........................................................................ Professional Ethics Report Publication of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Scientific Freedom, Responsibility & Law Program in collaboration with the Committee on Scientific Freedom & Responsibility, Professional Society Ethics Group VOLUME XIX NUMBER 2 Spring 2006 s ADVISING AND INFLUENCING legislative process? My own research successful at grasping unfamiliar SCIENCE POLICY IN THE UK AND investigates these questions by comparing scientific concepts (4). While increasing THE US the mechanisms of government particularly the number of qualified scientists in as they relate to areas of science policy elected government would undoubtedly By Richard Elliott upon which these two nations have failed assist the accurate communication of to agree (e.g. stem cell research, climate science, in theory, there is no reason Richard Elliott, a former intern with the change, and genetically modified agricul- why the advice of a third party (provided AAAS Scientific Freedom, Responsibility ture). it is accurate, impartial and reflects the and Law Program, recently completed a diversity of scientific opinion and Master’s degree in Science, Culture and The role of scientifically trained politi- acknowledges the often inconclusive Communication at the University of cians nature of research) cannot provide a Bath, UK. He holds a BSc in molecular The landslide Labour victory of 1997 substitute for scientific training among biology from the University of Edinburgh elected more Members of Parliament (MPs) legislators. and studied for a year on international with scientific qualifications than there had exchange at the University of California ever been before, but there are still only Governmental scientific advisory groups Santa Barbara. about 10% with a degree-level qualification Key bodies with science advisory in science, medicine or engineering (1). roles within the UK government include Science, engineering and technology Similarly, in the USA, it has been reported the Office of Science and Technology have a growing influence on almost every that less than five percent of Congress- (OST), directed by the Government’s aspect of modern public policymaking. men/women have such backgrounds (2). Chief Scientific Adviser, his Committee (a Each month, political debates on matters A lack of scientific expertise among cross-departmental forum for the ranging from healthcare and the environ- legislators may not matter for some discussion of science and technology- ment to education and national security, political decisions, but there are now so related issues), the Council for Science legislators (most without formal scientific many issues influenced by science and and Technology, and the Parliamentary training) encounter a multitude of highly technology that those unable to under- Select Committees on Science and technical concepts and make difficult stand basic scientific concepts are placed Technology. In addition, although they decisions regarding science policy. It may at a distinct disadvantage. These individu- have no formal advisory function, the be unrealistic to expect all of these als are potential prisoners to the advice of monthly debates of the Parliamentary decisions to be informed by a thorough scientifically-literate civil servants, expert and Scientific Committee provide a examination of the latest research. At the advisory committees, or lobbyists whose permanent liaison between Parliamentar- very least, legislators however, should interests may not be immediately apparent. ians and stakeholders representing have access to a system of scientific Such groups may, for example, be tied to industry, academia, scientific societies advice, enabling them to identify issues multinational corporations or biased and the general public, allowing the requiring scientific input and draw on an towards permitting questionable or airing of scientific and technological appropriate range of expert knowledge to hazardous actions with the intention of concerns. support their decisions. securing profit or employment (3). Unlike their British counterparts, the But just how is the life’s work of the But is a lack of scientifically trained Science Advisor to the President and the research scientist transformed into the politicians really significant for science Office of Science and Technology Policy latest white paper? Which advisory policymaking? Dr. Evan Harris, an MP, (OSTP) that he directs have no statutory bodies are providing decision-makers qualified medical doctor and member of the access to the Executive and their with the expert scientific knowledge that House of Commons Select Committee on influence has varied significantly among they need? And crucially, how are they Science and Technology, has stated his administrations, often depending on the adapting to meet growing demand admiration for MPs without formal Director’s personal relationship with the without compromising either scientific scientific training, who, he suggests, are President. Political analysts, scientists integrity or the conventions of the nonetheless highly capable and generally and even the former OSTP Director (5) Spring 2006 Professional Ethics Report 1 ........................................................................ (Elliott continued from page 1) Naively perhaps, the OTA was swept National Academies of Science and aside with the suggestion that Members of Engineering and the Institute of Medi- have lamented the declining status of Congress should be able to get the cine), produces approximately 600 highly these institutions, which has become information they need by interacting detailed, peer-reviewed reports, work- particularly apparent under the Bush directly with scientific researchers. While shops and roundtable discussions per administration (6, p.29). Established in there are undoubtedly politicians on both year, often at the behest of Congress or 1972 and dismantled in 1995, the Office sides of the Atlantic who contact scien- other federal agencies (16). of Technology Assessment (OTA) tists directly, it is nevertheless overly Traditionally, lobby and advocacy provided Congress with its own institu- simplistic to think of scientific advisory groups have been an important part of the tional source of expert scientific and bodies as mere intermediaries between US political landscape, but much less technological advice. Analogous to the researchers and politicians. In fact, at their significant in the UK. The New Labour current UK Parliamentary Office of best, such organizations operate jointly as strategy of listening to as many diverse Science and Technology, the OTA did journalist, translator, and fact-checker all at interests as possible has led to a dramatic note policy recommendations, but once (9, p.39). Ostensibly a budget-cutting increase in the number of British advo- provided Congress with information and move, it has been suggested that the real cacy groups, but the extent of their objective analyses on a wide range of reason for the abolition of the OTA is political influence is debatable. In science and technology issues and their rooted in partisan division, chiefly the Washington DC, think tanks and advo- implications for government policy, as Republican perception of many scientific cacy groups provide Congress with a well as offering face-to-face briefings for bodies as institutions symbolic of liberal- great deal of technical expertise, often Members of Congress (7). ism (11). employing renowned scholars to analyze In place of the OTA, the Congres- Increased politicization of science science policy issues, produce reports, sional Research Service, the Government advice on Capitol Hill and in the White and testify on Capitol Hill. However, as Accountability Office, the Congressional House is also at the heart of mounting these groups tend to divide along party Budget Office, and other non-govern- criticism of the Bush administration’s political lines, policy debates (for example, ment bodies share responsibility for relationship with the scientific community. those on climate change and obesity) can providing scientific and technical advice Among other attacks, a petition and two become a sparring match between two to Congress. However, in recent years, reports, released in 2004 by the Union of sets of experts with competing views, and several authors have criticized this Concerned Scientists, accuse the adminis- lead one to question the reliability of the arrangement, suggesting that these tration of appointing under-qualified advice. The powerful corporate lobby that entities are ill-equipped to provide the individuals and non-scientists to senior has targeted the US Congress for many same dedicated service as the OTA and roles on the President’s scientific advisory years is now becoming more prevalent in calling for the establishment of a staff, of applying political ‘litmus tests’ to Europe and, considering recent reports of replacement body to fill the gap (6, 8, 9, applicants for advisory roles, and of scaremongering in the European Parlia- 10). dismissing highly qualified scientific ment by manufacturers, apparently has advisors for political reasons (12, 13, 14). similar problems with corruption (17, 18). Editor: Mark S. Frankel The White House has always denied such UK OST guidelines suggest that Deputy Editor: Azurii K. Collier accusations, saying that it makes deci- departments should draw on a sufficiently Contributing Authors: