sign in sign up
<<
Home , Technology policy

DAVID H. GUSTON Forget Politicizing Science. Let's Democratize Science!

Since the publication last year by them of being somewhat insincere, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Ca.) of a in the same way that Louis, the report alleging that the Bush ad- Science advising in Vichy Prefect of Police in Casa- ministration has been inappropri- blanca, was "shocked, shocked" ately manipulating scientific re- government is to find gambling in the back room ports and advisory committees, unavoidably at Rick's, even as he collected his science has become an issue own winnings. From the $120 bil- with surprisingly long political political, but we lion for scientific R&D that the legs. The administration dismissed must make a government provides, to the petty Waxman's report as a partisan dis- power plays that plague depart- tortion and a politicization of sci- concerted effort to mental governance, science is ence in its own right. But this ensure that it is deeply political. Asking whether charge became somewhat harder science is politicized distracts us to sustain with the publication of democratic. from asking. "Who benefits and a like-minded report by the Union loses from which forms of politi- of Concerned Scientists and a let- cization?" and "What are the ap- ter, signed by a left-leaning but still propriate institutional channels for bipartisan group of scientists, again and Policy, eventually political discourse, influence, and alleging that the administration has responded with his own defen- action in science?" Arguing over inappropriately played politics with sively toned report. The political whether science is politicized ne- the findings of government scien- right also took aim with a critique glects the more critical question: tists and with appointments to fed- of leftist science in Politicizing Sci- "Is science democratized?" eral scientific advisory panels. ence, published by the conserva- Democratizing science does John Marburger, director of tive Hoover Institution. Without not mean settling questions about the White House Office of Science close examination of each allega- Nature by plebiscite, any more tion, it is hard to judge whether than democratizing politics means David H. Guston ([email protected]) one side is engaging in the more setting the prime rate by referen- is associate professor and director of the significant distortion or whether dum. What democratization does Program at the Bloustein both sides are merely viewing mean, in science as elsewhere, is School of Planning & Public Policy of business as usual through a lens creating institutions and practices Rutgers, The State University of New Jer- fractured along partisan lines. that fully incorporate principles of sey. In January 2005, he will join Ari- zona State University and its Consortium Regardless, such allegations accessibility, transparency, and ac- for Science, Policy, and Outcomes as pro- that science has been politicized countability. It means considering fessor of . are unproductive. I also suspect the societal outcomes of

FALL 2004 25 at least as attentively as the scien- science by expanding the array of the National Institute on Disability tific and technological outputs. It fields that the federal government and Rehabilitative Research of the means insisting that in addition to supported, as Sen. Harley Kilgore Department of Education, which being rigorous, science be popu- attempted to do with the social sci- seeks input from relevant disabil- lar, relevant, and participatory. ences in the early debate over NSF, ity communities in funding deci- These conceptions of democ- or by creating programs that were sions and post-hoc review. Disci- ratization are neither new nor, when explicitly focused on societal needs, plinary research such as that applied to science, idiosyncratic. as Rep. Emilio Daddario did with supported by NSF would be less They have appeared in discussions NSF's Research Applied to Na- likely to benefit from such input, about science at critical historical tional Needs. These approaches although priorities across areas of junctures. For example, the Alli- were problematic because public inquiry, such as climate research, son Commission, a congressional priorities are just as easily hijacked would benefit from an understand- inquiry into the management of by disciplinary priorities in the so- ing of what public decisionmakers federal science in the 1880s, estab- cial sciences as in the natural sci- want and need to know. For the lished the principle that even the ences. Moreover, at a basic research vast majority of mission-oriented emerging "pure science" would, institution such as NSF, applied re- public R&D spending, such partic- when publicly financed, be subject search may be either too small to ipation is likely a better way to en- to norms of transparency and ac- have great influence on the larger sure the conduct of basic research countability, despite John Wesley society or just large enough to in the service of public objectives, Powell's protestations. After World threaten the pure research mission. a goal sought by a diverse set of War II, the creation of the National My agenda for democratizing pol- analysts, including Lewis Brans- Science Foundation (NSF) hinged icy for science takes a different tack comb and Gerald Holton ("Jeffer- on establishing a politically ac- by broadening access across the sonian science"), Donald Stokes countable governing structure. sciences and across the levels at ("Pasteur's Quadrant"), and Rus- These concerns exist at the heart which priorities are set. tum Roy ("purposive basic re- of arguments made by theorists First, engage user communi- search"), not to mention policy- such as ties and lay citizens more fully in makers Sen. Barbara Mikulski philosopher Philip Kitcher, who de- review of funding applications. (D-Md.) ("strategic research") and scribes the accessible and partici- Such "extended peer review" in- the late Rep. George Brown ("sci- patory ideal of "well-ordered sci- creases the presence of public pri- ence in service of society"). ence" in his Science, Truth, and orities without mandating research Second, increase support for Democracy. They likewise exist in programs or diluting quality. The community-initiated research at many current science agencies and National Institutes of Health (NIH) universities and other research in- programs, but there they often fiy pioneered a modest form of ex- stitutions. National R&D priorities under the radar of higher-profile is- tended peer review by including are driven by large private invest- sues or have been institutionalized citizens on its grant advisory coun- ments. Through changes in intel- in ways that undermine their intent. cils, but the councils' reviews of lectual property, public investments They do not exist, however, study sections' recommendations have become increasingly oriented as an agenda for democratizing sci- have a pro forma quality. The NIH toward the private sector, even as ence. Below, I attempt to construct Web site acknowledges that "the private R&D spending has grown such an agenda: a slightly elabo- use of consumer representatives to twice the size of public R&D rated itemization of ways to de- may be extremely helpful in the re- spending. "Science shops"—re- mocratize both policy for science view of certain areas of research," search groups at universities that and science in policy. but it still holds "it is often neither take suggestions for topics from the necessary nor appropriate to in- local citizenry—offer the opportu- Policy for science clude consumer representatives in nity for community-relevant prior- In the past, critics of elite science peer review." A more thorough use ities to emerge from the bottom up. attempted to democratize policy for of extended peer review occurs at This research might include more

26 ISSUES IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY PERSPECTIVES

applied topics that are unlikely to search on research," areas that can between Congress and the Execu- draw grant money, such as assess- contribute to understanding the role tive Branch in matters scientific ments of local environmental health of science and technology in and technological. Without com- conditions. It might also facilitate broader political, economic, and petition from a co-equal branch. connections between research uni- cultural dynamics, but from which Executive-based science advice has versities and local economic inter- the federal government has pulled a monopoly, and monopolies in the ests that are less dependent on back intramural resources. ELSI marketplace of ideas do not serve intellectual property. These con- programs should also have institu- democracy. There have been re- nections would be akin to agricul- tional connections to decision- cent, behind-the-scenes efforts to tural or manufacturing extension, makers, as the genome program reconstitute a congressional ca- and they could be funded in the initially did. In addition to setting pacity for , same politically successful way. By aside three to five percent of the including a pilot project at GAO. A allowing some of the priorities of R&D megaprojects for ELSI work, positive finding from an indepen- the research enterprise to emerge the federal government should set dent evaluation of that project en- more directly from local commu- aside a similar amount for all R&D couraged Representatives Holt, nities, science shops can help rein- programs over a certain size, per- Houghton, Barton, and Boehlert to vigorate the concept of "public in- haps $100 million, and should ftind draft a bill authorizing $30 million terest science," articulated in the much-expanded research programs for an Office of Science and Tech- 1960s by Joel Primack and Frank in the societal dynamics of science nical Assessment (OSTA) in GAO. Von Hippel, and help set a research and technology through NSF. The bill specifies that OSTA as- agenda that is not captive to large sessments would be publicly avail- economic interests. Democratizing science advice able, thus contributing to demo- Third, restructure programs in Discussion of the democratization cratic politics as well as providing the ethical, legal, and societal im- of science advice borders on the competition for Executive Branch plications (FLSI) of research. If current controversy over politi- expertise. Even if OSTA is autho- ELSI programs, such as those cization. Despite their recent po- rized and funded, its influence funded with the genome or nan- litical currency, issues of science would remain to be seen. But es- otechnology initiatives, are to fa- advice will not attract media or tablishing OSTA would create, at cilitate democratic politics and im- move voters in the way that issues least in part, a public deliberative prove the societal impacts of of guns and butter will, and thus space for science and policy that knowledge-based , they the circuit of transparency and ac- a modern democracy requires. need to meet two criteria. First, countability will be incomplete. In Second, enhance the trans- they must extend into research earlier periods of reform, concerns parency and accountability of ex- areas that have not already been about the politics and process of pert deliberations through discus- designated for billion-dollar pub- expert advice led to the Federal sion and articulation of science lic investments. Such a change Advisory Committee Act, which policy rules. The decision rules for would not only protect them from mandates transparency in the ac- guiding how experts provide sci- being swamped by the mere scale tions of advisory committees and ence advice require more scrutiny of technical activity but would also balance in their membership. A re- and better articulation. Even sup- allow them to identify technical cent report by the General Ac- posing that science advice were areas prospectively and have an in- counting Office (GAO) found that purely technical, any group of ex- fluence on whether and how such agencies need better guidance to perts larger than one still needs a large-scale public investments are implement the balance require- set of decision rules by which to made. Second, ELSI research ment, but more wide-ranging ac- settle disagreement. The character must be more directly plugged tion is needed. of such rules, e.g., linear and back into the policy process. ELSI First, recreate an Office of threshold models for assessing risk, programs should include more Technology Assessment (OTA) to is familiar in environmental pol- technology assessment and "re- restore the policy-analytic balance icy. Such rules also include the ad-

FALL20O4 27 missibility of evidence, the defini- promotes learning about both sci- organizations at all major research tion of expertise and conflicts of ence and democracy, and gener- universities—not to replace more interest, the burden and standards ates novel perspectives for policy- technocratic methods, but as a nec- of proof, and the mechanisms for makers. These mechanisms are essary complement for a system of aggregating expert opinion. A par- more familiar in European settings, democratic science advice, analy- ticular example of the last rule where the Danish Board on Tech- sis, and assessment. would be instituting recorded votes nology uses citizens' panels for Some readers will surely find within expert advisory committees, public education and government this agenda not nearly far-reach- rather than pursuing a vague con- advising, and the Netherlands Of- ing enough to democratize science. sensus as most panels do. Com- fice of Technology Assessment de- Others will just as surely think it mittees of the National Toxicology velops other forms of public input. threatens the autonomy and in- Program make recommendations NSF has recently funded quasi-ex- tegrity of science. And there are for the biennial Report on Car- periments in face-to-face and In- most certainly grander ways of cinogens by recorded vote, and it ternet-mediated citizens' panels, perfecting our democracy that, al- seems salutary as it both specifies and the Nanotechnology Research though not directly dealing with the relative level of agreement and Development Act endorses the science, would transform it as well. within the committee and creates use of such panels, among other Such betwixt and between a record that can be used to assess outreach techniques, to inform the may be uncomfortable rhetorically, the objectivity and balance of a National Nanotechnology Initia- but I think it wise politically. Sci- committee, thus providing infor- tive (an arrangement that also con- ence and democracy have both mation for a more democratic pol- nects ELSI to policy). At Rutgers, been around for a long time with- itics of expertise. A second exam- I have recently created a Center out being perfected, and my ple is the Supreme Court's Daubert for Responsible Innovation, the agenda will not complete the task. decision, which describes consid- mission of which includes outreach These incremental steps, aimed at erations that trial judges should to and collaboration with commu- further implementing broadly rec- apply when deciding on the ad- nities in addition to research and ognized values of accessibility, missibility of expert testimony. teaching at the nexus of science transparency, and accountability, Every venue of expert deliberation and society. At Arizona State Uni- will admittedly not democratize evaluates expertise implicitly or versity, the Consortium for Sci- science immediately and thor- explicitly, yet the rules for such ence, Policy, and Outcomes is im- oughly. Neither will they condemn evaluations are rarely the focus of plementing a research agenda it to populist mediocrity. What pur- study, public discussion, or demo- called "real-time technology as- suing this agenda might do, how- cratic choice. sessment" that combines traditional ever, is foster the intellectual and technology assessment with his- Third, increase the opportuni- political conditions for a relatively torical, informational, and partic- ties for analysis, assessment, and more democratic science to flour- ipatory approaches in an effort to advice-giving through the use of ish within the current wanting en- incorporate intelligent deliberative polling, citizens' pan- vironment. Discussing this agenda into knowledge-based innovation. els, and other participatory mech- may, at the very least, shift the One could imagine building the anisms. Such "participatory tech- focus from sterile argument over capacity to foster exchanges nology assessment" circulates politicizing science to deliberation among experts, citizens, and civic views among citizens and experts. about democratizing science.

28 ISSUES IN SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY