgepose, scope, methods, and results can be al security that are plain and compelling. academic freedom significantly beyondfully and freely discussed." As he hadIt should enable universities and their the needs of national security. It w:-.sdone routinely in the past, the professor faculties to make informed decisions also argued that the nation's security isalso sent the papers to the program offi-about their research. Very different, and ill-served by the restrictions in that barri-cer in the Air Force who told him, a strongly objectionable, is a classification ers to learning from others, as well as theweek before the symposium, that hissystem that sweeps within it virtually suppression of innovative work whenev-papers had not been cleared and there- anything that might conceivably be use- er its originality might be useful even tofore should not be presented. The pro-ful industrially, technically, or militarily the industrial or technological progressfessor, while vigorously protesting, with- to at least someone and that is acminis- of other nations, are necessarily discour-drew the papers. tered by officials who feel compelled to aging to the maintenance of research Certain research conducted in univer- classify as secret any information about leadership within the United States. sities may have immediate and directwhich they have doubts. A recent event tends to justify suchnational security implications. Some of Here we review briefly the recent criticism. A university professor submit-that work is undertaken pursuant to De-changes introduced into the classifica- ted two papers for presentation, andpartment of Defense contracts. Universi- tion system by Executive Order 17356, subsequent publication, to the 26th An-ties generally recognize that such ar-issued by President Reagan on 2 April nual Technical Symposium of the Socie- rangements may compromise their com- 1982. A recent report of the National ty for Photo-Optical Instrumentation En-mitment to academic freedom, and theyAcademy of Sciences Panel on Scientific gineers meeting in San Diego in Augustvary in their policies respecting the wis-Communication and National Security (2) concluded that a national policy of security through openness is much pref- This article is adapted from a report issued in October 1982 by the American Association of University Professors' Committee A on Academic Freedom and Tenure. The report was prepared by Committee As erable to a policy of security by secrecy. Subcommittee on Federal Restnctions on Research. The members of the subcommittee are R A We agree. We believe the enlargement of Rosenbaum, professor of mathematics. Wesleyan University. Middletown. Connecticut 06457. Chair: M J Tenzer. professor of political science. University of Connecticut. Storrs 06268. S. H. Unger. professor of the classification system as stated in computer science, Columbia University. New York 10027. W Van Alstyneprofessor of law. Duke Executive Order 12356 is seriously mis- University, Durham, North Carolina 27706: and IKnight, associate secretary. Amencan Association of University Professors, Washington. D.C. 20036. taken. It poses an unwarranted threat to

2 P 4 220

academic freedom and hence to scien- the unauthorized disclosure of which the order had not included this provi- tific progress and the national security. reasonably could be expected to cause sion; it first appeared in the executive damage to the national security." At a order issued by President Carter. It was congressional hearing, a Deputy Assist- retained mainly as a result of protests Summary of Recent Changes ant Attorney General explained the dele- from the scientific community. Howev- tion of the requirement of identifiability er,it is not clear what this provision Executive Order 12356 is the most as follows: actually safeguards. recent presidential executive order pre- Every new qualifier or adjective, such as Sanctions for violations of the execu- scribing a system for classifying and de- "identifiable." added to the requirement of tive order may be imposed on the gov- classifying information on the basis ofshowing "damage" or any other requisiteernment's "contractors, licensees, and national security concerns.President element of proper classification, raises new grantees." Franklin Roosevelt issued the first such uncertainties or areas of ambiguity that may lead to litigation.... [T]he requirement of order in 1940. Succeeding executive or- "identifiable" damage may be construed to ders were signed by Presidents Truman, suggest that disclosure must cause some spe- Comments Eisenhower, Nixon, and Carter. In their cific or precise damage, a requirement that the government might not reasonably be able details, these earlier executive orders National security obviously requires differed on such matters as what infor- to meet in some cases. ... Provisions of such orders should be simple, general, less com- some classification of information as se- mation was to be classified, for what plex and require no more precision than the cret. It is also obvious that freedom to period of time, and according to what subject matter reasonably allows. The re- engage in academic research and to pub- standards. Their similarities, however, quirement of "identifiable" damage fails on all these counts. lish the results is essential to advance are more noteworthy than their differ- knowledge and to sustain our democratic ences. They sought to preserve the pub- In the event that a government official society. lic's interest in the free circulation ofis uncertain about the security risk of The possibility for friction between knowledge by limiting classification au- some information, the doubt will be reclassification and academic freedom is thority, by defining precisely the pur- solved in favor of classification pending alwrAys there. The friction can be re- poses and limits of classification, and by a final determination within 30 days. Induced if classification is invoked before providing procedures for declassifica- addition, if there is doubt about the level research has begun and is cautiously tion. of classification, the information will be applied for a limited period of time and By contrast, Executive Order 12356 classified at a higher level, also pending a only to matters of direct military signifi- significantly broadens the authority offinal cl!cision within 30 days. Once the cance. Classification defeats its own pur- government agencies to classify informa- information is classified, it can remain so pose, however, if it imperils the freedoms tion as secret.It removes a previous at the discretion of government officials it is meant to protect. In our judgment, requirement for classification that dam- "as long as required by national security Executive Order 12356 does exactly that. age to the national security be identifi- considerations." There is no provision in It gives unprecedented authority to gov- able. It resolves doubts about the need to Executive Order 12356 for justifying the ernment officials to intrude at will in con- classify in favor of classification. It per- need for classification beyond a stated trolling academic research that depends mits indefinite classification. It provides period of time. (President Nixon's exec- on federal support. It allows classification for reclassification of declassified and utive order called for automatic declassi- to be imposed at whatever stage a re- publicly released information. It expands fication after 30 years, unlessit was search project has reached and to be the categories of information subject to determined that continued classification maintained for as long as government offi- classification to Include nonclassified re-was still necessary and a time for eventu- cials deem prudent. Academic research search developed by scientific investiga- aldeclassification was set;President not born classified may, under this order, tors outside the government. Carter's executive order established a 6- die classified. year declassification period.) The latest The provision in the executive order order makes no comment on whether that "basic scientific research informa- Main Provisions declassifying information is generally de- tion not clearly related to the national sirable. security may not be classified" carries The preamble to Executive Order If information is declassified, it may be the suggestion that it may be classified if 12356 states that the "interests of the reclassifiedunder ExecutiveOrder It is determined by the government to be United States and its citizens require 12356 following the requirements for"clearly related to the national securi- that certain information concerning theclassification. Information that Aas been ty." This standard for classification is national defense and foreign relations be properly declassified and is in the public looser still than "could be expected to protected against unauthorized disclo-domain apparently may remain "under cause damage to the national security." sure." To prevent "unauthorized disclo- the control" of the government (the or- We may be reading too much into this sure," the order establishes three levels der defines information as "any informa- provision; we hope that it will be inter- of classification: top secret, secret, andtion or materials... that is owned by. preted as an exemption and nothing confidential. The standards for top se- produced by or for, or is under the more. Unfortunately, even with its most cret and secret are the same as in previ- control of the United States Govern- favorable gloss it is a weak safeguard for ous executive orders. However, Execu- ment") and thus can be reclaimed by the scientific inquiry. The government offi- tive Order 12356 omits the earlier quali- government. cial who cannot fix a clear relationship fying word "identifiable" in describing The executive order provides for limi- between scientific research and national the damage to the national security that tations on classification.It states that securitybutnonetheless has doubts can justify classification at the lowest, or "basicscientificresearch information could still classify government funded or confidential, level. The text reads: "con- not clearly related to the national securi- contracted research consistent with oth- fidential shall be applied to information, ty may not be classified." Early drafts ofer provisions in the executive order. 225 221

In the pursuit of knowledge, academic Classification, or the worry that it might nonclassified information, which is al- researchers should not have to look be imposed, could result in the isolation ready subject to potential restraints un- backward either in hope of favor or in of academic researchers, cut off from the der existing laws and regulations, is at fear of disfavor. In an era of reduced free exchange of ideas and exposure to best superfluous. The heavy emphasis federal support for research except in the constructive criticism. Those concerned on classification is misplaced: the provi- area of national security, and with in-in government with the uses of new sion for reclassification should be re- vestments in research programs and fa- knowledge are not likely to obtain the moved and the standards for classifica- cilities significantly reliant on previouslybenefit of the widest possible evaluation tion rewritten so that they do not sweep allocated federal funds, academic re-of their plans and projects. All of these unnecessarily broadly and thereby sig- searchers are under great pressure to consequences of the executive order are nificantly threaten academic freedom. submit to classification no matter how likely to be felt outside as well as within If the government's executive order or restrictive or apparently arbitrary the the field of research in which classifica- its successor continues to deny due rec- demand. The adverse effects on academ-tion is imposed. ognition to the need of the independent ic freedom and thus on the advancement The government has not put forward research scholar for academic freedom, of knowledge and on the national securi- any compelling reasons for instituting a the cost will be borne not only by the ty can te grave. system of classification that is so at odds researchers who are affected but by the The executive order can inhibit aca-with previoussystems. The govern- nation as a whole. demic researchers from making long-ment's own reports, including reports term intellectual investments in research issued by the Department of Defense, References and Notes 1 R. A. Rosenbaum. M. J. Tenzer. S H. Unger, projects that are potentially classifiable. seriously question the cost, effective- W. Van Alstyne, J. Knight. **Federal restnc- It can serve to foster unnecessary dupli- ness, and need for more classification. tions on research: Academic freedom and national security. Academe: Bull. ?I. Associ. cation of research efforts. It is likely toThey draw particular attention to the Univ. Prof. 68. I7a (September-Oct ber 1982). inhibit the sharing of research methods dangers of overclassification. 2. Natior,a1 Academy of Sciences. Scientific Com- munication and National Securuy (Washington. and results with professional colleagues, Executive Order 12356 requires dras- D C., 1982), vols. 1 and 2. because something that a government tic revision in order to be tolerable to a 3. The present address of S. J Unger is Thomas J. Watson Research Center. P.O. Box 218. York- official can call harmful to the national community of scholars committed to free town Heights, N.Y. 10598. security might unwittingly be revealed. inquiry. The application of the order to

The debate has thus far addressed the government's effort to control the export of appliedscientific knowledge as a broad question of public policy. It seems likely,, however, that the major issues in the controversy will soon be tested under narrower, legal principles in a court of law. If so, the government will almost certainly rely on one of two congressional statutes as authority for its restraints on the transmission of technological knowledge. One of the statutes is the Arms Export Control Act (9), which empowers the It is now apparent that the American of appliedscientificknowledge has State Department to license the export of scientific community is approaching a sparked heated debate. The government all military articles listed in the Interna- critical point in its relations with the maintains that the noanal avenues of tional Traffic in Arms Regulations (10). federal government. Until recently, the scientific communication often contrib- As defined by those regulations, the rele- conduct of most scientific work in this ute to a "technology leakage" that en-vant articles consist not only of war- country proceeded on a well-founded hances the military capabilities of the making devices such as aircraft and ex- assumption that it would remain free Soviet Union (6, 7). What underlies this plosives but also of "any information" from official intrusion or state regulation view is the belief that the American used in the production of military arms (/). Since 1979, however, the federal military must depend on the technologi- (10, sect. 125.01). Equally important, the government has frequently acted in the cal superiority of its weapons systems to regulations broadly construe the term name of national security to impose re- offset the quantitative superiority of the "export" to include the noncommercial straints on important aspects of the sci- Soviet Union (6, 7). The critics charge transmission of information in domestic entific endeavor. Most notably, in an that restraints on scientific expression settings such as scientific symposiums effort to curb the export of "militarily are both ineffectual as a means of curb- (10, sect. 125.03; 11). useful" technologies, the Administration ing the transfer of technology and incon- The other statute is the Export Admin- has applied the existing set of export sistent with the requirements of scien- istration Act of 1979 (12), which differs controls to domestic scientific sympo- tific progress (2, pp. 42-45; 4, 8). In this from the arms regulations in two re- siums,universityresearch programs, view, America's technological suprema- spects.First,itauthorizes the Com- and even the presentation of scientificcy is due in large part to policies that The author is a visiting scholar in law and science papers (2, pp. 97-107; 3-5). promote the free circulation of scientific at Yale Law School. New Haven. Connecticut This effort to restrict the dissemination and technological information. 06520. 2,o 222

merce Department to license the exportal theory, the Court's power is properlyrange of uses, some of which nave mili- of "dual use" technologies that are sub-exercised only when its decisions are tary value but most of which contribute ject to both military and civilian applica- rigorously based on principles deriveddirectly to the material welfare of the tions. Second, it deals principally withfrom the text of the Constitution ( /5, /6). community. This point is clearly illus- the export of technologies to "controlled These larger considerations have oftentrated by many of the "militarily criti- countries" such as the Soviet Union,guided the Court in deciding cases aris-cal" technologies that have been cited Poland, and East Germany. Like theing under the free-speech clause of theby the Department of Defensefor ex- arms regulations, however, the ExportFirst Amendment. Rejecting the notion ample, laser technology, semiconduc- Administration Act restricts the domes-thatall speech isabsolutely immune tors, computer hardware, and infrared tic release of any information used in thefrom official regulation, the Court hastechnology (23). Given the obvious so- production of commodities having a mili- determined the degree of protection tocial value of such technological achieve- tary value (13). Furthermoreand againbe accorded to various categories ofments, the Supreme Court will probably like the arms regulationsthe Exportexpression by looking to the major val-hold that the broad category of techno- Administration Act imposes stiff crimi-ues that underlie the free-speech guaran- logical knowledge warrants a full mea- nal penalties on those who willfully vio- tee.These values, according to thesure of constitutional protection, while late its licensing requirements (12, sect. Court, can be summarized in three prop-noting an exception for information that 2410). ositions. First, the right of free speechis subject only to military applications In these statutes Congress has provid-advances the citizen's interest in self- (/9). ed considerable authority for govern- fulfill ment by enabling him to realize his Once this larger question is decided, mental restraints on the export of "mil- full potential through the free expression the Court will not assess the social value itarily useful" technologies. This factof opinions, beliefs, and ideas. Second,of the technical data at issue in a given alone, however, will not end the legalthe guarantee of free speech serves anchallenge to a governmental restraint. inquiry in cases where the governmentimportant social function by promotingRather, it will simply note that the infor- has invoked the statutes to restrict the the widest possible circulation of sociallymation in question falls within the cate- open, domestic communication of ap- useful information. Finally, the right ofgory of fully protected speech and will plied scientific knowledge. On the con-free speech is essential to a democraticthen turn its attention to the govern- trary, in such a case, a major issue willform of government, for it ensures thatment's countervailing interest in regula- arise concerning the validity of the legis- all information bearing on various policytion. At this point, a crucial issue will lation under the free-speech clause of the issues is fully disseminated to the public arise: given the strong constitutional pre- First Amendment. (17, 18). sumption in favor of free speech, just To resolve this type of issue, the Su- Though the Court has not yet adjudi-what burden of proof must the state preme Court has consistently relied on a cated the issue, it seems clear that scien- carry to justifyitsimposition of re- well-defined analytical framework de-tific communications contribute to eachstraints on the information? Or, to put it signed to determine whether the state'sof these interests and thus warrant asin legalistic terms, what standard of re- interest in regulation is sufficiently im- much protection as political tracts, liter- view will the Court apply to the govern- portant to justify an abridgment of Firstary works, or any other variety ofment's stated justification for the chal- Amendment freedoms. In the rest of this speech. Indeed, a system of free scien- lenged restrictions? article, I will examine the ways in whichtific expression not only enables scien- the Court's mode of analysis can accom-tists to draw on the work of colleagues modate the difficult First Amendmentbut also tests the validity of hypotheses Determining the Standard of Review issues arising from the imposition of re-against current data and opposing vie vs. straints on the open, domestic communi-In these ways, it promotes the discovery To determine the relevant standard of cation of technological knowledge (/4). of scientific truth and fosters the intellec- review, the Court will focus on two tual advances that contribute to the col- broad questions. First, does the govern- lective wisdom (2, pp. 42-45; 19, 20). ment have a possessory interest in the First Amendment Fundamentals In the case of purely technical data, underlying information? If so, the Court however, more difficult questions arise. willapply a mere "reasonableness" Like other guarantees in the Bill ofFor example, does technical information standard to any governmental restraints Rights, the free-speech clause of thehaving only military uses warrant the imposed on government employees in an First Amendment stakes out a zone ofsame degree of constitutional protection effort to preserve the secrecy of the data. individual freedom by identifying a spe-as political speech or basic scientific Thus, for example, in Snepp v. United cific activity to be protected against un-knowledge? In all likelihood the CourtStates, a recent case involving a book warranted governmental intrusion. Thewill answer in the negative, for it has published by a former CIA agent, the enforcement of such guarantees is left topreviously held that analogous "lesser" Court broadly upheld the state's power the Supreme Court, the branch of gov-forms of expression do not stand on the to impose "reasonable restrictions" on ernment removed from public account-same constitutional footing as more tra- the dissemination of governmental infor- ability and vested with the power toditional varieties of speech. For exam- mation obtained by government employ- invalidate official acts that encroach onple, the Court has held that commercial ees (24). In addition, the Court pointedly the protected freedoms. This power ofadvertising occupies a "subordinate po- noted that this general principle applies judicial review, however, carries the risksition in the scale of First Amendment"even in the absence of an express that the Court will frustrate the demo-values" and thus warrants only a "limit- agreement" between the government cratic process by freely substituting itsed measure" of constitutional protection and the employee (25, p. 507). own preferences for the enacted will of(21;22, pp. 651-656). In like manner, the Court will proba- the public's elected representatives. Ac- Most forms of technological knowl-bly sustain any reasonable restraints im- cordingly, under prevailing constitution-edge, however, are subject to a wideposed on the dissemination of informa- 2`)7, 223 tion resulting from the government-fund- Weighing the State's For example, in the case of new technol- ed research of private parties. Indeed, in Interest in Regulation ogies having military applications, the such a case, the government's restraints underlying know-how can provide a hos- will likely be upheld on either of two The Court has held that the strength oftile nation with the capability of commit- grounds: (i) the state, by financing the the government's interest in regulation isting harmful acts it would not otherwise underlying research, acquires a property determined in large part by two indepen-be able to commit. interest in the resulting information ordent factors: the natu:: of the harm that This point was clearly underscored by (ii) the researcher, by accepting the pub-the stateis seeking tt, avert and the the decision of a federal district judge in lic financing, agrees to restrictions that likelihood of its occurrence (30, p. 843). United States v. The Progressive (34). In might otherwise be constitutionally im- In particular, crucial inquiry centersthat case, the government asked the permissible ',19, 26). on whether the "gravity of the 'evil,'judge to enjoin a magazine from publish- On the other hand, if the state at- discounted by its improbability, justifiesing an article outlining the design of a tempts to regulate th- dissemination of such invasion of the free speech right ashydrogen bomb. In granting the injunc- nongovernmental information by private is necessary to avoid the danger" (31).tion, the judge stressed that the case parties, the Court will apply a far more With this approach, the seriousness ofdiffered in important ways from the Pen- demanding standard of review. In such a the threatened danger will affect to sometagon Papers case, which dealt with a case, the weight of the state's burden extent the showing required of the gov-classified history of the Vietnam War will be determined by a second line ofernment on the "likelihood of occur-(29). Most notably, according to the judicial inquiry focusing on the precise rence." judge, the case before him concerned way in which the government has re- The Court has long recognized that"information dealing with the most de- stricted the free-speech right. "no governmental interest is more com-structive weapon in the history of man- On this issue, there are two majorpelling than the security of the Nation"kind, information of sufficient destruc- possibilities: either the state has imposed and that this interest sometimes requirestive potential to nullify the right to free a "subsequent punishment"usually inthe state to protect the secrecy of certain speech and to endanger the right to life the form of criminal penaltieson indi- kinds'''nformation (24). On the facts of itse;f" (34). Thus convinced that publica- viduals who have already published thea givei, however, the state couldtion "could pave the way for thermonu- restricted information, or it has blockednot rely on the mere assertion of a na-clear annihilation of us all," the judge the dissemination of the data by issuing ational security threat, for the Court will found that the government had met its "prior restraint." In the case of a subse-make its own inquiry into the nature and heavy burden of justifying a prior re- quent punishment, the Court will uphold magnitude of the harm said to result from straint (34; 35). the action only if the state can demon-publication of the data at issue (30, p. In the case of nonnuclear technolo- strate a "compelling" interest in regula- 843). gies, the government has also invoked tion (22, p, 602; 27)a burden of proof The state's argument on this score willthe name of national security to limit the that stands as the modern analog of the undoubtedly stress the unique nature ofdissemination of technical information well-known "clear and present danger" technical knowledge and, in particular,having possiblemiiitary applications. testformulatedbyOliverWendell the unique way in which this variety ofFor example, at a recent international Holmes (28). In the case of a prior re- speech can harm the public. Under clas- symposium on optical engineering. the straint. the Court will apply an evensic First Amendment theory, most forms Department of Defense blocked the pre- more demanding standard of review,of human communication contribute tosentation of a large number of unclassi- since the government is seeking to block the larger social exchange of opinions, fied papers on topics ranging from micro- the timely dissemination of informationbeliefs, and ideas and do not threaten in electronics to infrared technology (2, pp. and ideas. Indeed, on the evidence of the any way the material welfare of the soci- 106-107; 36). In so doing, the depart- so-calledPentagonPapersdecision ety. Indeed, on this theory, the speech ofment underscored its concern that ad- (New York Times v. United States) thean individual generally cannot cause any vanced work in "critical" technologies Court will uphold the restraint only if the harm to the community except by influ-could aid a foreign adversary in the de- government can show that a "grave"encing others to adopt an erroneous orvelopment of more effective weapons and "irreparable" harm will almost sure- misguided position. The theory furthersystems(36). The NationalSecurity ly result from publication of the data inholds that the government has no genu-Agency has recently monitored the ef- question (29). ine interest in suppressing a "danger-forts of research cryptographers to de- Clearly, under either standard of re-ous" idea, since the alleged error orvelop undecipherable computer commu- view the state is faced with an exceed-fallacy can be exposed through an addi-nication codes (2, pp. 120-125). Accord- inglydifficult task. Nevertheless, the tional exchange of views (22, pp. 605-ing to agency officials, the free publica- Court has indicated that in some "excep-606; 32). tion of this work could threaten the tional" cases, principally in the area of These general considerations, howev- inviolability of codes used by the Ameri- national security, the government's iner, do not always apply to technologicalcan military or provide a hostile power terest in regulation may be sufficient toknowledge, which often gives rise towith an impenetrable communication warrant a direct infringement on fully dangers of a more immediate and tangi-system (2, p. 123; 7). protected speech (29). The remainingble kind. In particular, technical know- In the light of these examples, itis question, therefore, is: Just how will the how, although rarely contributing to the useful to rank the various types of na- Court assess theimportance of the general exposition of ideas, often conferstional security information according to state's concerns to determine whetherthe power to alter the material conditionsthe nature and magnitude of the dangers they are adequate to justify an abridg-of life in important new ways, some ofposed by the resulting capability. This ment of First Amendment freedoms? which may prove harmful (19, 20, 33).effort applies, however, only to those 224

cases in which the government has first Finally, it is possible that the export of even if the government concedes that the demonstrated two important points: (i) some technical capabilities could under- Soviets will eventually acquire the capa- that the information at issue is indeedmine foreign policy goals that are closely bility anyway, since the maintenance of subject to the asserted d ngerous uselinked to the nation's security. The ex- a military lead time can be highly advan- and (ii) that the information is not cur-port of some types of technical knowl- tageous (4 /). On the other hand, if the rently available to the receiving nationedge, for instance, might undermine a threatened hetn to the nation's security from another source (19). trade embargo designed to influence the is less serious, the state's case will be Assuming these facts can be estab- internationalbehavior of theSoviet correspondingly weakened, and all the lished, the most serious danger would Union. more so if the receiving nation is shown arisefrom technicalcapabilitiesthat Turning to the question of the likeli- to lack the requisite skills or resources to could alter in major ways the currenthood of occurrence, the Court will ad- absorb the technology. balance of international military power. dress the probability that a third party This category would include technolo-will use the information at issue to devel- gies that directly conferred on the Sovietop the new capability. This line of inqui- Less Restrictive Alternatives Union a new offensive capability or anry will consider both the complexity of effective countermeasure to Americanthe technology and the skills of the re- ThecruxofconventionalFirst weapons systems. It would also include ceiving nation. The need for the inquiry Amendment analysis lies in the Court's technologies that exposed the United arisesin part from the fact that the effort to determine whether the restrict- States to new threats by providing a impersonaltransmission of technical ed information gives rise to a substantial smaller adversary with a destructive knowledge is rarely an effective method danger and thus warrants governmental power that it had not possessed before. of transferring technology (38; 40, p. 29). regulation. However, if this issue is re- These are examples of "sudden and As a general rule, the normal channels of solved in the state's favor, the Court will disastrous giveaways" (37). There areintellectual communication convey only pursue a further line of inquiry focusing other capabilities that, if acquired by athe broad outlines of technical design on the government's regulatory tech- hostile nation, could result in a number and theory (40, pp. 67-73). What is usu- nique. In particular, the Court will deter- of lesser harms to the nation's security. ally not published or t.odified is the body mine whether the restraints on speech Most significant is the wide range ofof associated know-how that constitutes imposed by the state are more extensive militarily useful technologies that could the art of the technology (40, p. 73),than necessary to serve its underlying enable a foreign adversary to add incre- typically including methods of operation, concerns (42). Accordingly, even if the mentally to its current military strengthorganization, and manufacturing proce- government can demonstrate a "compel- by (i) directly improving the perform- dures. This is particularly true of emerg- ling" interest in regulation, the Court ance of its weapons systems, (ii) enhancing technologies with few previous appli- will invalidate the challenged restraints if ing its communications network, or (iii) cations (40, pp. 73-74). it finds that a "less restrictive alterna- increasing its knowledge of American Accordingly, the Court's inquiry into tive" could serve the asserted interest military capabilities (38). Examples ofthe likelihood of occurrence will focus equally well. such technologies are electrooptical sen- on the ability of the receiving nation to A useful illustration of this principle is sors, solid rocket propulsion systems, absorb the knowledge at issue and put it offered by Central Hudson v. Public satellite technology, navigation and guid-to use. For example, if the receiving Service Commission of Nett York (43). ance subsystems, microprocessors, andnation has a high level of technical ex- In that case, the Public Service Commis- microelectronics (2, pp. 18-20; 6, k..p. 5-pertise in the relevant area, the govern- sion of the state of New York issued an 15). ment could show with virtual certainty order prohibiting all public utilities from A less immediate harm would resultthat that nation will put the information promoting the use of electricity. The from technologies that enabled a foreign to an immediate military use. If the re-commission reasoned that such a ban adversary to improve its military re-ceiving nation lacks any of the needed would decrease the demand for electric- search and development. The most sig- skills or resources, the state could show ity and thus further the state's interest in nificant are technologies associated with only a possibility that the knowledge will the conservation of energy resources. the use of the computer for correlating be put to a significant use in the foresee- The Supreme Court agreed that this in- experimental data with theoretical mod- able future. terest was sufficient to warrant some els (39). Other well-defined technical Together with the gravity of the threat- restriction of commercial speech but methodologies are used to "guarantee ened harm to nationalsecurity, the found that the state's blanket prohibition reliability, explore the limits of design, Court's finding on the likelihood of oc- was more extensive than necessary to and reveal new phenomena that can af- currence will generally determine wheth- further that interest. The Court noted, fect the next generation of weapons" er the state's Interest in regulation is for example, that the commission's or- (39). sufficient to warrant the restriction of der prevented utilities from promoting A slightly different harm to national First Amendment rights. Assume, for electrical services that would reduce security would result from technologies instance, that the government can show energy consumption by diverting de- that enabled a foreign power to upgrade that the Soviets have sufficient skills mand from less efficient sources. On this its manufacturing capability in industries to acquire a new military capability byground, therefore, the Court found that of military importance. For example, mi- exploiting an American breakthrough the commission's order was unconstitu- croelectronics and computer technolo- in directed energy weaponry. On thesetional. gies are important in the development offacts, the Court will no doubt agree that This type of inquiry might well bein-flight guidance systems (6,p.13), the government's concerns aresuffi- come relevant if recent proposals to alter while precision ball bearings are impor- ciently compelling to warrant an abridg- the export control statutes are passed tant in the production of missiles andment of First Amendment freedoms. into law. For example, under one such other military hardware (6, p. 7). This will probably hold true, moreover, proposal;4), the Arms Export Control

2 ."/ 9 225

Act would be amended to cover commu- References and Notes 15.Snepp v. United States (241. One caveat should be noted here The Court will apply a more nications of any kind-technical or oth- 1 The one notable exception to this general rule is ngorous standard of review to governmental research that is sponsored and classified by the erwise-dealing with any of a broad government-for example, the Manhattan Pro). restraints imposed on a publisher who has re- ect. ceived confidential information from a govern- range of restricted technologies (4). This ment employee (30). 2.National Academy of Sciences. Scientific Com- typeof regulation,however, would 26.Given the government's current emphasis on munication and National Secunty (Washinzton. curbing the transfer of technology. it seems clearly be more extensive than necessary D.C.. 1982). pp. 97-107. 3.G. Kolata, Science 215. 635 (1982). likely that the Department of Defense will be to safeguard the nation's security, since p icing an increasing number of contractual 4.S. H. Unger, Tecs----"Re;. 85 (No2), 30 restnctions on research that it supports (3). many communications dealing with the (1982). 27.First National Bank of Boston v Belloa 435 5.Committee on Operations, The Government's U S 765 (1978). restricted technologies have no military Classtfication of Prn'ate Ideas. H R. Rept No 28.Schenck v. United States. 249 U.S. 47 (1919). value.Consequently, anyregulatory 96-1540. 96th Cong., 2d Sess. (1980). 29.New York Times Co. v. United States. 403 U.S. 6.Central Intelligence Agency. Soviet Acquisition 713 (1971) (per curiam). In the Pentagon Papers scheme based on this proposal would be of Western Technology (Washington. D C.. case, the Court found that the government's Apnl 1982) subject to a stern First Amendment chal- claims of grave harm to the national security 7B. Inman. "National secunty and technical in were insufficient to Justify a pnor restraint on lenge on the grounds that there are less formation," paper presented at the AAAS annu- the publication of a classified history of U.S. al meeting. Washington. D.C.. 7 January 1982: restrictive alternatives. activities in Vietnam. F. Carlucci. Science 215. 140 (1982): U.S. De- 30.Landmark Communications. Inc. v. Virginia. partment of Defense. Soviet Military Power 435 U.S. 829 (1978). (Washington. D C.. 1981). p. 80. Conclusion 31.Nebraska Press Association v. Stuart. 427 U.S. 8.W. D. Carey. Science 215. 139 (1982). 539, 562 (1976). 9. Arms Export Control Act. 22 U.S. Code, sect. 32.Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616. 630 Whatismoststrikingaboutthe 2778 (1976). (1919) (Justice Holmes dissenting). 10.International Traffic in Arms Regulations. Title 33.H. Jonas. Philosophical Essays (Univ. of Chica Court's method of First Amendment ad- 22, Code Fed. Reg.. pans 121-I28 (February go Press. Chicago. 1974). judication is that it takes into account 1976). 34.United States v. The Progressive. Inc... 467 Specifically. the regulations state that an "rt- F.Supp. 990. 995 (W.D. Wis.). appeal dis- virtually all the commonsense percep- port" occurs "whenever technical data is inter missed. 610 F.2d 819 (7th Cir. 1979). tions that have informed the general poli- aha .. disclosed to foreign nationals in the 35.The injunction issued in the Progressive case United States (including plant visits and partici- was later vacated when a Wisconsin newspaper cy debate on the government's effort to pation in briefing and symposia)" (10. sect. published the relevant information. As a conse- control the export of scientific and tech- 125.03). quence, the decision was never reviewed by a 12.Export Administration Act of 1979. 50 U.S. higher court and its precedential value is uncer- nical knowledge. Indeed, if the Court Code Appendix. sect. 2401-20 (19791. tain. For a useful discussion of the case and its 13.Title 15, Code Fed. Reg.. part 379 (1982). significance. see M. Cheh, George Wash. Law applies its standard analysis to this issue, 14.The Supreme Court has not yet decided whether Rev. 48. 163 tI980). it will not only give due weight to the the First Amendment protects tht speech of 36.G. Kolata. Science 217. 1233 (1982). Amencan citizens in foreign countnes (Haig v. 37.T. Gustafson, Technol. Rev. 85 (No. 2). 34 value of scientific freedom but will also Agee, 453 U.S. 280. 306-310 (1982)1. (1982). examine critically the nature and magni- 15H. Wechsler, Principles. Politics and Funda 38.Export Administration. U.S. Department of mental Law (Harvard Univ. Press, Cambndge. Commerce. 116th Report on U,S. Export Con- tude of the threatened harm to national Mass.. 1961). pp. 3-27. trols (April-September. 1977) Appendix D. p. 16.A. M. Bickel. The Supreme Court and the Idea security. In addition, it will address a 128. of Progress (Yale Univ. Press New Haven. 39.Department of Energy. Fed. Reg. 45. 65152 (1 variety of other considerati ins, such as Conn., 1978). pp. 95-96. October 1980). 17 T. Emerson. A System of Freedom of Expres- 40.E. Mansfield. A. )(omen. M. Schwartz. D. the technical skills of the receiving na- sion (Random House. New York. 1970). pp. 6- Teece. S. Wagner. P. Brach. Technology Trans- tion and the reasonableness of the regu- 7. fer. Productivity and Economic Policy (Norton. 18,Virginia Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Consumer New York. 1982). latory technique. By incorporating each Council. 425 U.S. 748 (1976). 41.This point was demonstrated dunng World War of these factors into a method of adjudi- 19 R Ferguson. Harv. Ca. Rights-Cm Liber- II when Allied scientists worked to develop the ties Law Rev. 16. 519 (1981). atomic bomb before the Nazis. Ste C. P. Snow, cation that formally allocates the burden 20 Cornell Law Rev 64. 639 11979) The Physicists (Little, Brown, Boston, 1981). of proof, the Court's approach provides 21.Ohrahk v. Ohio State Bar Assoc.. 436 U.S. 447, pp. 104-105. 456 11978). 42.In re Primus, 436 U.S. 412 (1978). a well-defined analytical framework for 22L Tnbe. American Constautional Lam (Foun- 43.Central Hudson Gas & Electric Co. v. Public dation Press. Mineola N Y . 1978). Service Commission, 447 U.S 557 (1980) accommodating the claims of scientific 23Office of the Secretary of Defense. Fed. Reg 44House of Representatives bill H.R. 109 (1981). freedom with the legitimate interests of 45. 65 014 11 October 1980). 24.Snepp vUntied States. 444 U S 507 11980) national security. See also Haig v Agee 453 U.S 280 (1981)

selves in the eye when they apply brampow- er to weapons systems, scientists are Jus- tified in doing what is necessary to offset the unmistakable progress of an unpredictable adversary. But what must be added is that scientific responsibility has another dimension, and itis to look squarely at the consequences of violence in the application of scientific knowledge. It has been a very good thing for the integrity of science. and a sign of courage, that some 40 scientists of high standing have It has been said, perhaps too often and too recognition of what is taking place produces gone public with their considered estimates loudly, that science is an objective process a level of discomfort that expresses itself, of the global atmospheric effects and long- one that is value-free. In our time, when sci- within the strictures of science's methodolo- term biological consequences of nuclear ence is being employed most conspicuously gies, in concerted displays of scientific re- war(/). Whether such a weapons exchange as an adjunct of politics and strategic nation- sponsibility. The conscience of science would be small or vast in its scale, they be- al purposes, a vacuum of internal values comes, a step at a time, to life. lieve, the effects on the biosphere would be tends to be invaded by prevailing external Despite admonitions from Rome that be- lasting and literally deadly. In effect. life; values. Not surprisingly, the eventual lieving scientists have the duty to look them- support systems would he cut, and the di- 226

minished surviving populations would have For a few days, the news of potentialconclusion that scientists will swallow. little chance in a darkened and sunless en- biological catastrophe is the stuff of media smong the endless arguments centering vironment. prominence, only to be quickly displaced by 'Jai arms control agreements, no issue is more Some four decades ago in the heat of war the next catastrophe. The society is ex- vexing than that of verifying compliance, es- and its enforced secrecy, scientists prepared hausted and news-numbed. No special ses- pecially as new weapons are promised to the the nuclear weapons that we,exploded sion of the U.N. General Assembly is calledarsenals of both sides. What the cluster of without warning upon civilian populations. to digest and reflect on the appalling mean- scientists concerned with biological effects It says a good deal for the emergence of the ings of the scientists' findings. If alarms have done very well is to nail down, as far as scientific conscience that, in a difficult age have shaken the American and Soviet tacti-scientific method can do it, the probabilities of superpower hatreds and technological cians ostensibly seeking a breakthrough inof consequences of an exchange of nuclear gusto, the present warning is timely, un-nuclear arms control negotiations, itis a weapons on the biosphere. Even allowing for varnished, and stark. Nor is it the first of its well-kept secret. The drift continues, and the the constraints imposed on scientific opinion kind. Health scientists have made clear the world is ablaze with "small" wars and threats in the Soviet Union, it is fair to assume that absurdity of assuming that there would be a of larger ones. What does this signal to con- the same conclusions are held in that quarter. medical care system after a major attack and cerned scientists? For all that is obvious Here, then, is a new basis for dialogue and have been stumping the country to put theabout science as a universal force, as afor an alternative run at restraint. It is a run message across. trusted partner in the works of society and worth making. There remains the question of who is governments, can it be supposed that science REFERENCES listening and how deeply these warningscannot make a difference in the one matter I II P Turco rt al . St tent r 222. 1281 penetrate and adhere to the nation's thought. that transcends all the others? This is not a 2 P ItEhrbeii et al.. and . 1291

budgets. The surprise is the magnitude of the decrease in support of nondefense R&D. This has occurred in the face of rising concern about the international competitiveness of our industries and the need for increasingly innovative U.S. technology. One response to these concerns was passage of the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981; which provided U.S. industry with a 25 percent annual tax credit for incremental R&D expenditures. Partly as a result, industry funding of R&D rose between 1980 and 1984 at about 6 percent per year in constant dollars. U.S. scientists and engineers are generally Figures for fiscal 1983 and 1984 are es- There are fields of effort where contribu- aware that federal funding for R&D for thetimates. However, the opposite trends of tions by industry are small or fragmented and military has increased sharply in recentsupport are obvious. NSF lists 15 non- where federal support of R&D is essential. years. What is less appreciated is that federal defense budget functions that obtain federal These include health (other than drugs), en- tunding for the rest of the nation's R&D support for R&D. Of these, only one, gener- ergy, housing, agriculture, environmental etft;rt has considerably ,Decreased. Using al science, which is primarily basic research, protection, and natural resources. Basic re- words from a classic phrase, R&D funding shows an increase in constant dot' rs be-search, which supplies the fundamental for "guns" is up and R&D funding for "but- tween fiscal 1980 and 1984, the 4 -r in- knowledge on which industrial R&D builds, ter" is down. crease is a modest 7 percent. In P dent also requires federal support, since in- The National Science Foundation com-Reagan's recent budget proposals for R&Ddustry's contribution is slight. pilation (I) of federal R&D funding for fiscal for fiscal 1985, the dominance of funding for Will the pressure for increased military years 1980 through 1984 by budget function, the military continues. R&D ease soon? The answer is almost surely corrected for inflation with official deflators The rapid increase in R&D for the military no, since large increases in budgets for the (fiscal 1984 is set at 100), reveals the follow- is not surprising; it was almost inevitable,military are proposed for the next several ing in billions of constant dollars given the large expansion of militaryyears, and there is no reason to expect the fraction for R&D to decrease. The most likely future is intensified pressure on all other Fiscal year budget Increase fedenbudgets, including those for R&D. Category 1980--I984 What men is to be done to obtain more ade- 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 tek quate federal support for civilian R&D? Three efforts suggest thems,.;ves: develop Total R & D $39 0 539 2 $39 6 $40 4 545 7 17 more persuasive arguments to federal agen- National defense $19.4 $21.7 524 2 526 2 $32 0 65 cies and Congress on the need for more sup- All other R & D $19.6 517.5 515 4 514.2 513.7 30 port for R&D in nonmilitary areas, empha- 227 size the need for more basic research, partic- Space Laboratory and tighter constraints on What is at stake is the future prosperity of ularly in areas that supply the scientific base the burgeoning expenditures for military our nation. for our industries; and urge greater effective- R&D. REFERENCES AND NOTES ness in the federal government's civilian Scientists and engineers have a particular R&D support programs. with less emphasis responsibility to understand these problems 1 Science Resources Studies Highlights. NSI. 83-323. 14 Octotict 1983 on such research spectaculars as the Manned and make their recommendations known.

term security by restricting the communication of ideas and information could be the pact and effectiveness of both our research effort and the transfer of 0--* research into application. This perspective argues. in sum, that secrecy about existing knowledge can never replace the development of new ideas as a means of protecting national security. Those adhering to this view also suggest that openness pays dividends of other kinds. For one thing. U.S. efforts to limit the flow of information by restricting scientific exchanges with the In recent years. U.S. national securitydebate is concern over the loss of mili- Soviet Union inevitably will limit the has come to depend increasingly on lead tary advantage the United States might flow of information from them to us. Not time over its adversaries in areas of high suffer if it does not block the efforts of only does American science benefit from technologythat is. areas in which tech- the Soviet Union and its allies to gain these interactions, butit can also be nological progress is closely related to access to Western science. Some who argued thatforintelligence purposes advances in basic science. Many of these are concerned with national security be- they help gauge accurately the state of technologies (for example, high-speed lieve the speed and seriousness of this Soviet scientific advancement. electronics and computer-based encryp- technology transfer require new policies A third perspective focuses on the tion techniques) have commercial as well and reassessment of current regulations. educational impacts of restrictions on as military applications. This has led The concern here is really twofold. First. access to and dissemination of scientif- some in the past and current administra- by targeting Western research, the War- ic and technological information. Here tions to fear that the open U.S. research saw Pact countries avoid a large part of again there are two separate arguments. community could become a source ofthe massive R & D incestment the Unit- First. those who provide advanced sci- militarily significant technology to the ed States has committed to the develop- entific and technical training point out Warsi., Pact. ment of sophisticated military systems. that it is functionally impossible to sepa- Suc.h concerns were reflected both in Second. the nature of the research pro- rate completely education from research policy proposals end public pronounce- cess in nonclassifiedsettings has activities. Moreover, if the only experiments aimed inpart atthe scientific changed. with the result that universities ence a young scientist or engineer gains community. Public statements in early in particular are now becoming increas- is in the classroom, rather than the labo- 1982 included warnings by senior offi- ingly attractive targets for foreign intelli- ratory, the next generation of American cials in the Department of Defense, the gence efforts. Those sharing this concern investigators will be substantially less Department of Commerce. and the Cen- argue that the imposition of limited con- prepared to maintain the superior levels trtl Intelligence Agency that Soviet mili- :Nils is preferable to classification, which of productivity and achievement that tary intelligence might find easy access would remove such work entire'. from have characterized the U.S. scientific to sensitive information through what the campus. They suggest that, when effort since World War II. one crlled the "soft underbelly" repre- universities choose to accept the pres- But there is another imrortant dimen- sented by the American academic com- ence of defense-related research on cam- sion to the educational perspective. the munity (/). pus, for whatever mix of intellectual and cost to the U.S. academic system of economic motivations, controls must be excluding foreign nationals from sensi- considered part of the price. tive areas of science and technology. Conflicting Perspectives on the Problem A second perspective focuses on the The number of foreigr. students in higher critical importance of maintaining vigor- education in the United States increased There are sharply differing views with- ous, open scientific communication both substantially during the 1970's, at both in our society regarding the extent of within the borders of the United States the undergraduate and graduate levels. technology loss and the best solutions to and across international boundaries. Ac- Among the factors underlying this trend the problem. Some interests speak with a cording to this clew . cc en limited restric- were increased foreign demand and in- louder and more effective voice than tions on the free flow of information others in terms! the formulation of affect feedback. delay the discovery of Administration policy, recognizing that errors and duplication,, hinder cntical %kiwi HWallerstein isspecial assistant for policy and planning in the Office of international there is a good deal of overlap i.. the evaluation of scientific efforts. and, as a Affairs of the National Research Council. Washing- emphasis accorded by each. result, undermine the pace of scientific ton. D C 20418 ;le previously served as principal staff consultant to the Corson Panel on Scientific Clearly. what lies at the heart of public discovery. The price of achieving short- Communication and National Secunty. 232 228

creased recruitment of foreign students After reviewing evidence on the bene- than by preventing dissemination of writ- by U.S. institutions in order to augment fits and costs of control measures, the ten research reports. domestic enrollment (Fig.I). The J.-;tapanel concluded that a national strategy The Corson Panel examined five types are even more striking at the postdoctor-of "security by secrecy" would weaken of control mechanisms: (i) classification. al level (Fig. 2). The postdoctoral sectorAmerican technological capabilities, be- (n) export control regulations. (iii) con- is particularly significant because it is a cause there is no practical way to restrict trols on foreign visitors. (iv) restrictions major source of junior faculty and re-internationalscientificcommunication on government contracts. and v) volun- search talent in many American universi- without also disrupting domestic scien- tary prepublication clearance. Its general ties. tific communication. A national strategy review of these mechanisms led the pan- A fourth major view is that expressed of "security by accomplishment"one el to two broad conclusions: by private industry. Many leaders ofthat emphasizes protectingthe U.S. I) Where controls are deemed neces- U.S. technology-based industries have technology lead by promoting scientific sary, the government should use con- argued that if industries are to adapt toproductivityhas far more to recom- tract restrictions in preference to export rapidly changing business conditions, mend it (3). control regulations. The contract mecha- they must have access to scientific and The panel heard extensive briefings by nism has the advantage of informing a technological information from all parts the intel.ligence community, some at high researcher of his or her obligations in of the world. Beyond the loss of informa- levels of classification. While noting that advance while leaving application in the tion, industrial leaders express concern the available evidence left much to behands of the most technically qualified about other economic impacts resultingdesired, the panel reported that it had government personnel. Export controls, from a lack of openness. including regu- found no case of significant damage to devised for controlling the movement of latory costs, loss of sales, loss of reliabil- security associated with research dis- tangible objects. are ill-suited to the con- ity as a trading partner. and reductions in semination (3, pp. 13 and 41). The panel trol of information flow. the pace of innovation. also added Iwo caveats. First,itob- 2) The government's effort is uncoor- A fifth voice in the debate may be served that the evidence on leakage and dinated and spread too broadly across characterized somewhat broadly as the the associated damage to U.S. security too many diverse technologies to be constitutional and cultural perspective. was still only fragmentary and anecdotal, practicable. An effort spread this thin Many concerned about the continued part because the problem had only cannot be effectively administered. and vitality of the American political system recently been identified (3, p. 14). Sec- itraises unnecessary fears among re- believe it can flourish only in an atmo-ond, it pointed out that Soviet intelli- searchers working in areas with no mili- sphere of openness. First, they point outgence efforts were extensive and that tary relevance. The panel suggested that thatfundamental constitutionalques- universities and other researchsites the government adopt a strategy of build- tions may be raised when the govern-were indeed targeted. It also noted (but ing "tall fences arouad narrow areas": ment seeks to restrict the rights of citi-took no position on) intelligence commu- contract controls. for example,. should zens to speak or to publish. It is argued nity arguments that research facilities be restricted to a few gray areas that that freedom of speech is not just a legalare likely to be more heavily targeted injustifiably cannot be either classified or right, it is essential to the maintenance ofthe future (3. p. 21). completely open. It defined such tech- an informed electorate. Second.itis The panel suggested that the class of nologies as those in which all of four suggested that visits by Soviet and Eastresearch information of greatest poten- criteria apply (3. p. 49). European scientists expose them to thetial concern is not the explicit findings in U.S. culture and political system which. research reports but rather know-how the technology is de% eloping rapidly, and over time. may contribute to political the detailed understanding of equipment the time from basic science to application is short. and social change within the Warsaw use or operational procedures normally the technology has identifiable direct mil- Pact. gained only by direct participation in a itary applications, or itis dual-use and in- research project (3. p. 42). It follows that volves process or proluetion-related tech- protection of sensitive research informa- niques. transfer of the technology would give the Key Findings and Recommendations tion is achieved better by preventing U.S.S R a ygnificant near-term military ad- of the Corson Panel sustained access to research projects :antage. and In spring1982 discussions between representatives of the National Research Council and the DOD led to the establishment of an ad hoc panel of the Com- mittee on Science, Engineering and Pub- lic Policy (COSEPUP), chaired by Cor- nell University preside it- emeritus Dale R. Corson. The panel included scien- Fig I Percentage of foreign tists, former defense and national securi- students in full-time, graduate ty officials, and research administrators science and engineering pro- in industry and universities (2). Its man- grams in doctorate-granting in- date was to examine the evidence of stitutions. 1974 and 1979 (b5) technology leakage and methods for controlling it, and to seek policy measures by which the competing national goals of national defense and intellectual freedom could be accommodated satisfactorily. 2 s 3 229

the United States is the only source of DOD that otherwise would be subject to 7 0 information about the technology, or other release to foreign nationals under the friendly nations that could also he the source n have control systems as secure as ours. terms of the Freedom of Information SO Act. Additional proposals have been cir- The Corson report was released on 30 a:1MM within the DOD to seek broader Ia.30 September 1982. and it was received authority to protect sensitive technical favorably by top Administrationoffi- data produced by other federal agencies 10 cials. university administrators, and oth- (for example. NASA or the Department r-1 er members of the U.S. science policy of Energy) by facilitating their transferto >. community. DOD control. 0 4) A.Presidentialdirective."Safe- O guarding National Security Information" a. The Situation in 1984 (NSDD 84). was issued in March 1983. Fig.2.Percentage of foreign postdoctoral re- That directive would have required both searchers in science and engineering pro- More than 18 months have elapsed government officials and those under grams in doctorate-granting institutions. 1979 (16. p. 21). since the Corson report was issued. contract to the government with access Much of the hope that surrounded its to sensitive compartmented information. release has faded and there have been at which is information classified at levels least four attempts to formulate a new above top secret, to submit for prepubli-been able to use the authority vested in policy: cation clearance anything they write thatexport control legislation to limit the t) An interagency review of the Cor- bears upon national security matters. release of products. processes. and tech- son report's implications has yet to be The directive was withdrawnin Febru-nical data to potentially adversary na- completed. The elfin began with Na- ary 1984 aftersubstantial oppositiontions. The Export Control Act of 1949. tional Security Study Directive 14 82 arose in the Congress ane among the which has been renewed since 1969 as (now renumbered as NSSD 1-83). which general public. the Export Administration Act. required was signed by President Reagan and While the various intra- and inter- the Department of Commerce to prevent issued by then National Security Advi- agency policy studies have been underthe export of goods that might enhance sor William Clark in December 1982. way. a series of incidents have occurred either the economic or military potential The terms of the review have twice been over the past 16 months similar to those of communist countries. The Export Ad- altered, and there have been multiple that provided the original impetus for ministration Act implemented through changes of personnel at the Office of creation of the Corson panel. The princi- the Export Administration Regulations Science and Technology Policy (OSTP), pal distinction between now and thepre- and through a comprehensive listof which is responsible for coordinating a Corson environment is that most of the products and processes known as the major section of the report. In addition incidents relate to the withdrawal ofpa- Commodity Control List. Since 1979, the the study has been conducted at the pers from meetings. rather than the deni- Department of Commerce administra- classified level without the benefit of al or restriction of isas or other restric- tors have also relied for guidance on the outside input. It is not known how the tions. MilitarilyCriticalTe' List, product. reportedly near completion, which is prepared by the DOD and based compares in scope or substance with the on a 1976 report of the Defense Science effort originally requested by the Presi- The Development of Controls Board. commonly called the Bucy report dent. OSTP officials see an advantage in (4). the release of some sort of unclassified Since the early 1940's. t11, federal gov- Another method of controlling the ex- document. but they are unsure as to ernment has added steadily to the means port of security-related data is the Arms either the date of its public availability or by which it can preventor at least Expori Control Act of 1976. This Act is its comprehensiveness. :low- -the loss of militarily sensitivesci- implemented by the Department of State 2) Given the delays in the interagency entific information. For example. the through the International Traffic in Arms policy review. the Department of De-government has the authority, estab- Regulations. These regulations control fense (DOD) has moved to complete an lished through a series of executiveor- the export of military systems. mcluding internal policy review that was begun ders. to impose security classificationon technical data relating to the -design. in 1981. Accordingly, a Steering Com- sensitive research conductee by itsown production. manufacture, repair. over- mittee on Technology Transfer was es- employees or undertaken by private par- haul. processing. engineering, develop- tablished within DOD to focus on con- ties at public expense. The Executive ment. operation. maintenance or recon- tracts. visa cont:ols, emerging technolo- Branch has also been assigned a substan- struction... of implements of war on gies,scientificconferences.publica- tial amount of legislative authorityover the U.S. Munitions List" or "any tech- tions. and rules for exemption to the the years throurl- which it can attempt to nology that advances the state'of the art Freedom of Information Act. The work control all aspe ,s of scientific communi- or establishes a new art in any area of of the Steering Committee and its sub- cation. significant military applicability" (5). panels has now been largely completed The Atomic Energy Act of 1946. for In order to control the movement of and its recommendations are being im- example. prech Jed public dissemination militarily sensitive goods at the interna- plemented. of most of the results of the Manhattan tional level. the Coordinating Committee 3) A provision included in the 1984District Project or subsequent atomic for multinational export controls (Co- Defense Authorization Act permits the research, particularly through a "born Com) was established by informal agree- Secretary of Defense to protect certain secret"provisionthatautomatically ment in 1949. It comprised all the NATO kinds of unclassified technical data in the classifies research on atomic energy at countries except Iceland and Sown. plus possession or under the control of the its creation. The government has also Japan. CoCom has provided a forum for 2 n4 230 the voluntary coordination of trade con- Export controls. The Export Adminis- other hand. modifications to the .echni- trols on exports to the Warsaw Pact tration Act, and the attendant Export cal data regulations under consideration countries. The United States is currently Administration Regulations (EAR). re- for incorporation into the EAR could engaged in efforts to strengthen the ef- mains the principal regulatory instru- significantly alter this situation. If imple- fectiveness of the Co Com mechanism ment for controlling the flow of sensitive mented. they would eliminate the oener- technical data, par'icularly that of a pro- al licensing exemption granted to some prietary nature across our borders. The "scientific and education data." They Ar Update of the Key Issues Export Administration Act came up for would also require a validated lit onse for renewal during the first sessions of the the export of virtually all "critical tech- Evidence on the extent of technology 98th Congress. Bills were passed in both nical data," a new term identified in the leakage. Knowledge about technology Houses early in the second session, with draft wording. which isnot publicly leakage and its effects on national securi- the Senate version tending to be more available. Sinct, the definition of "ex- ty has not changed significantly in the 18 restrictive than that of the House. A port" in this draft includes presentation months since the Corson Panel was conference version of the Export Admin- of papers at symposia where foreigners briefed by the U.S. intelligence commu- istration Act of 1984 is expected before were present. the hiring of a foreign nity (6). In recent months the principal the end of the current session. researcher. and so on. the proposed activity has been the identification of the While the language of the new export rules, if adopted, woula have a signifi- ways in which technology leakage can act has been debated, the Administration cant impact on U.S. scientificinter- occur so that a comprehensive control has proceeded with vigorous efforts to course. effort can be fashioned. No major initia- control unwanted technology transfer. It The Administration has also stepped tive has been undertaken to better char- can be stated that. in general. the De- up its export control enforcement effort, acterizetherelativeimportanceof partment of Commerce presently consid- principally through two channels. The sources. channels. or types of informa- ers scientific communication to be a rela- first, Operation Exodus. is an effort by tion that leaks out or the relative signifi- tively smallalbeit significantaspect the Customs Service since late 1981 to cance of scientific communication within of the overall technology control prob- spot-check high-technology goods being the large picture. The intelligence com- lem. Since 1982 the EAR have not been readied for shipment. It has resulted in munity reports no cases during this peri- invoked to prevent the dissemination of the detainment and seizure of some 2300 od in which loss through the U.S. scien- the results of academic research. On the foreign-bound shipments worth approxi- tific community has led to identifiable damage to national security. However. intelligence officials remain concerned about the small percentage of Soviet Table 1. Distribution restrictions on DOD reports by source. 1979 through 1983 (13). intelligence acquisitions that involve the Classified Limited Public Source Tom! American research community. (9k) (%) (%) Classification controls. There is now DOD laboratories 61.694 12 44 44 better information on the extent to which Universities 23.119 I* 4 95 military research is classified or other- Industry 32.806 21 35 44 wise restricted. As part of the report of Nonprofit 5.609 17 15 68 its subcommittee on publications. the Total 123.228 13 33 54 DOD Steering Committee on National 'Generated at research institutes associated with universittes Security and Technology Transfer determined how publications in federal infer- mation centers were classified or dissem- Table 2. DOD reports withheld from public release. by subjeci (13) inated in terms of their subjeci area or Classified Limned Public Field Tom! source (Tables 1 and 2). (%) (%) The data support the contention that universities are responsible for less sen- Missile technology 2.524 57 32 11 Ordnance 6,740 32 47 21 sitive research than is done in other Military sciences 8.099 38 33 29 settings, no matter what field of technol- Navigation. communication, detection 13.490 40 28 32 ogy is involved. The study also found and countermeasures that all classified reports from universi- Aeronautics 5.082 13 .53 34 Propulsion and fuels 14 ties and approximately 50 percent of the 3.252 48 38 Space technology 905 17 44 39 limited reports from universities were Nuclear science and technology 1,259 24 34 42 generated in off-campus facilities affil- Energy conversion (nonpropulsive) 1 055 3 54 43 iated with the universities. Meanwhile. Electronics and electrical engineering 12,424 3 50 47 through Executive Order 12356. issued Materials 5,643 46 53 Methods and equipment 2.288 3 42 55 1982, inApril the Administration Agriculture 82 44 55 changed the thrust of its classification Mechanical, civil, industrial, and marine 9.284 5 35 60 policy, stating that restrictions are to be engineering imposed in all cases where reasonable Biological and medical sciences 10.093 3: 67 Physics doubt exists about the need for classifi- 12,812 6 25 69 Behavioral and social sciences 10,529 2 20 78 cation. It also expanded the number of Earth sciences and oceanography 4,671 21 78 categories of potentially classifiable in- Atmospheric sciences 3.078 16 83 formation and made it possible to re- Chemistry 4.042 14 86 Astronomy and astrophysics 584 13 classify information previouslymade 87 Mathematics 5,292 5 95 public. 2.0 231

mately $149 million and eventual indict-may be restricted. Because the Visa Bu- Table 3. COMEX recommendations for visit- ments in 221 cases, only 28 of which reau does not track technology transfer ing scientists' programs. 1981 to 1983 (14). involved so-called dual-use technology cases per se, it is not possible to provide Programs 1981 1982 1983 (7). The second effort to enforce controls a quantitative assessment of scientific recommended involved creation of a new post within visits approved, denied, or made condi- For approval 92 56 33 the Department of Commerce, known as tional. However, Table 3 provides an For approval with 225 57 133 the Office of the Deputy Assistant Secre- indication of the trend in advisory rec- modification tary for Export Enforcement, which re- ommendations made between 1981 and For denial 55 35 28 ferred 37 dual-use technology export 1983 by COMEX, the interagency Com- Total 372 148 194 cases to the Justice Department for pros- mittee on Exchanges. This period may ecution in fiscal 1983 (7). This two-track be somewhat anomalous, due to rising approach reflects uncertainty between tensions with the Soviet Union and East the Customs Service of the Treasury Europe over Poland and other matters, Research and Developmenta first-lev- Department and the Export Administra- but the data .eveal (i) a decline in theel appeal structure for resolving differ- tion of the Department of Commercetotal number of cases reviewed, (ii) aences on technical standards, defini- over which agency has lead responsibil- slight decline in the percentage of cases tions, and the dissemination and ex- ity for export enforcement. in which significant concern was ex-change of technical information, includ- The other principal export control pressed, (iii) a decline in the percentage ing appeals of "technologytransfer mechanism is the Arms Export Control of cases recommended for program deni- research cases." Act and the attendant International Traf- al, and (iv) an increase in the percentage With regard to sensitive research un- fic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). Revi- of cases recommended for program mod- dertaken in academic settings, the DOD sion of the ITAR, which has been pend- ification. COMEX recommendations are Steering Committee has made a number ing for more than 2 years, still has not not necessarily adhered to by the State of additional recommendations. First, it been completed, although a draft of the Department, but they prevail in a major- has clarified its policy on review of re- revised regulations is now said to exist. ity of the cases. search papers produced by DOD con- A likely target period for release of a new An interesting aspect of the visa and tractors, distinguished by budget catego- ITAR is mid-to-late 1984. The ITAR is scientific exchange matter involves thery and the nature of the research (Table administered by the State Department on People's Republic of China. The CO- 4). The point of these policies is to give the basis of the Munitions Control List, MEX data reveal that between 11 and 25 the researcher written notice of review which is maintained by the DOD. How- percent of the cases from 1981-1983 in procedures before he or she signs a DOD ever, there appear to be no instances in which significant concern about technol-contract. which the ITAR has been applied to ogy loss was expressed by the committee 'Iwo aspects of Table 4 merit special written or oral scientific communication involved Chinese students or scientists. attention:t,, the 60-day prior review since the release of the Corson report. Burbecause visa and export control requirement for basic research is more Controls on foreign visitors. In May policies towr.d the People's Republic restrictive than recommended by the 1983, after an ii.teragency review, Under have been Iiixralized!bstantiaily, none Cors,n Panel, which called for simulta- Secretary of State William Schneider anof the COMEX recommendations for neous review by the publishers and nounced a new visa policy for handling program denials involved the Chinese. DOD, and (ii) the 90-day prior review cases of individuals susp,-'led of tech- The progr 1ms of some visiting Chinese and right to require changes for sensitive nology acquisition. Schneider essentially were, howe-er, modified. exploratory research or development are reaffirmed th2t the existing visa law can Contract controls. The Corson Panel also far more restrictive than the Corson and should be used to limit the loss ofrecommended that where controls on Panel'srecommendationofsimulta- information ibidined by fore:,;:r /Biter's. unclassified scient;c information are neous review for both basic and applied Moreove, be indicated that action maywarranted, they can best be accom- research. now be taken on a visa solely on the plished by means of a priori contract In addition, the DOD Steering Com- basisif a visitor's potentizi to be a constraints. This mechanism was exam- mittee has recommended the permanent sourc : for technological loss. Therefore, ined by the DOD Steering Committee implementation of a series of six dissem- depending on the nature of tilt risk iden- on National Security and Technology ination-control stamps.already ap- tified, an applicant may be (i) denied a Transfer, and a new policy has emerged proved on an interim bas:s by Secretary visa, (ii) offs _ed a conditional visa, or (iii) on "international transfers of technolo- of Defense Caspar Weinberger, that clar- given an unconditional visa. in cases of gy, goods,services and munitions" ify the standards used in circulating unconditional visas, he r-strictions may be (DOD directive 2040.2) (8). This direc- classified documents producer through imposed either by the relevant depart- tive articulates a number of new mec'ia- DOD contracts (or at government labo- ment or by the Immigration Service ofnisms for establishing standard defini- ratories) and held by the Defense Tech- the Department of usticeoutside oftions of what is militarily sensitive and nical Information Center (DTIC) and the visa processas a condition of en-for resolving appeals of contractually other secondary distributionfacilities try. imposed restrictions. It al.o establishes (9). The State Departmere- principal con- the Panel on International Technology Finally, COMEX is updating an exist- cern is commercial trade visits, with only Transfer, as the highest level appeal ing DTIC database in order to ihform secondary attention paid to those in- mechanismforresolvingdifferences researchers of each other's work and to volved in academic research. Again, de- within the DOD on technology transfer determine quickly the number and type pending on the assessment of the risk policy, and it creates two subpanels: (i) of DOD contracts in force on a given involved, a sponsor may be asked toExport Control Policya first-level ap-university campus plus their level of modify a visitor's program, or alterna- peal structure for resolving differences classification or restriction. tivel:,,the visitor's freedom to travel on export control policy matters, and (ii) Voluntary prepublication review. An 232

agreement for voluntary submittal of pa-and (iv) continuing efforts are under waythe many parts of the technology transfer pers for simultaneous review by the Na-within the Coordinating Committee forproblem. There is a danger that the lack tional Security Agency (NSA) and pro- multinational export controls to identifyof effective government-wide coordina fessionaljournals, developed by the Pub- additional technologies that are to be Lion will undermine the perceived legiti- lic Cryptography Study Group of theproscribed or restricted for export tomacy of government programs among American Council on Education and the Warsaw Pact countries. the research community. NSA, appears to be working in a manner 3) There is little progress toward an that is reasonably satisfactory to all par- objective understanding of the technolo- ties. The NSA reports that 200 papers Conclusions gy leakage problem and the effects of have been submitted for review since control measures. This research failed to completion of the agreement. Of this This review of the current status of demonstrate any improvement in knowl- total, nine papers have ben challenged, scientific communication and national edge about the actual effectiveness or six have been modified, and three havesecurity suggests three major conclu-adverse effects of control on scientific been withdrawn. Pursuant to the agree- sions. communication. ment,Z.six-member appeals committee I) The government has not found it One feature that makes the policy di- has been established, consisting of fourpossible to act in a manner compatible lemma in this area particularly difficult is academic researchers and two former with the major principles set forth in the that the costs of being wrong, which are NSA officials. To date, there have been Corson report. Although the DOD ap-potentially great, accrue only after a no appeals of the NSA review decisions pears to be implementing the panel'sdelay and in ways that are difficult to (20). recommendation that the best form of measure accurately in the short term. If Implementation of gray area criteria. control is the research-funding contract, U.S. controls on scientific communica- Perhaps the most important reco---a-both the stringency and the reach oftionare too hot,the extensive Soviet dation of the Corson Panel concernedrestrictions either proposed or in force intelligence effort may obtain at relative- the need to build tall fences around nar-go considerably beyond the panel's rec-ly low cost information not otherwise rowly circumscribed technologies thatommendation. Moreover, if the draftaccessible. tven then, however, it may could be identified as meeting the fourwording for new technical data regula-be difficult to determine precisely how principal criteria set forth in the report. tions were incorporated into the EAR, the transferred data have contributed to Pending the public release of the inter-then export controls could come to sup- the Soviet military posture. On the other agency NSSD report, which was coordi- plant DOD-imposed contractual restric- hand, excessively tight controls may nated by the OSTP, it is impossible totions as the principal mode of control have effects that, while subtle and indi- determine with certainty the extent tocontrary to recommendations of the Cor- rect, are also pervasive. Penaps the which these recommendations have been son Panel. largest risk in this regard is the long-term adopted as official policy. 2) The continuing lack of effective changes that controls are likely to cause There are indications, however, thatgovernment-wide coordination raises im- in the demographic distribution of scien- the government is moving toward theportantrisks,including(i)disparate tists and engineers among the various adoption of a broader approach than wasagency policies that do not adequately disciplineand subfields. recommended by the Corson report. balance national goals, (ii) wasteful allo- The threatened or actual government Consider the following factors: (i) therecation of national resources among pro-intervention has already had an impact has been little progress in streamlininggrams of varying effectiveness, and (iii) on the number of papers put forward for the Militarily Critical Technologies List;confusion and skepticism in the researchpublication or presentation at confer (ii) a new, unclassified Militarily Signifi-commt, :ty. Given the successive delays ences incertain fields (/2). If thepresent cant Emerging Technologies Awarenessin the National Security Council review, climate of uncertainty continues, we List (METAL) is being created that will policy initiative has reverted back to themay witness an increasing migration of identify for purposes of monitoring cer-individual agencies (most notably DOD), thebest mindsaway from those areas of tain frontier technologies just appeanngwhose missions typically reflect only one science and engineering where controls on the horizon but not yet embodiedamong the many relevant national objec- are (or may be) imposedthe very fields ( / /); (iii) the definition of "threat assess- tives. Once put into place, these uncoor- where new talent is most critical to U.S. ment factors" proposed to the DODdinated initiatives will be difficult to ad- technological lead time. Furthermore, if Steering Committee on National Securi-just. The government's lack of centralthe United States acts to restrict further ty and Technology Transfer for identify-coordination also represents a missed the flow of people and ideas in frontier ing militarily significant emerging tech-opportunity to set reasonable prioritiesareas of science and technology, other nologies are substantially more compre- among the many offices (OSTP counted advanced industrialized countries may hensive than the Corson Panel criteria,44 of them) responsible for addressingfind it necessary to do the same. In this

Table 4. Review policy for research papers produced by DOD contractors (/5). - -- Budget items Nonsensitive research Sensitive research

Basic research* Simultaneous submittal to contract officer Manuscript must be submitted to contract officer 60 and to publisher. DOD has no right to days prior to submittal to publisher. Researcher require changes or to restrict publication. retains option of whether or not to publish. Exploratory research Same rules as for basic research. Manuscripts must be submitted to contract officer 90 and advanced tech- days prior to submittal to publisher. DOD retains nological developmentf the right either to require changes before allowing publication or to block publication outright. _ DOD budget category 6.1. t DOD budget categories 6.2 and 6.3 277 233 respect, to the extent that U.S. national U.S. Technology. An Analysis of Export Con- "Report to the DOD steering committee on trol of U.S. Technology-A DOD Perspective national security and technology transfer." De° security continues to rely on technologi- (U.S. Department of Defense. Office of the partment of Defense. Washington. D.C.. 29 De- cal superiority, by disrupting the invisi- Director of Defense Research and Engineenng. cember 1983. Government Printing Office. Washington. D.0 . 12.The Fusion Technology Division of the Ameri- ble colleges, the channels of informal 1976). can Vacuum Society reports the following statis- 5. International Traffic in Arms Regulations. sec- tics on papers presented at its meetings: 78 communication that speed the pace of tion 125.101. papers in 1981. 58 papers in 1982. and 35 papers innovation and scientific discovery, the 6. This assessment is based on bnefings at the Top in 1983: Office of Public Affairs, Amencan Phys- Secret level of classification. which the author ical Societypersonal communication, 29 De- nation may risk sacrificing its best hope receivedfrom theinteragency Technology cember 1983. for continued long-term security in the TransferIntelligence Committee (composed 13.Steering Committee on National Security and principally of representatives from the Central Technology Transfer. "Report of the subcom- belief that controls are necessary to Intelligence Agency. Defense Intelligence Agen- mittee on publications." Department of De maintain short-term strategic advantage. cy. and Federal Bureau of Investigation) and the fense, Washington. 9 November 1983, pp National Security Agency, in January 1984. 23 and 24. 7. J. Zonderman. "Policing high-tech exports." 14.From data provided by the interagency Commit- References and Notes New York Times Sunday Magazine. 27 Novem- tee on Exchanges. Technology Transfer Intelli- ber 1983. p. 103. gence Committee. 5 January 1984. I. B. R. Inman, -National security and technical 8 C. W. Weinberger. "International transfers of 15.Office of Research and Laboratory Manage- information." paper presented at the Annual technology. goods. services. and munitions." ment. Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for Meeting of the A AAS. Washington. D C.. 7 DOD directive 2040.2. 29 December 1983. Research and Engineenng, personal communi- January 1982: L. J. Brady. "Taking hack the 9. The range of classifications is as follows: (i) cation, 20 December 1983. rope Technology transfer and U.S. secunty." release only on approval of originator. (ii) re- 16.Division of Science Resource Studies. Foreign statement before the Association of Former lease within DOD only: (iii) release to DOD and Participant, in U.S. Science and Engineering Intelligence Officers. 29 March 1982; F Car- DOD contractors (who must apply for formal Higher Education and Labor Markets (NSF -81- lucci. Sc ience 215. 140 (19821. approval) only: (iv) release to U.S. government 316, National Science Foundation, Washington, 2. The members of the Panel on Scientific Commu- only: (v) release to U.S government and U.S. D.C.. 1981). p. 5. nication and National Secunty were Dale R government contractors only. and (vi) release to 17.I thank Lawrence E. McCray for his thoughtful Corson (chairman). Richard C. Atkinson. John the general public. This system will replace the contnbutions to this article, and also for their M. Deutch. Robert H. Dicke. Edward L. Gin- previous arrangement that allowed only two helpful comments Dale R. Corson. Rosemary ton. Mary L. Good. Norman Hackerman. James options: public release or U.S. government Chalk. Ruth L. Greenstein, Allan R. Hoffman. R. Killian. Franklin Lindsay. Richard A. Me- only. John M. Logdson, Richard A. Meserve, Robert serve. Wolfgang K. H Panofsky. William J. 10 Office of Policy. National Secunty Agency. per- L. Park, Victor Rabinowitch, Harold C. Relyea, Perry. Samuel C. Phillips. Alexander Rich. John sonal communication. 15 March 1984. Walter A. Rosenblith, Eugene B. Skolnikoff. D. Roberts. Harold T. Shapiro. Charles P. Shch- 11. Creation of METAL was recommended by the and Philip M. Smith. The views expressed are ter. Michael I. Sovern, and Elmer B. Staats. subcommittee on the monitoring of emerging those of the author and do not represent a 3 Committee on Science. Engineenng. and Public technologies of the DOD Steering Committee on deliberative process of or a position taken by the Policy. National Academy of Sciences. National National Security and Technology Transfer. National Academies of Sciences or Engineering. Academy of Engineenng. Institute of Medicine. The subcommittee urged the establishment of an the Institute of Medicine, or the National Re- Scientific Communication and. Worm! Securi- unclassified watchlist to which a technology search Council. ty (National Academy Press. Washington. D.C.. might be assigned during the period that it was 1982). p. 45. still at the stage of bask research. Subcommit- 4. Defense Science Board Task Force on Export of tee on monitorng of emerging technologies.

Department of Defense representatives in the DOD-University Forum over the past 2 years. (The forum participants are drawn about equally from the academic and defense communities.) To put the matter in perspective, about 80 percent of R&D on university campuses sponsored by DOD falls in the category of basic research. The discussions have therefore focused on the other 20 percent, only a very small fraction of which has been of security concern. The forum discussions have contributed greatly in formulating new policy that will provide for completely unrestricted publica- The conflicting imperatives of national enough to ask the right questions, regardless tion (without delay) of all unclassified fun- security and open scientific communication of nationality. All participants benefit in the damental research carried out in any labora- hay . bait the subject of a vigorous and testing of new scientific hypotheses and the tory (university or industrial). Henceforth, sometimes emotional national debate. Dif- exchange of scientific information. Nor can consistent with U.S. statutes, the primary fering priorities have led to incompatible the flow of ideas be stopped at national bor- way to restrict the publication of contracted conclusions. In times of peace and security, ders. On the other hand, know-how is a pre- fundamental research will be to classify it. the maximum freedom of speech and com- cious commodity leading to the commercial (The rules for classification are well under- munication has served this nation well, in o: military products that determine the for- stood. The DOD currently has no classifed times of great peril, national security con- tunes of nations in peace and in war. Yet basic research on university campuses, and siderations have temporarily displaced those sometimes it is hard to tell where scientific this situation is expected to continue. The precious freedoms. In this period of world knowledge leaves off and engineering know- government's power to classify is not new, it history when nations in competition may win how begins. nas not been and will not be invoked on uni- or lose by their technologies, both in combat The potential foi unintentional disclosure versity campuses except in the rarest of cir- and in commerce, how should we order our of national security information through the cumstances involving special reasons of priorities regarding national security and publication of basic research results is vir- national impr.ri, and with complete prior scientific communications? tually nonexistent, and the benefits of such agreement of the university involved.) We must begin by recognizing the distinc- an open publications policy far outweigh the The quickest way to disseminate research tion between science and technology, be- risks. The treatment of university R&D more results is through meetings, conferences, and tween knowledge and know-how. Nature applied in nature has been the subject of in- symposiums, often sponsored by scientific yields her secrets to anyone imaginative tensive discussions between university and and engineering societies Many meetings 2 :48 234 held in the United States are international,to lighten u`ie burden of mutual defense. I cational material is vital for progress in sci- and it is important to keep them so. For gov-also believe that no unclassified technicalence and engineering. Ultimately the rela- ernment sponsored or cosponsored technical conference requiring an invitation should ex-tionships among academia, government, and conferences, admission should likewise not clude individuals from allied nations whoindustry will depend on the trust and under- depend on nationality but only on securitycan contribute to the success of the con-standing among the people who work considerationsit is in the best interests ofference. together and depend on one another. all allied countries to share their technologies The freedom to publish scientific and edu-

2S9 In addressing problems posed by the changing roles of scientists in influences of personal gain will surely raise new questions of respon- contemporary society, the preceding chapters develop key princi- sibility and accountability in the conduct of science: What criteria ples of scientific freedom and responsibility. In many cases, these should be used in directing public subsidies, in the form of govern- principles derived from broader discussions of the nature of citizen- ment funds, tax credits, and relaxed regulations, toward selected ship, the role of the expert in a democracy, and the duty of experts to areas of research and development? What standards of accountability warn society when unintended consequences of individual actions should guide future government investments in basic research? How threaten others. As the possible risks associated with new scientific will the basic values traditionally associated with scientific research, developments became more apparent, leaders from the scientific such as the sharing of research data, freedom of travel and com- community and other responsible officials sought ways to diminish munication, and so on, be affected by an increasingly competitive potential dangers while at the same time providing the benefits of new global economy? research discoveries to the larger society. The framework of environ- In the 1960s and 1970s, scientists began to incorporate principles mental laws and regulations that evolved in the 1970s is built upon of informed consent, environmental protection, and recently many of these earlier discussions about the nature of risk and the animal rights into their research policies and procedures. What new manner in which it should be allocated throughout society as a whole. concerns will shape the conduct of research in the next decades? Will What issues will influence the objectives and practice of science in the increasingly competitive nature of scientific research weaken the the years to come? The status of the research university and other professional norms that have shaped traditional research practices? If research centers as emerging sources of economic and political so, what new standards will replace them? advantage will certainly be a dominant factor in future discussions Informed reflection on these and related issues requires the about the role and purpose of science in society. If the frontiers of accumulation of much experiente with the changing forms of modern discovery are seen as frontiers of profit and power as well as of science. If history is a reliable guide, the ethical problems of the intellectual excitement, vigorous efforts to direct scientific talent and future will build upon those of the past. It is hoped that the insights other research resources towards private Interests can be expected. and perspectives offered in this volume will assist those who struggle The privatization of science may, for example, help to promote the with future dilemmas about the meaning of rights and duties in rapid development of new sources of energy, food production, and science. RC medical advances. At the same time, concerns about the corrupting

2 -1 0 In the past four decades, the American Association for the society in each decade. In the late 1940s, AAAS concerns were Advancement of Science has organized four separate committees provoked by security restrictions and secrecy in the aftermath of to explore issues related to the rights and duties of scientists and to World War IL In the 1950s, in the wake ofSputnikand a new scientific freedom and responsibility. These four committees in- resurgence of public interest in the contributions of science to war and cluded the Special AA S Committee on Civil Liberties for Scien- peace, scientists sought to develop an appropriate place for their tists, appointed in 1948 and chaired by Maurice B. Visscher; the professional skills and expertise in the management of public affairs. AAAS Interim Committee on the Social Aspects of Science, formed In 1960, with the formation of the Committee on Science in the in 1955 and chaired by Ward Pigman; the 1960 AAAS Committee on Promotion of Human Welfare, AAAS addressed the disparity be- Science in the Promotion of Human Welfare, chaired by Barry tween military and civilian research in science and technology and the Commoner; and the ad hoc AAAS Committee on Scientific Freedom problems of environmental and urban pollution. Finally, in 1975 in and Responsibility, organized in 1970 and chaired by Allen Astin. cooperation with its affiliated societies, the Association sought to This ad hoc committee was succeeded in 1975 by a standing AAAS develop broad principles of scientific freedom and responsibility to Committee on Scientific Freedom and Responsibility,which con- protect and assist "whistle-blowers" scientists and engineers who tinues to sponsor programs and activities on behalf of the Associa- were punished as a result of actions intended to foster the public's tion. interest. Each of these four committees prepared a written report that was These four reports provide a unique historical record of thechang- published inScience.In some cases a committee's report might also ingdimensions of the social contract between science, technology, be published as a separate document by the Association, as in the case and society. As such, they provide a window on emerging areas of of the 50-page report,Scientific Freedom and Responsibility,pre- consensus defining the broad principles of social responsibility, pared by John T. Edsall in 1975. autonomy, and integrity in science that shape professional conduct in The AAAS committee reports provide a valuable analysis of issues modern times. RC that shaped the relationship between science and technology and

241 238

of scientists who have access to "restricted" or "classified" data. Neither of these agencies furnishes the affected scientist any statement of the reasoning underlying a conclusion which is adverse to him; neither one sets forth charges in a precisely formulated fashion; neither one requires that testimony used against an individual be made known to him, or that even casual and nonofficial informants De identified and produced for examination; neither one provides for the making of specific findings of fact; neitner one undertakes to record and publish its opinions in a way which makes possible any public On December 30, 1947 the AAAS Council Conclusions understanding or analysis of tile de- passed a resolution instructing the President terminations made. of the Association to appoint a Special Com- I In some respects the procedures of the mittee on Civil Liberties for Scientists. Secrecy is damaging to both science andAtomic Energy Commission are more fully Maurice B. Visscher was named chairman, democracy. In both, progress and the detec-elaborated than those of the National Mili- and with Philip Bard, Robert E. Cushman, tion of error depend upon open discussiontary Establishment, though the military Richard L. Meier, and James R. Newman as and free interchange of ideas among widelyclearance of the latter may affect literally members, and Walter Gellhorn as consul- divergent and widely separated groups. millions of employees of private industry en- tant, the Committee completed its in- Yet today, in the United States, we havegaged in the planning of production of arti- vestigations and submitted a 77-page report within the body of science large regions ofcles for military use. A military determina- of findings and recommendations in Decem- secrecy. We endorse the statement of thetion that clearance should notbegranted a ber 1948. The full text was referred to the President's Scientific Research Board,civilian scientist is subject to appeal to the Council, which voted by an overwhelming which in its 1947 Report on Science andIr 4'.trial Employment Review Board majority to publicize the findings, and it isPublic Policy said: "Strict military security(11,t./3), composed of Army, Navy, and Air planned ultimately to make the complete re-in the narrow sense is not entirely consistentForce officers. Proceedings of the IERB are port available at cost to thoseewho want ac- with the broader requirements of nationalthemselves "classified," which means that cess to it. Announcment will be made in Sci- security. To be secure as a Nation we musteven the immediately affected employee is ence when Maurice B. Visscher and E.0 maintain a climate conducive to the full forbidden to discuss them, keep notes about Stakman have concluded editorial revisions flowering of free inquiry. However impor-the handling of his own case, or possess a and the report is ready for distribution. tant secrecy about military weapons may be, copy of the record of the hearing. Despite the Meanwhile, by vote of the Executive Com- the fundamental discoveries of researchersfact that its decisions have a drastically im- mittee at its meeting July 7, the conclusions must circulate freely to have full beneficial portant impact upon the lives and careers of and recommendations are published here-effect....Security regulations, therefore,civilians entirely outside the public service, with. should be applied only when strictly neces-the tribunal is exclusively military in its There is at present a tendency in public sary and then limited to specific instruments,composition and there is no opportunity for thinking to relate scientific activity almost machines or processes. They should not at-review of its judgments by an appellate body wholly to military activity, exposing scien-tempt to cover basic principles of fun-differently constituted. Such subjection of tists more than most occupational groups to damental knowledge." the destinies of civilians to military tribunals sustained and stringent limitations upon their is contrary to national tradition. Quite apart II professional freedom. Fearful lest these from procedural inadequacies, the present limitations exceed justifiable bounds, No matter how the area of secrecy may beorganization for deciding security clearance jeopardize the national welfare, and infringe delimited, there will undoubtedly remaincases is open to basic criticism. the rights of scientists, the Americansome matters of scientific cognizance N.,:11 The Atomic Energy Commission has re- Association for the Advancement of S:i-should be kept confidential. So Ion, ascently manifested a tendency to require ence, in December 1947, created a Specialnational policy dictates that secrecy besecurity clearance not only for those scien- Committee on the Civil Liberties of Scien- observed, the reliability of persons to whom tists who themselves have access to re- tists. these matters are entrusted must be assured;stricted data, but also for their fellow scien- The present report embodies its con-hence inquiries into the character and atti-tists with whom they may have personal conclusions and recommendatio.:5 with respect tudes of these persons are warranted. tact. This is graver in its implications than to three main areas: If national as well as individual interestseven the serious procedtual and administra- 1. Restrictions on research and scientific are to be protected, however, improvementstive imperfections already noted. At information; must be achieved in the policies and pro-Brookhaven National Laboratory, for ex- 2. Measures to assure the personal cedures of our present security clearanceample, where only perhaps one-tenth of the reliability of scientists ha, ing accessprograms as they affect scientists who will scientific personnel works wiihin the area of to confidential data; be entrusted with classified information. secrecy, all scientists must be cleared as a 3. Inquiries relating to the "loyalty" of The Atomic Energy Commission and thecondition of employment. This apparently scientific workers in federal employ- National Military Establishment are the chiefreflects a yielding to uninformed or sensa- ment. agencies concerned with the trustworthiness tionalist legislators and others who tend to ex-

242 239 aggerate the problem of "keeping our atomic assure "complete and unswerving loyalty to present loyalty program. secrets." The effect of the excessive pre- the United States" on the part of all those Even if the Loyalty Order were to be con- cautions is to discourage participation in im- who are in its service. tinued without revision of its underlying portant research activities closely libiked to No one doubts the importance of faithful philosophy, important changes in adminis- the nation's well-being. Scientists are in-discharge of duty by public officials. No one trative methods are urgently needed. The creasingly reluctant to commit their personal questions the propriety of the government'spresent loyalty boards discharge simulta- and professional reputations to those who demanding that its employees be loyal to neously the functions of advocacy and have brought frivolous charges against re- their jobs and to the democratic institutions adjudication. The content of the charges they spected colleagues. Moreover, the delays they serve. The Loyalty Order is, however, issue and the conduct of the proceedings and expense often involved in obtaining basically objectionable because it seeks toover which they preside do not assure that security clearance deter qualified persons deterrn;ne the employee's loyalty by inquir- the facts and their implications will be fully from entering the atomic energy program. ing into his supposed thoughts and attitudes, explored. The organizations with which an So far as disclosures of evidence reveal, which are established in large part by imput- employee may be identified are finally and the problem of faithless scientific personnel ing to him the beliefs of his associates. conclusively characterized by the Attorney in this country appears to be markedly less If the Loyalty Order is to be retained, a General without either the employee's or the grave than the public has been led to sup- drastic revision is essential. Instead of focus-organization's having any opportunity what- pose. Moreover, informed scientists are in ing on an employee's associations, it should soever to establish that the Attorney General broad agreement that restricted data cannot focus on his behavior in overt acts. Legisla- tts not fully informed. These and other probe readily transmitted to unauthorized per- tion already on the statute book. amply procedural deficiencies can be corrected readily. sons. In the circumstances which exist rather tects the federal service against retention ofSo long as they remain, they accentuate the than those which are fancied to exist, theemployees who advocate overthrow of the possibility of error in the loyalty program. stringent application of personnel security government. The fundamental shortcomings in the clearance should be limited to smaller num- Insofar as the Loyalty Order purports to Loyalty Order, however, are not procedural. bers of scientists rather than extended to ever deal with such matters as espionage, sabo- Rather, they are to be found in the very con- larger groups. If nothing is done to reversetage, and disregard of instruc Sons, itis ceptions which the Order expresses. Refine- the present trend to require security clear- wholly superfluous, since conduct of that ment of administrative methods and gentility ance of scientists who do not have or desire character is not only criminal but is also fully of official behavior are important, to be sure. to have access to restricted data, it is likely subject to administrative disciplinary action But they are not basic. Until the Loyalty that many of the most penetrating and origi- under existing law and regulations. The fail- Order deals with the way employees act, nal scientific minds will be turned to pursuits ure to confine the Loyalty Order to matters rather than with the way they supposedly unrelated to further development of the of objective proof has engendered a feeling think, we shall inhibit the freedom and en- atomic energy program. Work in that field of insecurity in public employment and may courage the insecurity of our public servants. wi11 be shunned by men of ability and pride be expected to lessen the vigorous in- The cost will in the end be borne not by the if they are constantly treated as objects oftellectual independence which is a prime employees who are deprived of their normal suspicion and possible calumny. condition of sound scientific work as it is of freedom to believe and behave as they wish an imaginative civil service. "Experimenta- within the limits law has set. It will be bome III tion there may be in many things of deep by the nation as a whole. Executive Order No. 9835 provides that concern," Judge Cardozo once wrote, "but As President Truman recently asserted, no person shall be employed in a federal post not in setting boundaries to thought, for "Continuous research by our best scientists is if he is bel-,ed to be disloyal to the govern- thought freely communicated is the in- the key to American leadership and true ment of the United States. This Loyalty dispensable. ondition of intelligent ex- national security. This work may be made Order does not supplant existing provisions perimentation, the one test of its validity." impossible by the creation of an atmosphere for summary removal of employees onUnless there is elimination of the Order's in which no man feels safe against the public security grounds. Entirely without reference present emphasis on attitude rather than con- airing of unfounded rumors, gossip, and to security consideration, the Order seeks to duct, the nation will suffer heavily from the vilification."

that there is an impending crisis in the relationships between science and American society. This crisis is being generated by a basic disparity. At a time when decisive economic, political, and social processes have become profoundly dependent on science, the discipline has failed to attain its appropriate place in the management of public affairs. The committee believes that this question

Members of the commotee are Ward Pigman, associate The Council of the American Association has made a preliminary study of the present professor of biochemistry, University of Alabama Medi- cal Center, chairman, Barry Commoner, professor of for the Advancement of Science, at its 1955 state of science in the United States and its botany, Washington University, Gabriel Lasker, associ meeting, resolved to establish an "Interim relation to social forces and issues. The com- at: professor of anatomy, Wayne State University, mittee found that even a cursory examination Chauncey D Leake, professor of pharmacology, Ohio Committee on the Social Aspects of Sci- State University; Benjamin H. Williams, Industrial Col. ence." During the past year this committee of this question leads to a serious conclusion: lege of the Armed Forces. OAr) 240

demands the most urgent attention of the advance to a process of large practical im- into applied research and development rather AAAS and of scientists generally. The pr- pact upon society: antibiotics, synthetic pol- than into basic science. In industrial re- esent interim report is not intended as a com- ymers, nuclear energy, transistor elec- search, the ratio is about 97/3; in univer- plete consideration of the many interrelated tronics, microwave techniques, electronic sities, about 50/50; in federal agencies (in- problems encompassed by the area which the computers. The greatly narrowed gap be- cluding support for research done else- committee has studied. Rather, the report tween laboratory and factory results from a where), about 90/10. represents a sampling of some of the issues distinctively new role of research in in- 2) Support is heavily slanted toward phys- which the committee has found to serve asdustry. Scientific investigations were pre- ical sciences. In 1954, federal research sup- useful points of departure in developing an viously regarded by industry as a kind ofport was divided as follows: physical scien- analysis of the situation. Because of the im- exotic garden to be cultivated in the hope ofces, 87 percent; biological sciences, 11 per- portance of this matter, the committee be- producing an occasional rare fruit. In con- cent; social sciences, 2 percent. Industrial lieves that any decision on the manner in trast, research has now become a deliberate research is at least as heavily weighted in this which the AAAS can best deal with it should instrument of industrial development; direction. be based on extended and broadly conducted scientific investigations are consciously 3) At present a very large part of our total discussion among natural and social scien- undertaken as a means of achieving desired research activities are for military purposes. tists and other interested persons. The report economic gains or, as in several notable in- Of the estimated federal expenditures for re- which follows is intended as one means of dustrial laboratories, for the purpose of con- search in 1957 ($2.5 billion), about 84 per- initiating this discussion. tributing to our fund of basic scientific cent is earmarked for matters related to Such an undertaking comes at an op- knowledge. national security. portune time. We are at the start of a period Recent advances in science have also cre- 4) Colleges and universities, which are the in which science holds the promise of mak- ated completely new industries. Four major site of much of our basic research activities, ing unprecedented improvements in the con- industrieschemical, electronic, nuclear have become dependent on federal funds for dition of human life. Any action taken now energy, and pharmaceuticalrepresent di- the greater portion of their research support to assist the orderly growth and beneficial rect extensions of laboratory experience to (60 to 70 percent in 1954). use of science will be of lasting significance. an industrial scale. This type of direct Some of the effects of these factors upon transformation of scientific experience to in- the character t',; scientific research are dis- dustrial operation is probably unique in hu- cussed in the section on "Intemal situation of man history. Earlier industrial developments science." New Scientific Revolution were based more on empirical experience Public interest in science. There are in- than on laboratory science. dications that the public interest in science is A cursory examination shows that society not commensurate with the important role of has become far more dependent on science science in society. than ever before for the following reasons. Social Position of Science 1) Shortage of scientific personnel: We Accelerated growth of scientific activity. face a major crisis with respect to present The volume of scientific research and de- Science is but one sector of our cultureIt and future shortages of scientific personnel. velopment conducted in this country has is one of the institutions of society, and to a In effect, this means that the social environ- been increasing at an astonishing rateIn considerable degree society itself governs ment in the United States does not elicit 1930, expenditures for .cience were es- the development of science. In the present maximum interest in science on the part of timated at $166 million, ia 1953, the amount situation, social forces influence the de- thme individuals who have the capability of was more than $5 billion. Albwing for thevelopment of science in the following key doing scientific work, or that our social or- change in the value of the dollar, this ways. ganization does not permit them to receive represents approximately a I5-fold increase Social demand for technologic advances. the necessary training. This problem is in research expenditures over the 23-year pe- From the evidence already cited itis clear closely connected with the more general riod. The number of active scientists in the that there is a strong social demand for at question of the present state of public educa- United States in 1930 was 46,000, the pres- least sor.ie kinds of scientific progress The tion in the United States. The content of pub- ent number is probably about 250,000 All fact that industry has made unprecedented lic education has been subjected to a good estimates of future needs for scientific re- investments in research is practical evidence deal of criticism recently, especially with research and personnel indicate that this that this type of scientific work is seen as a gard to science and mathematics. Many sci- growth will continue at an accelerated pace. desirable activity by industrial managers. entists feel that an official state requirement This rate of growth sets scientific activity Government scientific activity, which per- for graduation from high school which calls apart as the second most rapidly expanding haps reflects a wider range of social forces, for 1 year of "general" mathematics and for I sector of our social structure, military activi- has also been very intense in the past 20 year of "general" science cannot be regarded ties being first. years. Accelerated support for scientific re- as proper recognition of the importance of Increased use of scientific knowledge. It is search is evident from the increased scale of science. characteristic of the present cry that the pre- military research, the growing activities of 2) Attitudes toward scientific work. To viously formidable gap between scientific the National Science Foundation, the greatly some degree the foregoing difficulties reflect knowledge and its application to practical increased support for medical research by the a broader problemthat is, a traditional dis- problems has become considerably reduced. National Institutes of Health, and the in- regard for abstract thinking. More than a It is now commonplace that calculations creasing share of philanthropic funds fromcentury ago De Tocqueville observed based on physical theory move quickly from private agencies now devoted to research on "Hardly anyone in the United States devotes the scientist's laboratory across the engi-health and social problems. The following himself to the theoretical and abstract portion neer's drafting board and on to actual in- generalizations may be made concerning the of human knowledge." He said that the im- dustrial production. Since 1940 we have ex- distribution of the enhanced research support mediately practical aspects of life were, perienced a series of classic examples of now enjoyed by American science. however, fully appreciated. The same almost immediate conversion of a scientific I) The major part of research support goes generalization appears to be true today. So- 244 241 called "practical" men of public affairs and dustrial management, military es- highly creative research of the type that leads business frequently disregard the advice of tablishments, mewed: agencies) have under- to major advances in our knowledge of na- scientists and prefer instead to rely on "com- taken to encourage, and pay fer. scientific ture. They point out that our present under- mon sense," but the latter is often construed research of a sort which seems to promise standing of the structur. of atoms and mole- to mean what Einstein has called "a deposit information that might be ustful to their own cules and of the behavior of living cells goes of prejudices laid down in the mind prior to specific purposes. This disproportionate back to great illuminating propositions that the age of 18." This problem, particularly as growth of the physical sciences as compared are 25 years or more old. it relates to a lack of interest in scientific with biological and social sciences to some Difficulties in scientific communication. careers, has attracted considerable attention degree reflects the interests and superior New information is the major goal of of late. Recent surveys indicate that the financial resources of the industrial and mili- scientific research, and communication of general attitude exemplified by popular tary agencies that support science. information is vital for all scientific prog- epithets such as "eggheads" and "longhairs" The effects of this unbalanced develop- ress. However, the rapid, rather disordered is well rooted in the opinions of young ment are already being felt. Generally speak- growth of science has placed a severe strain people. ing, we sometimes find ourselves embarking on the channels of scientific communication. 3) Science in the public press and other upon new ventures, based on advances in 1) Communication among the divisions of media: By all standards, science receives an chemistry and physics, before we are ade- science. The problem of adequate dissemina- unduly small share of the budget of news- quately informed about their consequences tion of the results of current research has paper space or broadcasting time. The num- on life or on social processes. Some of the become a matter of great concern. The ber of books and magazines devoted to dis- resultant difficulties which we have already growth of our research establishment and the seminating public information about science made for ourselves are described in the sec- resulting increase in the numbers of scientif- is correspondingly small The immediate tion on "Major social issues of scientific ori- ic communications have made the problem reasons for this state of affairs arc manifold. gin: signs of trouble." of "keeping up with the literature" quite It is clear, however, that the situation reflects It should be recalled that this unbalanced serious. It is now widely recognized by sci- a rather low level of interest in science on the growth takes place within, the framework of a entists that the existing system of publication part of the public, or, more probably., ofshortage of personnel. This situation has and distribution does not fill their needs. those who attempt to judge the public mind very naturally given rise to a somewhat dis- Published articles and monographs have not for purposes of directing the media of in- organized competition for students, which kept up with the current knowledge in many formation. further accentuates the disparate pattern of fields. The number of journals is insufficient development of the various sciences. (publication delays of 1 year are common), Inadequate progress in basic research. It and methods of abstracting, indexing, and Inter.tal Situation of Science is well known that the creative source of all reviewing are inadequate. Itis becoming technologic advance is the free inquiry into rapidly more difficult for scientists to find How has its recently accelerated rate ofnatural phenomena that we call basic, orout what their colleLgues know. The situa- growth and the general nature of the social "pure." science However, as has already tion is par.icularly bad with respect to arti- influences upon it affected the character of been indicated, the great bulk of our present cles print:d in foreign languages (Russian, American science? Some brief and approx- research activities represent, the develop- especially) which investigators too fre- imate answers may be made. ment of practical applications of the knowl- quently incapable of reading. Some obser- Unbalanced grots.th. The growth of our edge generated by previous advances in pure vers have already urged the establishment of scientific organization has not been an order- science. It has been pointed out repeatedly scientific information centers from which ly process. Growth has been based less on that many of our current technologic subscribers could receive transmitted repro- internal needs of science than on the interest vances are based on the applieation of ductions of teletyped abstracts obtained by of external agencies in possible practical re- accumulated basic knowledge which is per- electronic scanning devices. Such centers sults. to a sense, the speed and direction of haps 20 to 30 years old. The progress of would require government investment of the development of science have been de- basic science does not appear to be keeping about $150 million. That proposals of this termined by the users of science rather than pace with the development of applied st.i- magnitude are under current discussion is an the practitioners of science. Agencies which crux Some observers even feel that there indication of the severity of this problem. use scientific knowledge (for example. in- has been an absolute deeline in the amount of Proper communication among scientists is

Resolution adopted by the Council of the American Association for the Advancement of Science at its 1956 meeting in New York

WHEREAS one of the purposes of the AAAS isto improve the effectiveness of science in the promotion of human welfare, and to increase public understanding and appreciation of the imponanee and promise of the methods of science in human progress," and WHEREAS the present rapid advance of science is accompanied by social problems of unprecedented magnitude that affect human welfare; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that in recognition of the responsibility of scientists to participate in deliberations regarding the use made of new scientific kip )wledge. the Council of the AAAS authorizes the president to continue the work of this committee by appointing an enlarged gtoup for the purpose of defining the problems. assembling the relevant facts, and suggesting a practical program, to be submitted to the AAAS board of directors. to implement the objectives of the AAAS in this regard. 245 242

not, however, merely a matter of developing from other fields, the social order must pro-discussion and controversy. Nevertheless, proper recording, cataloging, and searching vide the greatest possible intellectual, social. additives are in use, and the problem of mak- devices. Face-to-face meetings, whichand personal freedom for scientist and non- ing a reasonable determination of their safety bridge the barriers of specialization, are anscientist alike at every level of the social must be faced. obvious necessity for the ordered growth of structure. A parallel situation exists in connection human knowledge. There is a widespread with the health hazards that arise from the feeling among scientists that scientific meet- dissemination of fumes, smogs, and dusts by ings which bring together investigators from industrial plants and from automotive and Major Social Issues of Scientific different fields of science are a necessity. other combustion processes. The harmful But, with some distingukhed exceptions, Origin: Signs of Trouble biological effects of these agents usually such meetings have been difficult to es- appear a long time after the commercial tablish thus far. How well have we solved those socialusefulne'- of the process is established and 2) Imposed restrictions of free com-issues which are most closely related tolarge-scale operations arc in effect. By then munication: Although government support scientific or technologic knowledge? Most ofr medial procedures are very diffuch to carry has been a major source of recent scientificour successes are self-evident. Scientificout. growth, it has been accompanied by in-knowledge is being applied to the develop- In these cases the use of substances result- fluences which are in some respects inimical ment of a new industrial system capable ofing from scientific advance has already out- to the basic needs of science. Complete free- greatly increasing, in both quantity and qual- stripped the base provided by our scientific dom of communication, regardless of nation- ity, the total wealth of man. We arc creatingknowledge. Information on the biological al boundaries, is an essential aspect of sci- a remarkable establishment for medical and effects of a new substance is acquired at a ence; nevertheless, along with government related research, which has given us mastery very much slower pace than the rate at which support American science has been burdened of many human ills and has prolonged thenew substances are made or put into use. It is with practices that restrict the free flow ofspan of life. Nevertheless, scientific prob-probably inevitable that biological research information. The interchange of scientific in- lems which influence social processes have will move more slowly than either chemistry formation is sometimes restricted unduly by become an arena of serious difficulties. Inor physics, but it should be expected, there- the overclassification of data that affect some situations our enhanced ability to con- fore, that we would put correspondingly national security. It must be acknowledged trol nature has gone awry and threatensmore effort into research on biological phe- that at certain times, and with certain types serious trouble. Some examples follow. nomena. The opposite is the case. Less than of data, restriction of exchange of informa- Radiation dangers. It is hardly necessaryabout 10 percent of our total research ex- tion is necessary, so long as scientific prog-to point out at this time that the difficulties penditure goes into biology and medicine. ress continues t. have military activity as created by the dispersion of radioactive Natural resou,ces. The natural resources one of its chief values The immediate prob- materials from nuclear weapons have caused contained in the crust of the earth comprise lem is to limit such restrictions to a minimal considerable concern in this country andthe major source of our wed and it is a area. The ultimate problem is to free society throughout the world. Regarc:.ess of one's matter of concern that they be properly used. as a whole and thereby science itself from attitude toward the necessity of setting offThe natural laws which regulate the char- the tyranny of war. nuclear explosions for testing purposes.acter and behavior of these resources lie Not all artificially imposed restrictions on there is considerable evidence that this within the domain of the various sciences. communication result from govermrent re-aspect of human control over nature is aHowever. social decisions actually control quirements. There is an understandablepotential danger to life. The recent con- what is done with our resources. It has been tendency on the part of industry to protect its troversy over the immediate significance ofpointed out Paul B. Sears that these de- investment in research by rectricting dis-this problem shows that we have not yet de-cisions are really in the hands of scientists. tribution of its results. As a gre share ofveloped methods for the orderly determina-Unger these circumstances large-scale research is taken on by indrst y. especiallytion of the facts, in an area in which suchchanges in our natural resources have oc- in those areas where expens,e. complex op- facts may influence the health of the whale. curred without proper consideration for the erations are involved, this problem will be- population of the earth. consequences which might be expected from come of greater significance. It is ironical to Food additives. The enormous growth ofa knowledge of natura' laws. note that a recent Conference on the Practical industry based on organic synthesis. co.,pled An illuminating example cited by Sears is Utilization of Recorded Knowledge with the already mentioned tendency towardthe recent flood disaster in New Englvd. He Present and Future (at Western Reserve Uni-rapid exploitation of scientific knowledge. points out that the widespread damage versity, January 1956), which devoted a has resulted in a great increase in the number caused by these floods was a direct conse- good deal of attention to the problem of im- of man-made compounds now used in foodsquence of the unplanned crowding of hous- proved dissemination of knowledge, found it or otherwise ingested or absorbed by human ing areas into the river flood-plains. This nee essary to hold part of its deliberations be- beings. The period of use of many of these was a failure to recognize and act upon phys- hind closed doors and to refrain fromsubsteaces has been rather short, and possi- ical events easily foreseeable from a rela- publicizing the full record of these "con-ble undesirable long-range biological effects tively simple knowledge of the landscape. fidential" sessions (Am. Scientist (April have not yet had time to appear. LaboratoryThe declining water-table caused by irriga- 1956)). methods for studying delayed biological tion practices illustrates a similar disregard Unrestricted communication is but oneeffects such as carcinogenicity are un- for natural laws. In these and more complex facet of the free intellectual environment thatfortunately difficult to manage and equivocal instances, the harmful outcomes of the given is as important to scientific creativity as it isin interpretation. Consequently, the es-practice can be predicted by appropriate to all other fields of human endeavor. If soci-tablishment of certification procedurestechnical analysis. ety is to benefit broadly and effectively fromwhich might assure the public that a given These examples show that social factors the efforts of modem science, and if scienceadditive is harmless is a difficult mattercondition the use to which scientific knowl- in tum is to be enriched by contributionswhich has been the subject of considerable edge is pot. Perhaps the most striking ex-

2 z; 6 243

ample of this phenomenon is modern war-enhancement of the degree of control which democratic system is operated to a consider- fare, which represents a social decision to we now exert over nature have given rise to able extent under stimulus from groups, each use the power of scientific knowledge fornew social practices of great scope and in-representing the views and interest of its purposes of destruction and death. fluence, which make use of new scientific members. knowledge. While this advance of science Business and labor are not backward in has greatly improved the condition of human presenting their opinions on social questions Some Conclusions life,it has also generated new hazards ofthat affect them. They make sure that in the unprecedented magnitude. These include the final decision their views have been consid- The present state of science and its rela- dangers to life from widely disseminatedered. There are many who think that the tion to the social structure of which it is a radiation, the burden of man-made chem-viewpoint of scientists should also be stated part are characterized by the following icals, fumes, and smogs of unknown biologi- publicly. In fact, if others express their opin- general features. cal effect which we now absorb, large-scaleions and scientists do not, a distorted picture I) We are witnessing an unprecedenteddeterioration of our natural resources, and will be presented, a picture in which the im- growth in the scale and intensity of scientificthe potential of totally destructive war. The portance of science will be lacking and the work. Research has placed in human hands determination that scientific knowledge is todemocratic process will become to that ex- the power to influence the life of every per- be used for human good or for purposes oftent unrepresentative. son in every part of the earth. destruction is in the control of social agen- The need for action is serious and im- 2) This growth has been stimulated by an cies. For such decisions, these agencies and mediate. Consider, for example, the situa- intense demand for the practical products ofultimately the people themselves must betion related to the biological hazards of research, especially for military and in-aware of the facts and the probable con- radiation. It is now 6 months since the radia- dustrial I se. Agencies which use the prod- sequences of action. Here scientists can play tion committees of the National Academy of ucts of research are willing to provide finan- a decisive role: they can bring the facts and Sciences issued a report that called for a cial support and other forms of encourage- their estimates of the result of proposed ac- series of immediate actions including, ment for science but show a natural tendency tions before the people. among others: (i) the institution of a r.ational to favor those fields and aspects of science system of radiation exposure record-keeping which most nearly relate to their needs. of all individuals; (ii) vigorous action to re- 3) The public interest in, and understand- Need for Action: The Role of the duce medical exposure to x-rays; (iii^s- ing of, science is not commensurate with the Organizations of Science tablishment of a national agency to reb Late importance that science has attained in our disposal of radioactive wastes; (iv) establish- social structure. It cannot be said that society This appears to Ix a critical time for re- ment of an international program of control provides good conditions for the properview of the general state of science and its and study of radioactive pollution of the growth of science. The effort to explain therelation to society. We are now in the midst oceans; (v) considerable relaxation of secre- nature of science to the public is slight com-of a new and unprecedented scientific revo-cy about dissemination of radioactivity. In pared with the public attention now given tolution which promises to bring about pro- addition, the committees pointed out that other, less consequential areas of human found changes in the condition of human "The development of atomic energy is a mat- activity. Interest in science as a career is so life. The forces and processes now comingter for careful integrated planning. A large restricted that a serious and worsening per- under human control are beginning to match part of the material that is needed to make sonnel situation has arisen. in size and intensity those of nature itself, intelligent plans is not yet at hand. There is 4) For reasons such as those just cited,and our total environment is now subject to not much time left to acquire it." science is experiencing a period of rapid but human influence. In this situation it becomes There is no evidence that these urgent rather unbalanced growth. Basic research, imperative tc determine that these new pow- pleas for action have yet met with any sig- which is the ultimate source of the practical ers shall be used for the maximum human nifica A response. Clearly, this is a matter results so much in demand, is poorly sup- good, for, if the benefits to be derived fromthat requires the persistent attention of all ported and, in the view of some observers, them are great, the possiblity of harm is cor- scientists.It exemplifies the pressing need lacks vigor and quality. Areas more remotely respondingly serious. that scientists concern themselves with social connected with industrial and military ap- As scientists we are particularly concernoi action. In this situation, the AAAS carries a plications, such as biology and the social sci- with determining how we should meet this special responsibility. As one of our past ences, are also not being adequately sup- situation, both as individuals and through presidents, Warren Weaver, has said. "If the ported. The present period of rapid, un-our organizations. In marked contrast to AAAS is to be a vigorous force for the bet- planned growth in research activities is pre-other associations, scientific societies sel- terment of science, it Linot continue in the cipitating critical difficulties in connection dom consider the social and economic posi- face of crucial situationsith closed eyes v!...11 the dissemination and analysis of tion of their group. Action taken on social and a dumb mouth." This responsibility has sc'entific information. problems with a scientific or technologicalready been recognized. What is needed L) The growth of science and the great base are sporadic and usually forced. Yet the now is a way to meet it.

24.7 in demand, is poorly supported and, in the view of some observers, lacks vigor and quality. 5) The growth of science and the great enhancement of the degree of control which we now exert over nature have given rise to new social practices, of great scope and influence, which make use of new scientific knowledge. While this advance of science has great- , ly improved the condition of human life, it has also generated new hazards of 'unprecedented magnitude. For nearly two decades, scientistsand social processes have become pro- have viewed with growing concern thefoundly dependent on science, the dis- troublesomeeventsthathave beencipline has failed to attain its appro-An Estimate of the Present Situation evoked by the interaction between sci-priate place in the management of pub- entific progress and public affairs. Withlic affairs." Since 1956 this general pattern has each advance in our knowledge of na- In the last few years the disparitytaken on some new features which con- ture, science adds to the already im-between scientific progress and the res-cern us at this time. mense power that the social order ex-olution of the social issues which it has 1) The conscious exploitation of sci- erts over human welfare. With each in-evoked has become even greater. Whatence for military advantage continues crement in power, the problem of di-was once merely a minor gap nowat an accelerating rate. But in recent recting its use toward beneficial endsthreatens to become a major discon-years this process has merged with an- becomes more complex,theconse-tinuity which may disrupt the historyother, equally important trend: science quences of failure more disastrous, andof man. is being pressed into the service of in- the time for decision more brief. Recent events have lent substance toternationalpolitics.Scientificaccom- The problem is not new, either in thethe conviction of our committee and ofplishment per se has become an ac- history of human affairs or of science.its antecedent groups :,id we believeceptedand at present dominantfac- What is without past parallelisitsto that of scientists generallythat sci-tor of prestige among nations. The phil- urgency. entists bear a serious and immediateosophy of "getting ahead of the Rus- Four years ago, the report of theresponsibility to help mediate the ef-sians" (or Americans), which once re- AAAS Interim Committee on the Socialfects of scientific progress on humanferred only to military matters, now Aspects of Science (1)stated: "Wewelfare, and that this obligation shouldincludes scientific achievements as well. are now in the midst of a new and un-be reflected in the program of theThis rivalry has strongly motivated the precedented scientific revolution whichAAAS. recentintensificationof government promisestobringaboutprofound In the present report we endeavor tosupport for scientific research. changes in the condition of human life.translate this conviction into action oy 2) The rapid emergence of political The forces and processes now comingsuggesting a general approach and someindependence among the "underdevel- under human control are beginning tosp "cific procedures which may serve asoped" nations of the world, and their match in size and intensity those ofa guide for the development of a AAASnatural desire to exploit modern tech- nature itself, and our total environmentprogram on the role of science in thenology, has added to the importance of is now subject to human influence. Inpromotion of human welfare. h ternationalexchangeofscientific this situation it becomes imperative to Now, as in 1956, our premises areknowledge and personnel. Perhaps one determine that these new powers shallthese (7) : reason for the rivalry for scientific pre- be used for the r .aimum human good, 1) We are witnessing an unprece-eminence among the more advanced for, if the benefits to be derived fromdented growth in the scale and intensitynations is the expectatiLn of political them are great, the possibility of harmof scientific work. advantage from this exchange. is correspondingly serious." 2) This growth has been stimulated 3) Certain recent scientific advances The Interim Committee also conclud-by an intense demand for the practicaladd directly to the ease with which our ed that "there is an impending crisis inproducts of research, especially for mil-knowledge of nature can be applied to the relationships between science anditary and industrial use. the control of human beings and of American society. This crisis is being 3) The public interest in, and under-socialorganization.Development of generated by a basic disparity. At astanding of, science is not commensu-new psychotomimetic drugs and psycho- time when decisive economic, poliEcal,rate with the importance that sciencelogical techniques have suggested, to has attained in our social structure. Itsome, effective means for controlling Members of the committee are Barry Com-cannot be said that society providesthe behavior of social groups. Progress moner, Washington University, chairman; Robert B. Brode, Universityof California,Berkeley;good conditions for the proper growthin the science of cybernetics and the Harrison Brown, CaliforniaInstituteof Tech-of science. development of automation techniques nology;T.C.Byer ly,Agricul.uralResearch Service;Laurence K. Frank, 25 ClarkStreet, 4) For reasons such as those justresult in new capabilities for direct con- Belmont, Mars.; H. Jack Geiger, Harvard Medi-cited, science is experiencing a periodtrol of social and economic processes. calSchool; Frank W.Notestein,Population Council, New York; Margaret Mead, Americanof rapid but rather unbalanced growth. 4) Despite some recent effort toward Museum of Natural History (ex officio Board improvement, there is nn reason to alter representative);and Dad Wolfie, AAAS(, Basic research, which is the ultimate officio). source of the practical results so muchthe earlier conclusion that our present 243 245 social environment does not favor thescience serves the nation by servingtheircolleaguesthatthediscovery development of an understanding ofhumanity. should be given an interpretation which science, or of science's aims and needs. A further examination of the effectsis less dramatic but more in keeping The increasingly spectacular practicalof the present social uses of science onwith the divided scientific opinion of its achievements of science have only ac-life inside the house of science itselfsignificance. centuated misconceptions about the rel-leads to even more disturbing conclu- Itis evident that the accelerating ative significance, for the growth of sci-sions. There is some evidence that theprogress of science has evoked a num- ence, of practical results and the ad-integrity of scienceisbeginning tober of serious problems that affect both vancement of basicknowledge. Toerode under the abrasive pressure of itsthe social order and the internal situa- many people physical science meansclose partnership with economic, social,tion of our scientificestablishment. nuclear energy and rockets. The publicand political affairs. Having become a major instrument in is sometimes led to expect that biolog- In r, cent controversies about falloutpolitical affairs, science is inseparably ical and medical research will conquerand the detection of nuclear explosions,bound up with many troublesome ques- every human ailmentwill overcomepartisanship on tile part of some sci-tions of public policy. That science is death. There is a tendency to equateentists for a particular politicalap-valued more for these uses than for its scientific progress with a sum of moneyproach to the problem has been so in-fundamental purposethe free inquiry and a number of p-ople. There is in-tense in some instances as to cloudatinto natureleads to pressures which sufficientappreciation of thesignifi-least in the public mindthe identityhave begun to threaten to e integrity of cance of basic research, or of the con-between science and an objective regardscience itself. ditions in which it can flourish. for the facts. The situation appears to be this: We The grim international competition are witnessing an unprecedented andfor "su, emacy" in scientific accom-Scientist? Approaches to accelerating rate of growth in man'splishment also endangers the integrityTheir Social Responsibilities power over his environment. Science,of science. Unseemly claims of pri- theinstrument which produces thisority may be encouraged. Premature re- It can be seen from the foregoing power, is being consciously exploitedportsof newscientificdiscoveries,discussion that the scientific community for industrial, military, and politicalwhich will occur to some extent in anyis faced with numerous problems that purposes. At the same time there iscircumstances, may be permitted to ac-very seriously affect the development of little recognition of the internal needsquire a semblance of credibility. science and the future of society. How of science, or of its purposes as a dis- An illustrationas yet unrealizedhave scientists responded to this chal- cipline of the human mind. is the matter of "the creation of life."lenge? In this situation it is inevitable thatSome scientists believe that the proper- Since World War II there has been a the inner strength of science shouldties of life are inherent in the chemistryconsiderable growth in scientists' partic- suffer, for what is essential to the properof nucleic acid, and would regard theipation in political affairs. The growth growth of science is often in conflictartificialsynthesis of a reproduciblehas been intermittent, and based on a with the conditions of its service to mil-nucleic acid or nucleoprotein moleculevariety of views of the scientists' rela- itary and political affairs. which may occur in the reasonablytion to social problems. An important example of this effectnear futureas the "creation" of life. The Federation of American Scien- is the matter of "competition." The mil-Other scientists would disagree with thistists, initiated by scientists involved in itary and political advantages, to a na-interpretation because they believe thatthe wartime atomic bomb project,is tion, of scientific progress within itsnucleic acid, nucleoprotein, or anythingfrankly designed to give scientists a own borders are self-evident. Yet, it isless than a living cell is not "life," fordirect voice in discussions of political a truismbut nevertheless a vital onethe reason that it is not a self-sufficientmatters that relate to science. The Pug- that nature is the same everywhere,replicative agent. wash movement and the less formal and that the study of nature is an ac- Under ordinary circumstances thisgroupings represented by the Bulletin tivity of the whole human race. Anydifference of opinion would be occa-of the Atomic Scientists take the view effort to divide science into fragmentssionally debated among scientists andthat scientists can serve A useful func- which are delimited by national bound-finally resolved when the weight of ev-tion in proposing politica. solutions to aries, and dominated by a local socialidence on one side or the other becamethe international problems that result philosophy, will inevitably restrict thesufficiently strong, or when a new andfrom the applications of modern sci- free discovery and communication ofmore acceptable idea emerged. How-ence. This approach results in a delib- new knowledge that is the substance ofever, in the present circumstances thiserate effort, on the part of these scien- scientific progress. A "nationalistic" sci-matter may take another course. Theretists, to persuade government agencies ence is an anachronism which cannotis some evidence that a claimed "crea-to follow a recommended course of ac- long continue without damage to sci-tion of life" based on the test-tube syn-tion. A third group is typified by the ence, and eventually to the nation. thesis of an infectious molecule mightSociety for Social Responsibility in Sci- What, then, is the scientist's respon-be regarded by a government as a sci-ence, which takes the view that scien- sibility to his own nation's scientific ef-entific accomplishment of great politicaltists have a moral responsibility totry fort? Clearly, we need to understandimportance- -a kind of "biological Sput-to limit to ethical uses the applications that what science contritutes to the na-nik." In this case, scientists may beof science and technology. tional purpose is measured by what ithard pressed to persuade government In the 1956 Presidential campaign, adds to the sum of human knowledge;officialsand perhaps even some ofad hoc groups of proponents for both 249 political parties developed among scien-itselfare matters in which scientists,the importance which such issues have tists. During the past year both partiesas scientists, have a particular interest,assumed in public affairs. have organized scientific advisory com-responsibility, and experience. In the The foregoing analysis leads to a mittees, which will presumably providesolution of these problems, the opinionsdistinctive view of the part which the the "scientific authority" for the posi-of thescientificcommunity shouldscientist and his professional organizations that these parties will take in thecarry some special weight, and scien-tions should play in the social proc- 1960 campaign. tists should ac opt the obligation toessesinvolvedin theresolutionof Finally, some scientists take the viewdevelop and explain these opinions. science-related issues. that their proper role with respect to The more difficult problems are those With respect to the process of deci- questions of policy that are related towhich do not so exclusively concernsion-making, the scientist's role is simply science is to bring to public attentionscientists but which have a broad re-that of an informed citizen. Like any the relevant facts and scientific prin-lation to public policy and affect allother citizen, the scientist is free to ciples and an explanation of the limitscitizens equally. An example of suchexpress his opinions regarding alterna- of accuracy and alternate interpreta-a problem is public policy in relationtive solutions for matters of public tions that apply. Thus informed, theto nuc.tear energy, but this is only thepolicy and will perhaps join with like- citizenis prepared to make his ownmost obvious of a growing class ofminded citizens in 2 group effort to choice between possible solutions. Thistroublesome issues. foster the solution he prefers. This approach has been the basis for the It is our view that such problems arerole does not derive from the scien- formation in St. Louis of the Citizensin essence social and political. We ex-tist's professional competence or obli- Committee for Nuclear Information, apect the choice among alternative solu-gations but only from his citizenship, group of scientists and citizens devotedtions of these problems to be madeand therefore it bears no direct rela- to thedissemination of informationthrough the normal, democratic pro-tionship to his professional organiza- about the radiation problem. A groupcesses of social and political decision-tions. of scientists with a similar purpose, themaking, in which all citizens participate. But in the matter of provis!ing citi- Scientists Committee for Radiation In- In this respect the general issues thatzens with the knowledge revuired to formation, has been organized in Newrelate to scientific developments do notmake informed decisions on science - York City under the auspices of thediffer from other social and politicalrelated public issues, the scientist ..no New York Academy of Science. questions. The difference between themhis organizations have both a unique This account shows that scientists arelies at a less fundamental level. In thecompetence and a special responsibility. trying to meet their social responsibil-case of the more familiar questions ofAs the producer and custodian of sci- ities in a va.iety of ways. It also sug-public policy, the facts which the citi-entific knowledge, the scientific com- gests that no single approach has as yetzen, or the government official, requiresmunity has the obligation to impart such won the active participation of moreto make an informed choice betweenknowledge to the public. than a very small part of the scientificalternative solutions are relatively ac- The scientific community has another community. Nor has there been a sus-cessible and the consequences of dif-specialcompetence(whichderives tained development of these activities.ferent solutions are more or less ap-naturally from its concern with new Indeed, in the last few years activity onparent. On the other hand, the factualand potentially significant attributes of these matters within the scientific com-background and implications of thenature), for attempting to detect incip- munity has been relatively slight. issues with which we are concerned in-ient problems before they become un- If we regard participation in the reso-volve scientific and technical data, oftennecessarilyacute.For example,the lution of public issues related to sciencein areas relatively new to science, whichlikelihood that the relation between as a part of the scientists' professionalare in themselves complex. Many citi-nutrition and the development of can- responsibilities, we must conclude thatzens are neither familiar with sciencecer would eventually become a practical the scientific community has not yetgenerally nor well informed about theproblem for the food industrya mat- developed aconsistent,widely sup-specific developments which are at theter which is at present agitating farmers ported way of meeting this obligation.root of present public issues. Scientistsand food processorshas beenap- as well as other citizens often lack theparent from the work of investigators relevant scientific facts and are unablein many countries for the past 15 to A Suggested Approach to visualize the effects of alternative20 years. courses of action.Inthese circum- Early detection of such problems is This committee and its antecedentstances, there is little reason to hope f-rone of the most important direct con- groups have developed a distinctive ap-informed decisions about questions oftributionssciencecan make toward proach to the matter of how scientistspublic policy that relate to science. theirsolution. Too oftenthemost andtheirprofessionalorganizations In our view, this deficiency is a majorserious obstacle to the solution of such (and in particular,the AAAS) cancause of the difficulties that now im-issues is that they are recognized only best function with respect to the publicpede the proper development of publicafter the commitment of massive and issuesthat involve theprogressofpolicy on science-relatedissues. Thisessentiallyirreversible economic and science. conclusion can be documented in de-social investments. If the Los Angeles To begin with, we suggest that thetail from recent experience regardingarea were now about to be settled, it issues fall into two classes with respectpublic,olicies on radiation hazards,would be a relatively simply matter, to where, in our social structure, theirfood additives and insecticides,thegiven our present knowledge about the ultimate solutionslie.Certain prob-significance of space exploration, thecauses of smog, to make planstt, at lemsfor example, the effects of publicnature of modern warfare, the popula-would prevent a future smog problem. policy on the development of sciencetion question. This list also illustratesHow much more costly is the real situa- 2 0 247 tion, which may require that an entireus.Purthermrife, our command overof nuclear energy; (iii)the effects of community'srelianceongasoline-natural forcesfor example, the des-new organicinsecticides, food addi- powered transport be altered!Initstructive potentialof nuclear waristives, and food colors on animals and fields of competence, foresightis anow so great as to create social andman;(iv)artificialcontrolofthe capability and, in our view, a respon-moral questions of such great momentweather; and (v) population control. sibility of the scientific community. that no social agency ought to intervene 2) The association of scientific re- It follows, then, that the scientiqcbetween the issue and the public. search and military activities. Military community should accept the obliga- In sum, we conclude that the a usefulness is,at present, a dominant tion to dettimine how new advances inentific community should, on its ownmotivation in the social support of sci- our understanding and control of nat-initiative, assume an obligation to callentificresearch and has a profound ural forces are likely to affect humanto public attention issues of publiceffect on the development of our sci- welfare, to call these matters to publicpolicy which relate to science, and toentificestablishment. Any significant attention, and to provide for the publicprovide for the general public the factschange in the pattern of military activi- and its social and political agencies theand estimates of tha effects of alterna-tiesdisarmament,forexampleis objective statements of the facts andtivepolicies which the citizen mustlikely to cause serious changes in re- oftheconsequencesofalternativehave if he is to participate intelligentlysearch opportunities. The close associa- policies that are required as the basisin the solution of these problems. f.tion of science with recent military ad- for inforzned decisions on the relativecitizenry thus informed is, we believe,vances tends to foster a public image merits of proposed courses of action. the chief assurance that science will beof science and the scientist which is At what point in the social procesrdevoted to the promotion of human wel-not in keeping with the inherent goals should the scientific community enterfare. of the discipline. The secrecy associated as an agency of information? One view with military applications may restrict is that, since most social decisions are the development of science. Some ob- executed by government, the scientist'sQuestions of Immediate Importance servers regard the problem of prevent- function is to inform and advise governing the catastrophic application of the ment departments and officials. The Many specificproblems commar c'power of science in war as a matter government does, of course, need suchthe attention of scientists who are con-which overshadows all others. advice, and a number of useful methodscerned with meeting their responsibility There is an obvious need for the of providing it have been evolved. Intomediatetheinteractionbetweenscientific community to give attention these instances, scientists serve only byscience and society. In choosing certainto the wide range of problems arising invitation. Inevitably, the general con-issues for emphasis, we have adoptedfrom the close linkage of science and tent of the information thatis pro-the view that itis more important tomilitary activity. The role of science in vided and the tenor of the advice thatlearn how to deal with the difficult prob-possible efforts toward disarmament and isoffered are to some degree con-lems than with the simpler ones. the practical impact of disarmament ditioned by the particular interests of The problems presented below haveon scientific research are of immediate therequestingagency, which deter-been chosen with this in mind. Otherconcern. mines what questions are asked andissues may appear to be more important 3) International aspects of science. who is given an opportunity to answerto other observers; we shall welcomeScience figures prominently in the in- them. ourcolleagues'recommendationsintense political rivalry among the major Such a relationship does not whollythis regard. nations of the world. This use of sci- fulfill the scientist's social role, as we 1) The social consequences of tech-ence tends to conflict withits basic see it. In dealing with social issues, thenological progress. Itis characteristicinternational character, and means must scientific community must demonstrateof the present situation that scientificbe found to resolve this difficulty. A itsresponsibility and its inherent re-advances lead to a very profound leveluseful innovation has been the develop- gardfortruthandobjectivity aadof control over our environment andment of collaborative international sci- must zealously preserve the freedom ofto widespread effects on nature. Oftenentific programs, such as those associ- thought and communication that is es-the benefits which are the original aimated with UNESCO, the World Health sential to the pursuit of these goals.of a particular application of scienceOrganization, CERN, and the IGY. A Accordingly, we believe that the sci-are accompanied by secondary effectsnumber of proposals for similar pro- entific community ought to assume, onthat cause unanticipated harm. The ap-grams in medicine, space research, and its own initiative, an independent andplicationof new scientificadvancesoceanography have been made. This active informative role, whether or notcalls for social decisions which weigharea is a fruitfulfield for developing other social agencies see any immediatethe benefits against the disadvantages,new ways to foster a sound develop- advantage in h 'aring what he scientistand the public needs have the factsment of collaborative science. Of partic- has to say. relevant to such a decision. The sci-ular importance are international pro- We believe, also, that what scientistsentific community faces an immediategrams to provide scientific and tech- have to say about the social implica-need for developing the necessary edu-nological assistance to underdeveloped tions of science should be addressedcational programs. Important examplesnations. directlyto thegenera!public. Ourof such problems include: 01 the gen- 4) Government support for scientific traditional preference for democraticeral effects of technological advances,research. This nroblem has received procedures requires that the citizen besuch as that of automation on industrialconsiderable attention in the last few sufficiently informed to decide for him-development, or of rapid social changesyears, but two recent discussions [the self what is to be done about the issueson health; (ii) the effects of radiationParliament of Science (March 1958) that scientific progress has thrust uponfrom ,nilitary and peaceful applicationsand the Symposium on Basic Research 251 (May 1959)11 have shown thatno ade-clear need for candid discussion of thisin this stage of the program. quate solutionis in sight. The basicproblem. 4)Development of liaison between difficulties seem to be the absence of scientists and the public on a local any over-all rationale in the support of basis. It isexpected that, as the fore- science and the overemphasison proj-Proposed Procedures for ects that give promise of immediate going program progresses, citizens will AAAS Consideration develop an increasing interest in learn- practical results. We find,as a conse- ing more about the facts relevant toa quence of this emphasis, that the major We wish to confirm the generalpro- part of governmental research support particular issue directly from scientists cedural approachsuggested by ourin their own community. Many scien- (about 87 percent in the projected 1961antecedent committee in its 1958 budget) reporttists report an increasing demand from is in the military area, thatto the AAAS Board of Directors. Inlocal civic groups for lectures -n con- basicresearch isinadequatelysup-summary we suggest that AAAS activi-temporary issues. As already ported, that the pattern of support is td, in ties follow these steps with respecttosome communities not conducive to the development of scientistshave any given issue: formed organizations devoted to free inquiry into nature, and that the in- 1) Stimulation of discussion, withinforming thepublicaboutradiation narrow base of support is distorting thethe scientific community, of issues relat-problems. The British Association for development of science as a whole, ining science and human welfare.SuchtheAdvancementof our universities in particular. Various Sciencehas discussion would result in the identifi-organized local groups to meet public solutions have been proposed, none ofcation of issues which the scientificdemand for information on these and which has as yet received really wide community regards as of most im-related problems. The success of these support in the scientific community. A mediate interest and would serveas aactivitiessuggests possible extension, specific example is the proposal for the guide for the development of a specificboth geographically and with respect to establishment of a federal Departmentprogram. We urge our colleagues to of Science. the types of issues considered. Our Clearly, further analysissubmit articles and comments for pub- and discussion of committee may serve a useful function this problem arelication, and we welcome directcom-in stimulating such developments. greatlyneeded. munications to this committee as well. 5) Now can scientists best meet theirSymposia and other discussions on these social responsibilities? From what hasmatters should be organized in con-Conclusion been said above itis clear that thenection with the AAAS annual meeting. scientific community has not yet devel- 2)Assembly of the facts relevant to In this report we have reviewed the oped a widely accepted means of per-a given issue.We propose that a de-momentous problems which result from forming its function in connection with tailed report directed toward the sci-the interactions between the social order publicissues relatedtoscience.Itentific community be prepared afteranand the progrt...s of science. We con- would be useful, therefore, to stimulate issue has been identified. Such a reportcludethatthescientific community discussion among scientistson howwould include the relevant data,a dis- such activity can best be developed bears a serious responsibility for help- cussion of assumptions and sources ofing to solve these problems, and have and to encourage efforts whi. hseem toerror, and a description of the ex- promise success. suggested a program that mightaccom- pectedconsequencesofalternativeplish this aim. 6) The integrity of science.As sci-courses of action. The report would Such a program does not yet exist, ence becomes more deeply involved innot recommend a specific course ofand it would be appropriate for the the frequently discordant "fairs of pub-action. The report would be madeAAAS to help bring it into being. The lic life and in highly competitive social widely available to the scientificcom-task is not an easy one. It will add endeavors, we may expect a gi owing to munity, either directly or by publica-the scientist's burden of work; it willre- pressure toward relaxation of the tradi-tion in a suitable journal. For theprep-quite from the citizen more attention to tional rules for the conduct of science:aration of such reports we would relypublic affairs; it will demand new social objective, open communication of re-onad hoccommittees, conferences,inventions. But we believe that a society sults; rigorous distinction between fact and symposia. capable of producing theenormous new and hypothesis; candid recognition of 3) PreparLtion and dissemination ofpowers of science ought to be capable assumptions and sources of error. It isreports for the general public.We pro-of finding the means of comprehending these rules which permit science topose that the content of the reporttheir effects on the social order. Andwe prcgressively increase our understand-should then be translated into formsare confident that with such understanding of and control over nature. With-suitable for distribution to the publicing, scienceas an expression of the out them science becomes useless, andthroughallavailable channels. Thiscreative gifts of the human mindwill even dangerous to the social order. Ifstepis part of the program of theflourish, and the power which it endows the scientific community isto accept AAAS Committee on Science and thewill be turned more fully to thepromo- the obligation to participate inpublicPublic and would be carried out inac-tion of human welfare. affairs, meansmustbefoundtocordance with plans which thatcom- strengthen the discipline's rules ofcon-mitteeisdeveloping. An important References and Notes duct. Some observers favor the adoptionaspect of these activities is the proposed 1. Science 125,143 (1957). of a code of ethics; others 2Premises quoted from the report of the In- propose lessappointment of a new member of the terim Committee (Science 125. 147 (1957)]. direct means of maintaining scientificAAAS staff to supervise work in this objectivity. To begin with, there isaarea. Our own committee will cooperate 249

gered, or responsible scientific conduct is alleged to have been violated. The full text of our report in response to this charge is being issued as a special publication of the AAAS. Here we set forth the major features of that report more briefly.

The Scientific Community Its Rights and Responsibilities The American scientific community, as we define it, includes a wide range of very diverse individualsbasic scientists in universities, research institutes, and govern- Problems of scientific freedom and re- weapons testing, over the use of defoliantsment laboratories; engineers; workers in sponsibility are not new; one need onlyand herbicides in the Vietnam War, overmedicine and public health; graduate stu- consider, as examples, the passionate con- the effects of DDT and other chlorinateddents and technicians working on scientific troversies that were stirred by the work ofhydrocarbon pesticides, over the antiballis-problems; and teachers of science in col- Galileo and Darwin. In our time, however, ticmissile program, over the supersonicleges and secondary schools. The dis- such problems have changed in character,transport, and over the extent of the haz-cussion that follows applies primarily to and have become far s..3re numerous,ards from nuclear power plants. In thesescientists involved in basic or applied re- more urgent, and more complex.Science conflicts the contestants are often unevenly search, but in large measure it is relevant and its applications have become entwined matched, with powerful industrial and gov-to the whole scientific comnunity. with the whole fabric of our lives andernmental forces on one side and a small The Committee concLided, early in its thoughts. On the one hand, basic sciencegroup of critics on the other. There havedeliberations, that issues of scientific free- has enlarged our intellectual horizons been attempts to suppress important scien-dom and responsibility are basically in- one need only mention as examples the vis- tific data that appeared unfavorable to theseparable. Scientific freedom, like aca- tas opened up by the formulation of quan-policies of some powerful organizations. Ifdemic freedom (2), is an acquired right, tum mechanics and the discovery of the ge-wise policy decisions are to be made amidgenerally accepted by society as necessary netic code. Applied science has largelysuch pressures, there is a compelling needfor the advancement of knowledge from freed mankind from the terrors of infec-for fair hearings, due process, and publicwhich society may benefit. Scientists pos- tious sisease; but these terrors have been access to all relevant information. sess no rights beyond those of other citi- replaced by new terrors, also the fruits of The American Association for the Ad-zens except those necessary to fulfill the re- science. These include not only nuclearvancement of Science (AAAS) is deeplysponsibilities arising from their special weapons with their incomparable powersconcerned that such issues should be dealtknowledge, and from the insight arising of devastation but also such organic chem-with, and resolved, in a responsible fash-from that k. )wledge. icals as the dioxins, 4cciden tally discovered ion, It would of course be far beyond the Later we shall have much to say of the as contaminants of certainherbicides,capacity of the Association to act as aactivities oftenreferred to as "whistle which can kill guinea pigs at dosages ascourt of appeal in such disputes, except inblowing" in which issues of freedom and low as 600 parts per trillion (I) and are very rare and special cases. However, be-responsibility are inextricably inter- perhaps comparably poisonous for human cause of its concern with the policy issuesmingled. Whistle blowing involves situ- beings. The unprecedented rate of popu-involved, the Board of Directors of theations in which a scientist, engineer, physi- lat;on growth in our time, largely a con-AAAS charged this Committee to con-cian, or other expert becomes aware of sequence of advances in medical science,sider the following matters: hazards arcing from some process, mate- sanitary technology, and transportation, I) To study and report on the generalrial, or product, or becomes aware of pos- threatens the ecological balance of theconditions required for scientific freedomsible improvements in technology or pro- earth and raises the specter of catastrophicand responsibility. cedure that deserve to be adopted but are famines. 2) To develop suitable criteria and pro-being neglected. Issues of public safety are These and other problems have led .o in- cedures for the objective and impartialfret 'ently involved, and often the whistle tense and oftenbitter disputes amongstudy of these.problems. blower works for the marketer of the pro- members of the scientific community, and 3) To recommend mechanisms to enablecess or produk, Some may argue that per- between scientists and policy- makers. As the Association to review specific instancessons with expert knowledge have a "right" examples we may recall the controversies in which scientific freedom is alleged toto release information in their possession, over thebiological hazards of nuclearhave been abridged or otherwise endan-if such release is in the public interest. Oth- ers would say that it is the responsibility of such experts to release the information, This article is an abbreviated version of the report of the AAAS Committee on ScientificFreedom and Respon- even though they might prefer to remain Committee, which was estab- sibility, prepared on behalf of the Committee by John T Edsall The members of the silent. Both rights and responsibilities are lished in 1970, are Allen V Asun, Director Emeritus of the National Bureau of Standardsand Home Secretary of the National Academy of Sciences. Chairman John T. Edsall, Professorof Biochemistry Emeritus, Harvard Uni-clearly involved here, but it seems clear to versity, Walter J Nickel. former Governor of Alaska and former U S Secretaryof the Interior. John H Knowles, President of the Rockefeller Foundation. Earl Warren. former Chief Justice of theU S Supreme Court (who died us that the responsibilities are primary in July 1974). and Dorothy Zinberg, Lecturer in Sociology.Harvard University Mary Catherine Bateson, Asso- Presumably the potential whistle blower ciate Professor in the Department of Sociology and Anthropology.Northeastern University. served on the Com- mittee until early 1972. will begin by reporting his concern to his 250

employer and urging that corrective mea- transplantation of foreign genes into bac- out how many diseases that we can now sures be taken; if the matter can be settled teria because of potential though as yetun- diagnose or treat, or both, would have been without appeal to outside authority, so proven hazards to human health (3). This unmanageable if a ban on fetal research much the better. If this step fails, however, group has spoken with authority as thehad been in effect. Especially notable is Rh and the concerned employee decides that Committee on Recombinant DNA Mole-disease, which is now totally preventable, he has the responsibility to make the mat-cules of the Assembly of Life Sciences ofthanks in considerable part to fetal re- ter public, he faces obvious risks that may the National Academy of Sciences. Theirsearch. The human fetus is extremely sus- include the loss of his job. If whistle blow- views have received wide public attention;ceptible to many drugs, as the thalidomide ers are to be encouraged to take such of course, this con:mittee has no police disaster dramatically demonstrated. Like- risksand we believe that they should be powers to enforce its recommendations, wise, the fetus is far more susceptible to ra- encouraged, when serious issues are in- but its influence is great and as yetappears diation damage than the adult. Research volvedthey must be assured of some not to have been seriously challenged. Theon fetuses that do not survive abortions form of due process in passing judgment members of the committee are well aware can help us to discover how to give protec- on the issues that they raise. This would of the dilemma; the experiments thatare, tion from such harmful agents to thou- call for the presence of outside Independent for the present, being renouncedare notsands of other fetuses that are destined to members on any board that passes judg-only of great scientific interest but alsoreach full term and to grow into healthy ment on the issues, and should also include might make positive contributions to hu-adults. We would urge that fetal research some right of appeal. We return to these man health and well-being. The decisionnot only be permitted but intensified, sub- matters later. involves an expert balanced judgment ofject to careful peer review of the research probabilities and risks (3a). projects involved. The grounds cited for refraining from Should There Be Forbidden Areas theseexperimentstoprotecthuman beings from possible new and dangerous in Basic Research? The Conflict between Science and Secrecy infectionsare quite different from the Those for whom the advancement of ethical problems of present or future "ge- Many scientists, especially those em- knowledge is a supreme value might be- netic engineering," as with the possible ployed in industrial firms and in some gov- lieve that, in basic research as distinct from production of multiple copies of peopleernment laboratories, spend much or most applied science and technology, no subject with identical genotypes by cloning. Theof their time in work classified as secret. should be declared off limits. Yet thereare suggested threats here are not so much to Often the grounds for secrecy appearcom- clear inhibitions on some kinds of researchhealth as to human integrity, dignity, and pelling.Nevertheless, sconce inevitably involving human beings, and indeed ani- individuality. It seems to us proper to besuffers from the imposition of secrecy on a mals. Today we are increasingly conscious on the alert for such possible threats, butresearch project. The reasons were well of the need for informed consent in studies we see no justification as yet for attemptsstated in the report of the AAAS Com- of human physiology and behavior that to impose restrictions on the freedom ofmittee on Science in the Promotion of Hu- may involve risk to the experimental sub-genetic research. We hold that the dangersman Welfare (8, p. 177): ject. With young children, informed con-today are remote, and that they are deci- sent is impossible to obtain; parents orsively outweighed by the great benefits that Free dissemination of information and open guardians must take the heavy responsi- discussion is an essential part of the scientific such research can bring. process Each separate study of nature yields an bility of giving cnnsent for the child. Some approximate result and inevitably contains some experiments may endanger the health, or errors and omissions Science gets at the truth even the lives, of the participants; some Restrictions on Needed Research: by a continuous process of elf-examination which remedies omissions and corrects ci rors psychological experiments could bere- Fetal Research as an Example This process requires free disclosure of results, garded as morally degrading or psycholog- general dissemination of findings.inter- ically damaging. In such cases, review of As we have said above, the advancementpretations. conclusions, and widespread veri- the proposed experiments by a qualified of knowledge by research must often be fication and criticism of results and condusions panel of experts may provide more effec-balanced againstrisks to experimental That report provided specific examples tive protection to the subjects than the at- subjects that may be Involved in gaining to illustrate these general conclusions and tempt to obtain their informed consent, al- that knowledge. The complexity of toe is-showed that sec.ccy almost alwaysim- though we would insist on the importance sues involved emerges from the diversepedes scientific progress; in applied science of the latter. points of view that have been collected andand technology it frequently permits haz- Some experiments are justified, even ifset forth in much recent discussion, nota-ards to develop that could be eliminated if they involve great risks. The experiments bly in a comprehensive book (4) and ina information were publicly available We that conclusively demonstrated the trans-symposium (5). believe that, with me exceptions, data that mission of yellow fever by mosquitoes in- In some important instances we believeprovide a significant advance in fundamen- volved the death of one subject, Dr. Jesse that current restrictions on research havetal science should not be kept secret, ex- Lazear. Those who took part knew they gone too far. Thus the National Researchcept in a major war situation, as with the were risking their lives. Such heroic experi- Act of 1974 has, atleast temporarily,atomic bomb in World War IIFven in ments are fortunately seldom called for, banned research on any "living" human such cases information should rcmain clas- but they may well be needed from time to fetus, either before or after induced abor-sified only for a limited and specified time: time in the future. tion, except in the very unlikely event thatit should then be released avtomatically, Recently, in a statement probably un- the experiment is intended to save the lifeunless a strong specific case can be made precedented in the hi, ;ery of science, a of that particular fetus (6). for withholding a particular piece of infor- group of eminent mo..:cular biologists, We strongly oppose such restrictions.mation for a further limited time. We headed by Paul Berg of Stanford Univer- Research on the human fetus,over the past should look at claims of "national secu- sity. have deliberately renounced, for the two decades, has yielded major benefits for rity" with a very critical eye; such claims. time being, certain experiments on the human health. Behrman (7) has pointedas we have good reason to know from re- 2'..73 251

cent experience, often serve to cover updevelopment. Dams and irrigation because their wider impact would, on the governmental ineptitude or corruption. schemes have vastlyincreasedthein- whole, be more damaging thanbene- cidence of bilharziasis (schistosomiasis), aficial.In some cases it would be prefer- debilitating disease for which there is as able, in the eyes of some thoughtful sci- Technology and Innovation: yet no effective cure (12). The disastrous entificpolicyadvisers, notto carry a Their Multiple and Complex Effects effects of the recent catastrophic droughtsproject from the stage of research even in the Sahei region, south of the Sahara, into preliminary development, lestpres- When we turn from the problems of ba-have been accentuated by some tech- sures would then arise that would lead to sic science to those of applied science andnologicalinnovations, notably,for ex- its full development. technology, the problems of freedom andample, by the drilling of thousands of deep responsibility become even more formi- boreholes which have tapped the abundant Conflicts Involving Scientific Freedom dable. Whatever the intentions of tech-water far below the surface. The resultant and Responsibility nologicalinnovators, the results of in-wells encouraged a great increase in the novation are always more complex thansize of the cattle herds, pasture instead of We turn now to the second item in the the innovators intended, and usually more water became the limiting factor in num- charge to this Committee, which calls for complex than they could even Imagine. bers of cattle. As pasture dried up in the us "to develop suitable criteria and proce- These facts, in our time, have created a drought, countless thousands of dead anddures for the object', e and impartial study compelling need for the assessment of ma- dying cattle were clustered around the of these problemsThe conflicts that call jor technological innovations, and for their boreholes, while the surrounding land, for for such study generally lie in the realm of critical evaluation and control. The so- miles around, was ravaged by trampling applied science and technology. including called "side effects" of innovation are of- and overgrazing. These wells, drilled bymedicine and public healthIn most in- ten deleterious and not infrequently are somen of good will and technical skill in or- stances they involve the right, and the re- pronounced that they dominate the pri-der to bring more water to the people and sponsibility, o. an employee to warn con- mary effect that was intended. cattle of the Sahel, became a major factor cerning the dangers inherent in some prod- The history of the use of DDT piovidesin intensifying a great human and natural uct or process with which he has become an example of such complexity (9). Its usedisaster (l3). familiar in th arse of his work; that is, brought a dramatic halt to a cholera epi- These illustrations could be multiplied athe "whistle blowing" activity of which we demic in Naples in World War II; its ini-hundredfold. Let us add at once that wehave spoken earlier. The employer may tial success in destroying agricultural pestsare not among those who consider that put intense pressure on the employee to was spectacular. Only a few biological ex- there is something inherently evil about keep quiet; the employee may be fired, or perts warned of trouble at that time Grad- technology. Technology has been indis- 'lie may be made so uncomfortable that he ually problems appeared, as insect pestspensable for the rise of all civilizations, anddecides to resign. Interested parties may developed resistance to DDT, as, in many new technology is essential for the survivalseek to suppress scientific data that are vi- cases, the pesticide destroyed the natural of our own civilization. As an example wetal for the proper resolution of a con- enemies of thepests, as the long per- need only mention the need for the devel- troversy. On the other hand, the employee sistence of DDT in soil was discovered, and opment of new energy sourcessolar and may be acting not in the public interest but itsprogressiveconcentrati.,ninfood geothermal energy and nuclear fusion, for out of prejudice or spite against the em- chains led to the killing of great numbers instancethat may be less polluting than ployer. To be an "objective and impartial" of certain birds and fishes. All this has led. fossil fuels and less hazardous than nuclear judge in such circumstances is not easy; in the United States, to the banning offission. one person's "objectivity" looks like bias I'DT for nearly all uses Yet in countries Likewise we reject the notion of the so- to another. In all these cases scientific evi- where malaria is widespread, the spraying called"technologicalimperative' the dence is an essential part of the whole situ- of house interiors with DDT has proved ideathatwe mustpursue new tech- ation, but wise decisions involve complex the most effective antimalarial techniquenological possibilities, wherever they may human factors,ethical judgments, and available. In Sri Lanka (Ceylon) malaria lead Thousands of projects may be techni- standards of value that go far beyond had almost disappeared by 1963. when the :ally feasible, including the destruction ofpurely scientific argument. We consider DDT program was stooped. Then. in 1968 all human life on Earth Even among thosebriefly a few specific cases, before dis- and 1969, there was an explosive increase projectsthat appear attractiveatfirst cussing criteria and procedures. in the number of infections. In 1967 onlysight, careful appraisal may lead to the The problem of standards for exposure 3,465 cases had been reported; in 1968 theconclusion that they will do more harm to radiation. A few years ago, Drs. J. W. number rose to 425,937, and in early 1969 than good. The U.S. Congress drew such a Gofman and A. R. Tamplin, who worked the rate of infection was even higher ( /0). conclusion in 1971, when it voted to cut offat the laboratories of the Atomic Energy Other factors were at work, of course. thefunds for the supersonic transport pro-Commission (AEC) in Livermore, Califor- World Health Organization attributed thegram, which it had been generously fund-nia, claimed that existing standards for.ex- rise in the incider.ce of malaria in large ing a few years earlier. posure to ionizing radiation were far too part to conditiorthat were unusually fa- In summary, the development of new tolerant. and would permit a large increase vorable to the ',reeding of the Anopheles technologies is aidispensable, the training in the number of deaths from cancer if ex- mosquito and to unusual human popu-and encouragement of gifted and imagina- posures rose to the allowed levels. They lation movements that helped to spread the tive technologists deserves a high priority publicized their views widely. The chief au- infection (11). Nevertheless, until we have among our national needs, but the multiple thorities in the AEC sharply opposed these something better, DDT appears to be an repercussions of new technology need to be views and held them to be invalid. Gofman essential component of any major programcriticallyevaluated before theyarcin- and Tamplin eventually left the AEC, after of malaria, control. troduced and constantly monitored after what they believed to be considerable ha- Other complexities have arisen in con- their first introduction. Many schemes that rassment, and eventually the AEC did im- nection with programs for internationalare technically brilliant must be rejected pose considerably stricter radiation stan- 2F 252

dank for the protection of workers withinhazards of vinyl chloride, although tens of In industrial medicine and public health its jurisdiction. A committee appointed bythousands of workers were exposed co it. similar situations often arise. In recent the National Academy of Sciences, AfterMore than a year later, the Mantliacturingbooks Paul Brodeur (17) and Rachel Scott intensive study, produced a report, com-ChemistsAssociation (MCA)inthe (18) have described the medical problems monly known as the BEIR (Biological Ef-United States initiated its own researchof workers exposed to asbestos particles, fects of Ionizing Radiation) Report (14),and in October 1972 entered into an agree- beryllium dust, and other hazards. Many which stands at present as the most author-ment with the plastics manufacturers, whoof these workers develop 7ancer, or fatal itative statement on the hazards of ionizingsponsored the European research, to sharerespiratory or other diseases, over the radiation. In our full report we considerinformation but not to reveal it without thecourse of 10 or 20 years; the risk is high. thiscontroversyatsomewhat greaterconsent of the European manufacturers. InYet the company physicians who look af- length. August 1972 Dr. Cesare Maltoni of Bo-ter the workers sometimes join their em- The case of the BART engineers. A ma-logna found angiotarcOmas and variousployers in minimizing the need formore jor feature of the Bay Area Rapid Transittumors in experimental animals exposed torigorous standards of health protection. (BART) system in the San Francisco Bayvinyl chloride concentrations as low as 250 This appears to be a clear abdication of the area was to be the Automated Train Con-parts per million (ppm). At that time the prime responsibility of physicians or public trol (ATC) system, for which a contractallowed exposure limit for workers in thehealth workers to place the health of the was awarded to the Westinghouse ElectricUnited States was 500 ppm. In Januarypeople for whom they are responsible be- Corporation in 1967. Beginning in April1973 U.S. scientists visited Dr. Maltonifore all other considerations. Obviouslya 1969, three of the engineers on the projectand learned of his findings. However, theydoctor who is paid by a commercial enter- became increasingly concerned about whatdid not notify the National Institute of Oc- prise will fnd it very difficult to act con- they saw as serious defects in the system.cupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)trary to the policy of the company. The They expressed their concerns to the man-concerning these extremely ominous find-doctor who works for an independent in- agement but drew no significant responseings, nor did they make any attempt to specting agency will be in a much stronger except vague warnings not to be "trouble-warn the public or the workers exposed toposition. Even so, we know from experi- makers." Late in 1971 the three engineersvinylchloride.InlateJanuary1973 ence that regulatory agencies often become decided to take their case to the Board ofNIOSH requested information on possiblethe subservient allies of the organizations Directors; this led to a public hearing in hazards associated with occupational ex-that they are supposed to regulate andmay February 1972, after which the Boardposure to 23 chemical substances, includ-collaborate with the commercial organiza- voted 10 to 2 in favor of the managementing vinyl chloride. On 7 March, MCA re- tion in concealing the hazards. and against the engineers. The managersspondedby recommending aprecau- then told the three engineers that theytionarylabelthatmade no mention could choose between resigning and beingof toxic effects on animals or people; inCriteria and Procedures for fired; they refused I resign and were sum- other words, it appears to have deliberatelythe Resolution of Conflicts marily dismissed. Subsequent events vindi-deceived NIOSH regarding the true facts. cated their concern. The ATC systemApparently MCA has claimed that the Having now indicated the character of failed on several occasions; the failureswithholding of data was due to their agree-the problems, we now turn to criteria and were dangerous that the s!:stem couldment with the European manufacturers to procedures that may aid in resolving them. not be used, and it became necessary tokeep the data confidential until an agree-We approach the problem of establishing control the trains in the traditionalman-ment for their release could be worked out. criteria by asking questions rather than by ner. The fact remains that, because of the sup-offering answers. How will the proposed The California Society of Professionalpression of these data, tens of thousands ofdecision or procedure affect human health Engineers (CSPE) initiated an inquiry.workers were exposed without warning, forand safety, and the general quality and However,BA RT's topmanagementperhaps some 2 years, to toxic concentra-amenities of life, for all the people con- refused to meet with them, or to offerex-tions of vinyl chloride. On 22 Januarycerned? Will a decision to require a drastic planations to anyo .e. Then CSPE under-1974, B. F. Goodrich announced that threecleanup of operating conditions in a cer- took afull investigation of the firings,polyvinyl chloride workers, in just one oftain industry cause much of the industry to which brought out much disturbing infor-their plants, had died of angiosarcoma ofclose down, with loss of jobs and produc- mation, and the California State Legisla-the liver since1971. On the same daytion? How should such risks be balanced ture set in motion a study, resulting in a re-MCA revealedtheMaltonidatato againstconsiderationsofsafetyand port (the "Post Report") which essentiallyNIOSH. The Occupational Safety andhealth? What are the possible large-scale confirmed the warnings of the three engi-Health Administration, on 5 April, in an environmental effects of the present opera- neers. Although CSPE took tentative stepsemergency action lowered the permissibletions and of the proposed changes? Have toward a court action on behalf of The engi-exposure level from 500 to 50 ppm; drastic possible future effects been carefully con- neers, the society did not follow through onfurther lowering, to I ppm or less, is .insidered, as, for instance, with the widely this. The engineers themselves launchedaprospect (11c). used aerosols, which liberate Freons that, suit against BART for $885,000, the out- The evidence here seems clear a consid- in a decade or two, might (but again per- come of which we have not yet learnederable number of scientists were aware ofhaps might not) destroy much of the ozone (15). the hazards of vinyl chloride long beforein the stratosphere? These are some of the The case of date suppression concerningthe facts were made available to NIOSHproblems that will have to be faced in the the carcinogenicity of vinyl chloride.Inor to the public; yet they kept quiet andformulation of criteria. Obviously it is fir May 1970 an Italian investigator, Dr. P. L.gave no warning. As the Federation ofeasier to impose suitable regulations on a Viola, reported at a cancercongress thatAmerican Scientists states, "... industrialnew enterprise than on a powerful industry highconcentrations of vinylchloridescientists who fail to challenge conspiraciesthat is already established, with a huge caused cancer in rats. Up to that time thereof silence within their firms are not re-capital investment and with faults of oper- had apparently been no research in thebuked; rather, they are often quietlyre-ation and production that are already plastics industry concerning the possiblewarded for their loyalty." deeply entrenched. 1 bus the need for tore- 2 :153 sight in technology assessment is over-sional employees include such provisionsin controversies, can be a very expensive whelming; yet foresight is always imperfect for the revie v of disputes through hearingbusiness, especially if the case goes into the and needs constantly to be corrected by and appeal 1.rucesses. Provision far neutral courts. In any event, responsible scientists further experience. or third-party participation is important,would be required to spend substantial We turn now to procedures: how is theparticularly when issu-=, of public interestamounts of precious time serving on hear- whistle blo mer to be assured af a fair hear- are involved. ing panels, studying large bodies of evi- ing, without fear of reprisals, and with a dence, and preparing reports. good prospect that his recommendaticns, When a professional society does fight if they are found to be sound, will actually Professional Societies as for the rights of its members, it is more likely to be concerned with defending their be put into practice? Many scientific and Protectors of the Public Interest engineering societies have developed codes status and pay than to be acting primarily of ethics relating to the responsibility of How active can, and should, profes-on behalf of the public interest as its pri- employers and to the professional and per-sional societies be in actively fighting on mary motive. The impetus to take actions sonal conduct of scientific and technical behalf of then members who are attempt-of the latter sort is likely to be much less employees. A highly articulate expression ing to defend the public interest? Moststrong than the desire to provide direct of such concerns is to be found in a state-such societies have in the past remainedhelp to members of one's own professional ment on "Employment Guidelines," which aloof from conflicts of this sort and havegroup. has now been adopted by at least 20 engi- often taken the attitude that the purity of These are powerful obstacles to our pro- neering and scientific societies. For thetheir devotion to the advancement of their posals, but they are not inst,nerable. So- most part, it is concerned with the general respective sciences would somehow be con- cieties that share common interests, but principles that should govern relations be-taminated if they entered the public arenawhich may be individually too weak finan- tween employers and employees, but it also to contest such issues. We believe that suchcially to support such activities, may band contains the significant statement: "Theattitudes are no longer appropriate. The together in groups to finance the necessary professional employee should have due re- scientific community can no longer remainoperations. There are increasing pressures gard for the safety, life and health of the apart from the conflicts of our time, where upon scientists, engineers, and other mem- pudic and fellow employees in all work for so many technological decisions are being bers of the scie.."ific community to face which he/she is responsible. Where themade that vitally affect the well-being ofthese public issues and deal with them ef- technical adequacy of a process or product society. We are not proposing that profes-fectively. These pressures come both from is involved, he/she should protect the pub-sional societies should take public standsthe public and from within the ranks of the lic and his/her employer by withholding of on large general political issues, such as thescientists themselves. We are well aware of plans that do not meet accepted profes-legitimacy of the Vietnam War; individualthe mistrust and hostility toward science sional standards and by presenting clearly members of the societies, when their con-that is manifest in many quarters; one re- the consequences to be expected if his/hercern is aroused, should deal with theseflection of this attitude is the decline in professional judgment is not followed" (/9, matters by other mechanisms. However, in government support of scientific research p. 59). matters directly related to the professionalin recent years. Such hostility will almost The formulation of such a declaration is competence of members of the society,certainly grow unless scientists exhibit a sign icant event. How much it means de- where the public interestis clearly in-greater concern for preventing the misuse, pends, of course, on the effectiveness with volved, we believe that the societies canof science and technology As these con- which it is applied. Moreover, these guide- and should play a much more active rolecerns beeline more intense, it should be- lines, like most such codes of ethics that we than they have in the past. They can dealcome easier for the professional societies haveseen,lacka very importantin- with such issues by setting up committeesto obtain additional funds to finance the gredient, namely, a provision for the arbi-of inquiry in cases where a serious viola-expenses of lawsuits, hearing panels, and tration of disputes. The protection of indi- tion of scientific freedom or responsibilityother activities unc' rtaken in the defense viduals from arbitrary action by authority is suspected, by publicizing the results ofof the public interest. Whether government is deeply ingrained Ir.English common the inquiry in professional journals, and, iffunds could or should be available for such law, and the U.S. Constitution provides necessary, in the more popular j urnalspurposes is open to question; but it is likely that "no person shall ... be deprived ofand in the news media, and by calling the that some of the major private founda- life, liberty, or property without due pro-matter to the attention of governmental tions, either those now in existence or those cess of law." We believe that some form ofbodies, as with the California Legislatureyet to be created, will sec the urgency of due process should be an essential part of in the BART case. They can on occasionsupporting such public service activities. any employer-employee agreement or con- launch lawsuits on behalf of their membersThe need for these activities may also lead tract, to protect the employee from arbi-who have apparently sufferedinjusticeto the creation of other social mechanisms trary action by the employer, allegedly when acting on behalf of the public inter-for dealing with these problems, of a sort based on professional or personal miscon- est. that we cannot now foresee. We look to in- dcct. A minimum requirement for such In stating this, our major new proposalcreased activity of the professional so- due process would involve a hearing by a for dealing with "the objective and impar-cieties as the most hopeful approach to the board, including independent members, tial study of these prcblems," we are aware problem in the immediate future. with the right of appeal to some reasonably of the difficulties that the proposal will neutral but professionally qualified higherface. The most serious problems ale those authority. Codes of professional ethics are of time and money. Most professional so- The Role of the AAAS in the Defense likely to be ineffective unless some type of cieties have limited funds; many operate of Scientific Freedom and Responsibility due process is provided for the resolution more or less on a shoestring. They keep of disputes. Without this, scientific free-members' dues fairlysmall; otherwise We now consider the third charge from dom is likely to be abridged. We therefore members drop out, particularly in times ofthe AAAS to this Committee: "To recom- strongly recommend that all employment economic hardship. The fighting of diffi- mend mechanisms to enable the Associa- contracts involving scientific or profes- cult cases, on behalf of members involved tion to review specific instances in which 257 254

scientific freedom is alleged to have been that are notindispute. The real dis-ties gives it a greater freedom of action. abridged or otherwise endangered, or re- agreements in such cases usually turn not Both organizations clearly have very im- sponsible scientific conduct is alleged toon the scientific facts but on the relativeportant and somewhat different roles to have been violated." The domain of theweight to be given to different kinds of sci- play in the maintenance of scientific free- AAAS is very broad, including all of theentific facts, and on extrascientific issuesdom and responsibility. sciences anti a large number of profes-involving political judgment and broad The problems we have been considering sional societies which belong to it as affili-general perspectives on human nature and hece will certainly continue and will prob- ates. Hence, by its nature the AAAS can- human motives. These factors always enter ably become more numerous and more not undertake therolethat we haveinto the practical decisions that must be acute in the years to come. We hope that envisaged for the professional societies inmade in applications of science and tech- the concern of the AAAS will continue. the preceding section. The number of pos-nology. When a scientist or technologistWe suggest that, not more than 5 years sible appeals to the AAAS, if it were to un- states a case for action of a certain sort onhence, the AAAS should reexamine the dertake the responsibility of reviewing par-such an issue, it is important that he makewhole problem, perhaps by setting up a ticularinstances of alleged threatsto clear the general presuppositions fromcommittee similar to this one, to see where scientificfreedom andresponsibility, which he starts. He may, of course, be un- we stand at that time. Alternatively or in would be immense. If it were to agree toconscious of these presuppositions; if so,addition, it might set up a committee to re- handle some such cases, it would have toScience should as a matter of editorial pol-ceiv' complaints concerning violations of be rigorously selective and deal only with icy bring them to the surface. This is im-scientific freedom and responsibility and those that were at once so important andportant, both for the rational discussion ofrefer them, when possible and desirable, to so broad in scope that they would fall out- the issues involved and for the main-appropriate bodies for fu her study and side the domain of any individual society. tenance of public confidence in the honestypossible action. Such a committee should Because of its multiple affiliations withand objectivity of scientists, not itself serve as a judicial body; its func- the professional societies, the AAAS can On rare occasions the AAAS may and tions should be to refer complaints for pos- play an important part in coordinating should become actively involved ir. broadsible action elsewhere and to analyze the man" of the activities of the societies. A issuesthatareimportantandcon- information received, with an eye to pos- number of the societies, for example, aretroversial, as it did when it decided to con-sible recommendations concerning future now formulating, or revising, codes of eth-duct an investigation of the effects ofpolicy initiatives by the AAAS in the light ics for their members, which will involvedefoliants and herbicides in Vietnam. Thisof this information. The terms of reference policies for dealing with issues such as wewas an important attempt to obtain scien-of such a committee would need to be very have been discussing here. The AAAS can tific evidence on an issue that had arousedcarefully drawn, to prevent the committee help to provide an exchange of information passionate controversy (20). The Nationalfrom being overwhelmed by a mass of un- on these matters among the different so-Academy of Sciences, at the request ofmanageable complaints. cieties and thereby promote a more unifiedCongress, later undertook a more exten- approach to these complex issues. sive study of the same problems, with in- References and Notes The AAAS is already playing a signifi-creased financial support provided by the 1 Perspective on Chlorinated Dibenzorhorins and Dibenzofurans(Environmental Health Per- cant role in dealing with alleged abridg-Department of Defense. The resulting re- spectives. Exrerimental Issue No. 5. Dept- rtment nu:tits of scientific freedom, and alleged vi- of Health. Education, and Welfare Publication port of the National Academy committee No. NIH 74.128. National Institute of Environ- olations of responsible scientific conduct,(21) greatly extended and amplified the mental Health Scien-s, Box 12233. Research Tn. through active discussion of such matters angle Park, N.C., September 1973) Several arti- AAAS report; the findings of both are for cles deal with the toxicity of the dioxins See in Science, chiefly in the News and Com-the most part reasonably concordant, but particular! y table 4 in the artvle by R. Baughman and M. S. Meselson. pp 27-35. which summarizes ment section, but also in some of the leadsome discrepancies have given rise to con- the results of earlier workers. articles and in the Letters section. Sincetroversy (22). These disagreements can be 2 V Earle, Ed . On Academic Freedom (American Enterprise Institute. Washington, D C., 1971) Science is so widely read, both inside andresolved later, when it is possible tocon- 3. P Berg et al. Science 185, 303 (1974): N. Wade. outside the scientific community, 'this is ibid p. 332. duct studies of the Vietnamese forests on 3aIn February 1975. an international conference of one of the most important channels nowthe ground in a peaceful setting; as long as experts at the Asilomar Conference Center in Cali- available for bringing such problems to the fornia devoted several days of intensive discussions war continues, only aerial observations are to this problem and concluded with a recommen- attention of the public. To focus public at- possible. In any case the AAAS study per- dation to lift the voluntary moratorium on most of tention on such problems, of course, is not t:,,:seproposed genetic experiments, However, formed a valuable service and was in no such experiments were to be done only subject to resolve them, but it is an essential stepway rendered superfluous by thelater to rigorous precautions for containment of the possibly hazardous organisms. 'he stringency of toward such resolution. We recommendstudy of the National Academy of Sci- the precautions increasing with ,he estimated risk that Science, without any drastic change ofences. in different categories of expenments Indeed. for many of the possible experiments, the required its present editorial policies, enhance its This raises the more general question: conditions cannot be met without the development coverage of such matters, particularly byWhat should be the relation between the of new organisms and new techniques, so that the moratonum is in effect being continued for such inviting distinguished academic, industrial,AAAS and the National Academy in mat- experiments. See N. Wade. Science 187, 931 and government scientists who are well in- (1975). ters such as we have considered in this re- 4 J Katz, Ed.. Experimentation with Human Beings formed on some of these controversial is-port? The National Academy has special (Russell Sage Foundation, New York, 1912) sues to set them forth in its pages. In some 5. "Clinical Studies in the Human The Ethical and prestige and a unique relation to the U.S. Scientific Problems." symposium by A. C. Barnes, cases, it will be desirable to present two or R Q Marston, B Barber. and JKatz (Fero, government. It, and its committees, can Steed 23, 593 (1972)). more articles by different authors, ex-speak on many issues with far more au- 6. B. J. Culliton. Science 185, 426 (1974) pressing more or less contradictory points 7 E F Behrman, New York Times (9 June 1974), thority than the AAAS, and it can gener- opposite editorial page of view.Inscientificcontroversies,itally cc amand much more financial sup- 8 AAAS Committee on Science in the Promotion of should not be necessary for the champions Human Welfare "The integrity of science," Am port for its investigations. However, the Sci 53, 174 (1965). of different views to operate like adver-AAAS, with its much broader member- 9 For a useful short history of the use of DDT. see G McIntire. Environment (St bout, 14 (No 6). 14 saries in a court of law; the opposing sidesship,ismore widely representative,)f (1972) presumably should be able to find a largeAmerican scienceingeneral, andits 10 These figures are from World Health Organization RelevbEpidenuologique Hebdomadaire (8 August area of agreement about scientific factsgreater independence from gov-rnmental 1969) 2 8 255

I I. R. Garcia. Environment 1St Louis, 14 (No 5). 2 port by S. H. Unger ("The BART Case: Ethics 20 engineer rig and scientific societies. (1972) and the Employed Engineer." host Elects. Elec- 20. M. S. Meselson, A H. Westing. J. D. Constablc 12 For numerous examples of this and many other tronEng Comm SocImplications Technol Herbicide Assessment Commission of the Amen- problems in international development schemes. Newel No 4 (Sept1973). p 6 (VKlig, Ed, can Association for the Advancement of Science, See The Careless Technology Ecology and Inter- 497 Park Avenue, Leonts, N J 07605)) Background Matenal Relevant to Presentations at national Development. M. T. Farvar and J. P Mil- 16.Our discussion is based on Fed Am So Pmf the 1970 Annual Meeting of the AAAS (reprinted ton. Eds. (Natural History Press, Garden City, Bull 2 (No. 8). 1 (1974) in the Congressional Record 118 (No 32), S3226 N.Y., 1972). 17P. Brodeur, Expendable Americans (Viking Press, S3233 (3 March 1972)) 13 C. Sterling, Atlantic Monthly (May 1974), p. 98, New York, 1974) Concerning the hazards of as- 21 Committee on the Effects of Herbicides in Viet- N. Wade, Science 185.234 (1974) bestos, and steps taken to control them. sec also nam. The Effects of herbicides in South Vietnam 14. Report of the Advisory Committee on the Biologi- A K. Ahmed, D R MacLeod, J Carmody [Envi- (National Academy of Sciences, Washington, cal Effects of Ionizing Radiations. The Effects on ronment 1St Louis? 14 (No 10), 16 (1972)1 DC 1974) Populations of Exposure to Low Levels of ionizing 18R Scott, Muscle and Blood (Dutton, New York. 22 Concerning this controversy. sec, for instance. D Radiation (Division of Medical Sciences. National 1974) Shapley (Science 183, ;217 (1974)1 Jnd C Nor- Academy of Sciences-National Research Council. 19Statement on "Employment Guidelines," Ins. man fArasure (Lund 124. ; YS (1974)1 Washington, D.C.. 1972) ElectElectron Eng Spectrum 1973, 57 (Apnl 15. Our description is taken from a more detailed re- 1973) The statement has been adopted by at least

2S9 AAAS Committee on Science in the Promotion of Human Kennedy, Donald, Scieti,e 216 365 (1982). p. 216 Welfare. Science 132 68-73 (1960), p. 244 Koshland, Daniel E., Jr.. Science 235 141 (1987), p. 131 AAAS Committee on Scientific Freedom and Responsibility. La Porte. Tod,' R. and Daniel Metlay, Science 188 121-127 Science 188 687-693 (1975), p. 249 (1975), p. 88 AAAS Committee on the Social Aspects cf Science. Science 125 Lanz. Henry. Science 142 916 (1963), p 44 143-147 (1957), p. 239 Long. F.A., Science 223 1133 (1984), p. 226 AAAS Special Committee on Civil Liberties for Scientists. Morison. Robert S., Science 165 150-156 (1969), p. 53 Science 110 177-179 (1949), p. 238 Motulsky, Arno G.. Science 219 135-140 (1983). p. 152 Abelson, Philip H.. Science 167 241 (1970). p. 11 Neir.ark, Edith D., Science 212 873 (1981), p. 129 Abelson, Philip H., Science 217 1095 (1982). p. 104 Nelkin, Dorothy, Science 716 704-708 (1982). p. 99 Bazelon, David L., Science 205 277-280 (1979). n. 173 Numbers, Ronald L , Science 218 538-544 (1982). p. 104 Blair, Carve!, Science 215 1456 (1982), p 129 Okrent, David, Science 208 372-375 (1980), p. 176 Broad, William J.. Science 212 137-141 (1981). p. 126 Pie!, Gerard. Science 231 201 (1986). p. 121 Burnham, John C.. Science 215 1474-1479 (1982), p. 147 Pierce, J.R., Science 172 115 (1971). p. 98 Carey, William D.. Science 199 1161 (1978). p. 65 Pigman, Ward and Emm,.(t B. Carmichael. Science ill 643-647 Carey, William D., Science 210 383 (1980). p 212 (1950), p. 34 Carey, William D.. Science 214 609 (1981,. p. 213 Raleigh, C.B.. Science 213 499 (1981). p. 96 Carey, William D., Science 217 1207 (1982). p. 217 Ramo, Simon, Science 213 837-842 (1981). p 186 Carey, William D., Science 222 1281 (1983). p. 225 Reistritp, J.V., Science 155 271,(1967), p. 10 Carey, William D. and Frank Carlucci, Sc cent e 215 139-141 Ricci, Paolo F. and Lawrence S. Molton. &ten«, 214 1096-11(R) (1982), p. 214 (1981), p. 191 Carroll. James D.. Science 171 647-653 (1971). p. 76 Rosen, Michael R. Brian F. Hoffman. Science 235 1561 Chagas, Carlos, Science 207 1159-1161 (1980). p 66 (1987). p. 132 Conference on Nuclear War, Science 218 4-.8-449 ( i 982). p. 217 Rosenbaum. Robert A. et al.. Science 219 257-259 (1983). p. Cranberg, Lawrence, Science 141 1242 (1963). p. 44 219 DcLauer, Richard D., Science 226 9 (1984). p. 233 Rowley, Peter T.. Science 225 138-144 (1984). p. 158 &hall, John T., Science 121 615-619 (1955). p. 24 Ruckelshaus, William D., Science 221 1°,26-1028 (1983), p. 207 Edsall, John T.. Science 212 11-14 (1981). p. 12 Russell. Bertrand. Science 131 391-392 (1960). p. 4 Ferguson, James R., Science 221 620-624 (1983). p.221 Schenken, J.R., Science 121 184-186 (1955). p. 74 Fosberg, F.R., Science 142 916 (1963). p. 44 Shapiro. Harold T.. Science 225 9 (1984). p 32 Giamatti, A. Bartlett. Science 218 1278-1280 (1982). p Silver. George A . Science 215 1456-1457 (I12). p 129 Glass. Bentley, Scenic 126 1317 (1957). p 27 Snow. C.P.. Science 133 255-259 ('961) p. 6 Glass, Bentley. Science 150 1254-1261 (1965). p 37 Sproul!, Robert L.. Science 219 125 (1983). p. 114 Goodfield, June, Science 198 580-585 (1977). p 60 Starr. Chauncey. Science 165 1232-1238 (1969). p. 166 Gordis. Leon and Ellen Gold. Seten«, 207 I53-15n (1980). p Starr. Chauncey and Chris Whipple. Science 208 1114-1119 143 (1980). p. 180 Graham, W.E., Science 142 1257 (1963). p. 44 Stetten, DeWitt. Jr.. Science 189 953 (1975). p 28 Hamburg, David A.. Science 224 943-946 (1984). p114 Stetten, DeWitt. Jr., Science 226 1375-1376 (1984). p 130 Hamburg, David A.. Science 231 533 (1986). p 122 Turner. Joseph. Science 131 1013 (1960). p 5 Handler. Philip. Science 208 1093 (1980). p 95 Turner. Joseph. Se:,,it«, 133 1393 (1961). p. 28 Harrison. Anna J.. Science 215 1061-1063 (1982). p15 Var.m. Robert D. and Diane S. Kukich, Sc cent2; "35-388 Harrison, Anna J.. Serettee 224 939-942 (1984). p. (1985). p117 Hess, Charles E.. Science 225 273 (1984). p 31 von /Impel. Frank and Joel Primacy Sue's«, 177 1166-1171 Hillman, Harold, Science 212 494 (1981). p. 129 (1972), p. 82 Hohenemser. C. a al.. Sc cent230 378-384 (1983). p 201 Wallerstein, Mitchel B.. &ten«. 224 460-166 (1984), p 227 Holton. Gerald, Science 131 1187-1193 (1960). p 48 Weisskopf, Victor F. and Robert R Wilson. .Science 208 97- Jasanoff. Sheila and Dorothy Nelkin, Scull«, 214 1211-1215 (1980), p. 212 (1981), p. 196 Wink, Edward. JrS(.ten«, 206 771 (1979). p. 94 John Paul II. Pope. Sc ware 207 1165-1167 (1980), p 29 White, Ra)mond R &ten«. 235 1447 (1987). p131 Kass. Leon R., Science 174 779-788 (1971). p. 134 Wolfle, Duel. Science 134 359 (1961). p.I() Kates. Robert W...5(tence 201 502-506 (1978). p. (>8 Zack. Brian G.. Science 213 291 (1981). p 98

260

257 ABM system, 84, 85-86 open research and, 25 Abortion, universities and, 114 genetic disease and, 135-136 Coate..., Vary, 79 genetic screening and, 158 Code of ethics. See Scientific ethics, code of limitations of science and, 98-99 Confidentiality, 145 Academic community. See Universities civil liberties and, 238 Academic freedom, 32, III, 121. See also Scientific freedom health sciences and, 133, 138, 143, 144, 155, 160, 163 fraud and, 129 intellectual property and, 100 national security and, 220-221 national secunty and, 220 Allen, James, 100 in universities, 118, 119 Alsabti, Elias A.K., 126, 127 Conflict of interest, Alvarez-Rojas, Federico, 70 cod, of ethics and, 44 Andreopoulos, Spyros, 12, 13 faculty members and, 112, 113, 119 Animal rights, 31, 235 regulatory agencies and, 187, 190 Anti-Evolutionists, 104-110 Consent, Antiscience activities, 73, 76, 88-93, 95 human subjects research and, 138 creationists and, 104-110 genetic screening and, 161 legislation and, 31 patient, 144, 145 Applied research, 5, 7, III, 114, 121, 240. See also Technology Courts, 98 national security and, 211, 221 creationism and, 106-107 scientific responsibility and, 29, 133, 249 intelle-tua: property and, 100 Aroun, Taysir al-, 69, 70 medical research and, 145, Ashby, Eric, 14, 114 regulatory technology and, 77, 165, 189-190, 196 Atomic research, 34, 68 "Right to die," 197 risk and, 173-174 Basic research, 13, 26, 29, 56, 66, 216. SPe also Classified Creationism, 104-111 research Cyclamates, 84 budget for, 48, 226-227 industry and, 112, 114 DDT, 13, 178, 251 national security and, 211, 233 DNA research, 29 public understanding of, 55, 95 Darrow, Clarence, !J7 scientific responsibility and, 5, 12, 98, 134, 245. 249 Darwin, Charles, society and, 34, 51, 62, 240-243 creationism and, 104 technology and, 50 scientific ethics and, 40, 41 universities and. 118, 121 Dawson, John William, 104 Baslow, Morris, 14 Delgado, Jose, 136, 141 Bateson, William, 106 Disclosure, Bay Area Rapid Transit (BARD, 14, 252 of fraud, 130, 132 Bazelon, Judge David, 99, 189. 192, 196, 198 principle of, 113 Bernard, Claude, 34, 35 risk and, 180 Blankenzee, Max, 14 Discovery, scientific. See Scientific discovery Blyth, Edward, 40 Djerassi, Carl, 14 Bridgman, Percy, 121 Dobzkansky, Theodosius, 10 Bronowski, Jacob, 28, 39 Drell, Sidney, 84 Bruder, Robert, 14 Dubos, Rend, 54, 62 Bryan, William Jennings. 105 Burt, Cyril, 128 Ebert, Robert H.. 127 Burtt, E.A., 52 Einstein, Albert, anti-Semitism and, 47, 76 Cancer, 187, 242 creationism and. 109 confidentiality and, 143-144 as scientific conscience, 47 genetic manipulation and, 153 scientific responsibility and 43. 49. 74 scientific responsibility and, 252 Eiseley, Loren C., 11 Carabelli, Gabriela, 70 Ellul, Jacoues, 77, 89, 90 Carson, Rachel, 13, 80, 84, 86 Engineering. See Technology Cassell, Eric, i39 Engineers code of ethics and. 44 Chudnovskiy, Grigoiiy, 69 Etzioni, Amitai, 76 Clark, Harold W., 108 Evolution, 37, 114 Classified research, 101-102, 217, 220, 227-233, 242 reationisin and, 104-111 "Born classifie, ," 101 civil liberties and, 238 Felig, Philip, 126, 129 2 61 259 Feyerabend, Paul, 127 Malone, Thomas F.. 10 Foster, John. 84 Marcuse. H., 77 Foundations, 81, 87 Massera, Jose Luis, 70 Fraud, 7, 20, 122. 125, 126-128, 131. See also Science, as Mayo, L., 79 self-correcting system: Scientific ethics McCann, Alfred W. 107 disclosure of, 130, 132 McCarthyism, 26, 67 plagiarism and, 40 Medawar, Sir Peter, 64 pressure to publish and, 127 Medicine, practice .4. 134-135. 158-159 scientists and, 129, 132 confidentiality and, 143-146 as profession133. 147-151 Galileo, 4, 41, 66 self-regulation of. 148. 150 Catholic Church and. 23. 30 Merton, Robert, 12. 13. 121 scientific freedom and, 27, 28. 249 Misetich, Antonio. 70 Gallardo, Juan Carlos. 69 Mitroff. Ian I.. 128 Garwin, Richard, 84 Mohammed, Ismail, 69 Genetic engineering, 31, 78, Ill, 133-135, 152-153. See also Monod. Jacques. 12 Technology. DNA Morality. See Science and morality Gish, Duane T.. 110 MorerCUiST., 107 Goldberger, Marvin, 84 Morris, Henry M. 108-110 Government regulation. See also Public policy Murray. Madalyn, 109 academic freedom and, 219-221 genetic manipulation and. 153 National security. 216, 217. 219- 220. 111-115. 250 medicine and, 75 federal research funding and. 24 technology and. 77. 88, 141. 216 regulatiors and. 237. 238 Graduate students. science communication and. 101. 211. 213. 214. 227-234 sponsored research and, 118. Nazism, 27, 67 "sequestered thesis" issue, 120 genetics and, 41. 153 Guyot, Arnold, 104 scientists and. 8, 74 Nuclear energy. Handler, Philip, 70 judicial competence and. 198 Hjortsvang, Holger, 14 public understanding of. 95 Hobby, Oveta Culp. 24 regulation and. 187. 190 Huizinga. J., 94 risk and. 171. 175. 178. 184. 193. 205 Humanities, science and, 4. 49. 52. 60. 62 scientific responsibility and. 246 Human rights, 66, 212 Nuclear weapons. Committee on (NAS), 68 arms race and. 9 Community of scientists and. 72 national security and. 211 Human subjects research. 100. 136. 138. 143. 145. scientific responsibility and. 12. 84. 21.i. 249. Humboldt, r.l.-xander von. 41 as a social issue. 242 Huxley. Sir Andrew, 71 technological regulation and. 141 use of. 115. 116. 217-219. 226 Hitch. Ivan. 147. 150 Industry-university collaboration. 101. III. 114, 117 See also Omens. G.S. 162 Universities, industry and Oppenheimer. Robert. 3. 73. 74 Information. pinpnetary, 113. 118-120. 195. See also Scientific Orlov, Yuriy F.. 71. 72. 21? freedom intellectual property. 99. 121 Pasquini. Eduardo. 70 Peer review. Kaback, M.M.. 163 defects of, 128. 129 Kamil, T.W., 69 fraud and. 125 Kamin, Leon, 128 scientific integrity and, 132 Kapitza, Peter. 8 Peters. John P.. 25 Keble, J. 61 Peto. Richard. 15 Kellogg, Vernon. 105 Piltdown man. 7, 131 Kelly, Howard A., 107 Pitzer, Kenneth, 84 Kennedy, Donald. 101 Polanyi. Michael. 34 Kidd, Benjamin. 105 Pontifical Academy of Sciences. 29. 31. 217 Kovalev, Sergei A.. 70. 71 Pope John Paal II. 29. 211 Kuhn. Thomas, 110. 127 Poplar!. Samuel. 1(X) Kulp, J. Laurence. 108 Popper. Karl, 110 Population growth. Lamments, Walter E. 108 scientific responsibility and. 249 Lang, Walter. 109 as a social issue. 55 Lastuvka, Vladimir, 70 technology and. 77. 115. 135. 136. 138 Lederberg, Joshua. 13 Price, George McCready. 106 Leuba, James H. 105 Public interest science. 48, 73, 82. 94-95. 216 Long, John, 126, 127. 128 examples of, 83-87. 240 Luddites. 54, 90 intelleztua! property and, 103 Ly, Ibrahima, 69 medicine and. 150 technology and. 78. 141 Machacek, Ales, 70 Publit. policy, 198. See also Government regulation Magruder, William, 83 risk and. 165 260 2 f; 2 scientific responsibility and, 5, I I. 13. 73. 95. '45-246 Science, technology, and society. Public understanding of science. See Science. public social contract between. 15. 18. 97. 142. 237. 239-243 understanding of. "Scientific creationism," 109 Scientific discovery, 6. 8. 12. 63 Quality of life, moral implications of. 10 risk and. 166-168. 195 national security and, 233 technology and, 19. 89. 92 public understanding and. 89 Scientific ethics. See also Fraud: Scientific responsibility Recombir...4 DNA research. 62, 64. 95. 135. 152-153 code of. 33, 34-37, 38. 44-45. 102 debates and. 65, 133, 174 human rights and, 72 Research, 24. 122. 220. See also Applied research: Basic research: image of science and, 95 Classified r-search: Human subjects research science advising and. 85, 86 civil liberties and, 238 Scientific freedom. See also Academic f:eedoir government and. 25 authoritarianism and. 70 national security and. 211. 214. 217. 233 climate for, 28-29.138. 245 universities and. III. 114. 118. 254 federal research funds and. 25 Richter, Clifford. 14 ethics and. 41 "Right to die," 197 govemmeit and. 26 Riley, William Bell. 105 hea!th sciences and. 133 Rimmer. Harry, 106 human rights and, 71 Risk, 40. 82. 102. 165. 166, intellectual freedom and. 41 biomedical research and. 136 intellectual property and. 99 criteria and analysis of. 180-185 national security and. 211 environmental law and. 191-19' principle of. 237 genetics and. 142. 158 public understanding and. 93 health sciences and. 133. 144. 150 totalitarianism and. 26. 28 judicial process and. 197 universities and. 117 meantres of. 176 Scientific integrity. See also Scientific ethics regulation of. 173. 186 fraud and. 20. 132 scientific responsibility and. 42. 243 multiple authorship and. 35. 129. 131 technology and, 169. 20i-206 principle of. 225. 237. 245. 248 Rosenberg. C.. 64 protection of. 15-17. 114 Scientific responsibility. 3, 5. 11. 20. 95. 243. 244. 248 SST case. 83. 88 examples of. 12-14. 129 Sakharov. Andrei. 70. 212 genetic manipulation and. 157. 163 Scenic Hudson Case, -o medical researchers and. 145 Science. 18. 38. 89. See also Public interest science physicians and. 150 beneficial uses of. 144. 186. 240 politics and. 4. 17. 66. 73. 74. 85. 165. 245 competition in. 12. 130 pollution and. 24: ethos of 12. 13. 121 principles of. 237 image of. 48-53. 54. 57. ;'8. 95. 98. 241 public interest science and. 81 jurisprudence and. 98 scientific community and. 3. 94. 225. 249 :imitations of. 99. 163. 173. 191 scientific ethics and. 6. 9. 34, 44 philosophy of. 64. 127 universities and. 118-119 as self-correcting system. 86. 126. 127. 128. 129 Scientific society .. Science. communication of. citizen participation and. 81 barriers to. 16. 19. 20. 117. 241 codes of ethics and. 44 freedom to publish and. 118 fraud and. 126 human rights and. 72 human rights and. 69 intellectual property ..nd. BM intellectual property and. 102 national security and. 101. 211. 213. 214. 227-234 medical societies and. 148 restrictions on. 242 politics and. 73 threats to101-103 role in public interest. 87. 253 between U.S. and U S S R.. 212 scientific misconduct aild. 13. 125 universities and. 111-113 social responsibility and. II. 94. 117 Science court. 199 Scientism. 51 Science education. 16. 17. 21. 48. 116. 157 Scientist% genetics and. 161 as advisers. 82-83 medical. 75 as advocates. 21. 84-85. 2(Xt teaching evolution and. 107 as citizens. 3. 4. 5. 9. 10. 12. 73. 74-75. 95. 174 Science and morality. 7. 9. 49. 95. 99. 129. 130. 131. 136 as expert witnesses. 21 anti-Semitism. 47. 57 as soldiers. 8. 9 apartheid. 27 Scopes. John Thomas. 106 discrimination. 19-20. 122. 137 Secunty. See National security Science. public understanding ot. 61o4. 76. 90. 92. 93. 139 Segraves. Nell. 109 biomedical development, and. 134 Sevilla. Elena. 69 citizen participation and. 85 Shannon-Thomberry. Milo. 1(X) genetic manipulation and. 142. 152. 161. 161. Shils. Edward, 88 medicine and. 147 Simpson. Melvin. 126. 128 "overselling science" and, 16 Singgih. Kamaluddin. 67 risk ai.J. 173, 209 Soman. Vijay, 126, 128-129 scientific community .41. 47. 66. 94-95.1432( Straus. Marc. 126. 127. 128 261 Surrunerlin, William, 127 industry and HA, I11, 112-113. 117 Surma II, Jean, 109 politics and, 32 Sutayasa, I. Made, 69 research budgets of 240 Szilard, Leo, 12 self- regulation of, I 1 1 Upton, Arthur C.. 145 Technology, 18, 19, 75, 115.See alsoApplied research Verification, 39, 70, 121, 125, 126, 131See alsoNuclear weapons assessment of, 78, 95, 167, 251 biomedical. 133, 134, 141, 155 War.See alsoNuclear weapons cost-benefit analysis and, 166-172 Darwinism and. 105 DNA, 134, 157 Einstein and, 67 health sciences and, 133, 150, 152, 162 history of science and, 50 participatory. 76-81, 85 social responsibility and, 4, 247 pollution and, 90, 92, 187, 207 between U.S. and U.S.S.R, 212 public understanding of, 16, 88, 133 Weinberg, Alvin, 12, 13 risk and, 167 Wheelock, E. Frederick, 127 social consequences of, 16-17, 18, 60, 77. 240, 247 Whistle-blowing, 14, 237, 249 Teller, Edward U., 74 Whitcomb, John C., Jr., 108 Torture, 70, 72.See alsoHuman rights White, Lynn T., Jr. 11 "Two cultures," 47 Wiwoho, Burson°, 69 Wright, George Frederick, 107 Universities, 59, 112, 114, 117 fraud and, 125, 132 Ziman report, 70 government and, 216

262