Cargando…

Science, Policy, and the Transparency of Values

Background: Opposing groups of scientists have recently engaged in a heated dispute over a preliminary European Commission (EC) report on its regulatory policy for endocrine-disrupting chemicals. In addition to the scientific issues at stake, a central question has been how scientists can maintain t...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Elliott, Kevin C., Resnik, David B.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: NLM-Export 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4080531/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24667564
http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1408107
_version_ 1782324005352505344
author Elliott, Kevin C.
Resnik, David B.
author_facet Elliott, Kevin C.
Resnik, David B.
author_sort Elliott, Kevin C.
collection PubMed
description Background: Opposing groups of scientists have recently engaged in a heated dispute over a preliminary European Commission (EC) report on its regulatory policy for endocrine-disrupting chemicals. In addition to the scientific issues at stake, a central question has been how scientists can maintain their objectivity when informing policy makers. Objectives: Drawing from current ethical, conceptual, and empirical studies of objectivity and conflicts of interest in scientific research, we propose guiding principles for communicating scientific findings in a manner that promotes objectivity, public trust, and policy relevance. Discussion: Both conceptual and empirical studies of scientific reasoning have shown that it is unrealistic to prevent policy-relevant scientific research from being influenced by value judgments. Conceptually, the current dispute over the EC report illustrates how scientists are forced to make value judgments about appropriate standards of evidence when informing public policy. Empirical studies provide further evidence that scientists are unavoidably influenced by a variety of potentially subconscious financial, social, political, and personal interests and values. Conclusions: When scientific evidence is inconclusive and major regulatory decisions are at stake, it is unrealistic to think that values can be excluded from scientific reasoning. Thus, efforts to suppress or hide interests or values may actually damage scientific objectivity and public trust, whereas a willingness to bring implicit interests and values into the open may be the best path to promoting good science and policy. Citation: Elliott KC, Resnik DB. 2014. Science, policy, and the transparency of values. Environ Health Perspect 122:647–650; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1408107
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4080531
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher NLM-Export
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40805312014-07-11 Science, Policy, and the Transparency of Values Elliott, Kevin C. Resnik, David B. Environ Health Perspect Commentary Background: Opposing groups of scientists have recently engaged in a heated dispute over a preliminary European Commission (EC) report on its regulatory policy for endocrine-disrupting chemicals. In addition to the scientific issues at stake, a central question has been how scientists can maintain their objectivity when informing policy makers. Objectives: Drawing from current ethical, conceptual, and empirical studies of objectivity and conflicts of interest in scientific research, we propose guiding principles for communicating scientific findings in a manner that promotes objectivity, public trust, and policy relevance. Discussion: Both conceptual and empirical studies of scientific reasoning have shown that it is unrealistic to prevent policy-relevant scientific research from being influenced by value judgments. Conceptually, the current dispute over the EC report illustrates how scientists are forced to make value judgments about appropriate standards of evidence when informing public policy. Empirical studies provide further evidence that scientists are unavoidably influenced by a variety of potentially subconscious financial, social, political, and personal interests and values. Conclusions: When scientific evidence is inconclusive and major regulatory decisions are at stake, it is unrealistic to think that values can be excluded from scientific reasoning. Thus, efforts to suppress or hide interests or values may actually damage scientific objectivity and public trust, whereas a willingness to bring implicit interests and values into the open may be the best path to promoting good science and policy. Citation: Elliott KC, Resnik DB. 2014. Science, policy, and the transparency of values. Environ Health Perspect 122:647–650; http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1408107 NLM-Export 2014-03-25 2014-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4080531/ /pubmed/24667564 http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1408107 Text en http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/ Publication of EHP lies in the public domain and is therefore without copyright. All text from EHP may be reprinted freely. Use of materials published in EHP should be acknowledged (for example, “Reproduced with permission from Environmental Health Perspectives”); pertinent reference information should be provided for the article from which the material was reproduced. Articles from EHP, especially the News section, may contain photographs or illustrations copyrighted by other commercial organizations or individuals that may not be used without obtaining prior approval from the holder of the copyright.
spellingShingle Commentary
Elliott, Kevin C.
Resnik, David B.
Science, Policy, and the Transparency of Values
title Science, Policy, and the Transparency of Values
title_full Science, Policy, and the Transparency of Values
title_fullStr Science, Policy, and the Transparency of Values
title_full_unstemmed Science, Policy, and the Transparency of Values
title_short Science, Policy, and the Transparency of Values
title_sort science, policy, and the transparency of values
topic Commentary
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4080531/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24667564
http://dx.doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1408107
work_keys_str_mv AT elliottkevinc sciencepolicyandthetransparencyofvalues
AT resnikdavidb sciencepolicyandthetransparencyofvalues