2. THE
MEANS BY
WHICH GOVERNMENT
USES SCIENTIFIC
ADVICE TO
INFORM DECISION-MAKING
AND POLICY
DEVELOPMENT
2.1. Each Government department is responsible
for the provision and use of the scientific advice it needs to
discharge its individual mission. Departments themselves are in
the best position to decide what systems and processes best suit
their needs, and a flexible approach is necessary to meet the
varying requirements for scientific advice across Government.
Common sources of advice include committees of experts to advise
on particular issues (see Section 5), and the commissioning of
research by scientists both in the UK and overseas. But a wide
range of approaches are used depending on the circumstances.
2.2. That said, it is also important to
ensure all parts of Government adhere to certain principles and
best practice in relation to the provision and use of scientific
advice, and that a coherent approach is taken across Government
in the growing number of areas—such as biotechnology and
food safety—which raise issues that cross traditional departmental
boundaries. OST's role in this process is to ensure that best
practice is promulgated and adopted across Whitehall and that
such issues are co-ordinated effectively, with no unnecessary
overlap of effort between departments.
2.3. On this last point, in 1996 the Chief
Scientific Adviser undertook a review of the inter-relationships
between the science, engineering and technology (SET) expenditure
of different Government departments[2].
This provided a snapshot of the extensive network of relationships
and co-ordination among Government departments and their agencies
in 40 areas. The Review did not find any major areas of duplication
or unnecessary overlap and concluded that in general the co-ordination
mechanisms across Government were working well. A number of recommendations
were made for improvements on specific issues which OST and departments
have been following up.
2.4. An example of OST's co-ordinating role
is its chairmanship of the Inter-Agency Committee on Marine Science
and Technology (IACMST). This is an inter-Departmental Committee
which maintains an overview of national and international activities
in marine science and technology. Marine responsibilities are
necessarily distributed across a range of Government Departments,
Agencies and Research Councils and IACMST's primary purpose is
to ensure that satisfactory arrangements exist for the co-ordination
of these various interests.
2.5. In order to encourage the sharing of
best practice, OST issued guidelines on The Use of Scientific
Advice in Policy Making in March 1997. These guidelines were
developed in consultation with departmental Chief Scientists,
the Research Councils, the Royal Society and the Council for Science
and Technology. The guidelines set out key principles for departments
to apply to the use and presentation of scientific advice in carrying
out their work, and address many of the issues which are the subject
of the Committee's Inquiry.
2.6. The key principles set out in the OST
guidelines are that:
— departments should ensure that their
procedures allow the early identification of issues for which
scientific advice or research will be needed;
— policy making should draw on the
best available scientific advice, from a sufficiently wide range
of sources (including overseas), and should also take into account
the views of experts in other (not necessarily scientific) disciplines;
and
— there should be a presumption towards
openness in explaining the scientific advice and its interpretation.
Departments should aim to make public all the scientific evidence
and analysis underlying the policy decisions on the sensitive
areas covered by the guidelines. The scientific process thrives
on openness, which stimulates greater critical discussion of the
scientific basis of policy proposals and raises any conflicting
evidence which may have been overlooked.
2.7. The President of the Board of Trade
has made it clear that she sees it as part of her role as Cabinet
Minister for Science to ensure that the guidelines are implemented
across Government. Following agreement with Ministerial colleagues,
the President announced a series of measures in November 1997
to ensure effective implementation:
— a Minister has been designated within
each department with special responsibility for ensuring that
the department's general procedures for taking account of scientific
advice are consistent with the guidelines. A list of the designated
Ministers is attached at Annex A;[3]
— departments will report annually
to the Chief Scientific Advisor (CSA) on the general procedures
they have established to satisfy themselves that the guidelines
are being taken into account. The first such reports are currently
being prepared by departments and OST intends to produce a summary
of these in the Summer; and
— the CSA and departmental Chief Scientists
should have a regular opportunity to discuss emerging issues to
which the guidelines may be relevant so that potential problems
can be identified and, if necessary, appropriate scientific advice
sought. Such discussion will also facilitate the sharing of experience
and is now a standard agenda item for regular meetings of the
Chief Scientists.
2.8. An example of the way in which the
guidelines have already made an impact was the provision of scientific
advice on the situation in Montserrat. Against a background of
continuing volcanic activity during 1997, on 10 November the Government's
Montserrat Action Group commissioned two reports: an updated scientific
assessment of the status of the volcano and its hazards, and a
risk analysis based on this report quantifying the health and
safety risks for those remaining on the island. Meetings were
held on Antigua and Montserrat between 2-5 December involving
a team of international scientific experts, including senior scientists
from the Montserrat Volcano Observatory. Given the significant
scientific uncertainties and sensitive health and safety issues,
the CSA was asked (on 21 November) by the FCO to review and validate
the team's work. An ad hoc group was quickly formed, including
scientists responsible for the assessment and risk analysis, senior
officials from DH, FCO and DfID, and other eminent scientists.
Three members of the group had not previously been involved in
the issue. A meeting was held on 16 December which provided the
basis for a short report by the CSA, endorsed by the group, and
drawn on by the Governor of Montserrat in his note of advice to
residents published in January 1998.
2 Review of the Inter-Relationships Between the Science,
Engineering and Technology Expenditure of Government Departments,
OST, December 1996, DTI Ref: URN 96/1113. Back
3
Not printed. Back
|
