Friday, March 17, 2006
Power Grab?
Prometheus Blog quoting an article out of Kenya on the failure of malaria research to be used effectively in that nation and then commenting
Can it be slow? - Yep! Frustrating? - definitely to black & white science and engineering types. But that does not change the fact that it's the best to come along so far.
To claim some "special process" for science results to become policy is to claim autocratic authority for science. We already run dangerously close to that with the authority invested in bureacracy, particularly on matters of science.
Guess what scientists - me included - you want to help make policy, you need to learn the system that exists - anything else undoes the nation.
Related Tags: science policy, public policy, constitution, law
The Kenyan desire to have research "automatically" translate to policy is terrifying and Prometheus rightly calls it into question, but I really wonder what he is hinting at by saying questions of process should be kept at the fore? We have a constitution that defines how anyone's work, desire, whatever, becomes a matter of public policy - that's why the founding fathers wrote the thing."As scientists in Kenya, we have to do two jobs. We have to conduct research and then convince the government or the Ministry of Health to adopt our research findings. This should never be the case. There should be a mechanism that automatically facilitates adoption of research findings by the government."What mechanism? How created? Run by whom? What does it mean to "adopt research findings"? Automatically? These are the questions at the core of 21st century science policy. Asking and answering these question are of course political exercises themselves and can create some discomfort among scientists/advocates. Consider the cirle-the-wagon reactions often seen here to suggestions that the IPCC might not be an optimal means of connecting science and decision making. And consider the frustration expressed by scientists such as James Hansen about their role in the political process.
As people focus attention on press releases, NRC committees on hockey sticks, drug approval processes, government science reports, national academy statements, science in developing countries, etc. etc. it will be these questions of process that will be important to keep at the fore.
Can it be slow? - Yep! Frustrating? - definitely to black & white science and engineering types. But that does not change the fact that it's the best to come along so far.
To claim some "special process" for science results to become policy is to claim autocratic authority for science. We already run dangerously close to that with the authority invested in bureacracy, particularly on matters of science.
Guess what scientists - me included - you want to help make policy, you need to learn the system that exists - anything else undoes the nation.
Related Tags: science policy, public policy, constitution, law
