Memorandum 177
Submission from The Royal Society
SUMMARY OF
KEY POINTS
- Two overarching considerations should underpin
the provision and use of science and engineering advice by Government:
(a) Scientific advice to Government must
be independent;
(b) All scientific research or evidence used
by Government should be exposed to independent and rigorous peer
review.
- In fulfilling their roles Chief Scientific
Advisers (CSAs) act as conduits for scientific and engineering
advice: by gathering, synthesising and communicating advice from
experts. To deliver effective advice to Departments they therefore
need to access and maintain extensive networks of contacts in
the UK, Europe and the international scientific community.
- Where departmental CSAs have been appointed
at a senior level from outside Government this has led to an improvement
in the use of science (including engineering) across Departments
and has assisted in the development of a clear strategy for science.
However, it is vital that the CSA is involved in all the key strategic
decisions within a Department.
- Some departments-for example, Defra and
the Home Office-have created independent Science Advisory Councils
to provide independent advice, support and challenge to the departmental
CSA. We believe that to maximise effectiveness, there is scope
for further sharing of best practice between departmental Science
Advisory Councils. Departmental science advisory committees should
be involved in all major policy issues involving scientific evidence.
- We welcome the designation of the Government
Chief Scientific Adviser (GCSA) as the pan-governmental "Head
of Profession" for science and engineering. This development,
coupled with the creation of similar Head of Science and Engineering
Profession (HoSEP) positions within each department, should make
a positive difference to career prospects for scientists and engineers
within the civil service. We are exploring ways in which we can
support HoSEPs and the use of science across government, as we
do with our scientist-civil servant pairing scheme (see paragraph
19).
INTRODUCTION
1. The Royal Society welcomes the opportunity
to contribute to the Committee's Engineering in Government case
study. This submission has been approved by the Royal Society's
Physical Secretary, on behalf of the Council of the Royal Society.
2. From its inception, the Society has used
a broad definition of science which encompasses both engineering
and medicine. Our responses to the Committee's questions draw
on this wide perspective, meaning that where we use the term "science",
we do so meaning all areas of the sciences, engineering, mathematics
and medicine.
3. A number of important principles and
observations have informed the Royal Society's response:
- We believe that policy decisions should
be informed by the best available scientific advice and analysis;
indeed it is the Society's objective to "influence policymaking
with the best scientific advice".
- Many of the key challenges faced by the
UK and other nations (such as demographic and socio-economic change,
globalisation, climate and environmental change, global uncertainty,
and technological change)[25]
are characterised by their complexity and their far-reaching,
often global, impacts. Scientific research and advice will play
a major role in Governments' abilities to respond to these and
other challenges. Given the nature and scale of these issues,
government departments and agencies must be able to draw widely
on the best available scientific expertise, wherever in the world
it is to be found.
- The nature and complexity of these problems
will require, in many cases, collaborative and multidisciplinary
responses by research and policy communities. This means that
Government must frequently draw on and integrate scientific advice
of various kinds; eg advice from economists and social scientists
as well as scientists and engineers. It is therefore important
not to artificially separate science from engineering or to treat
different sorts of information and advice in isolation.
- Two overarching considerations should underpin
the provision and use of science and engineering advice by Government:
(a) Scientific advice to Government must
be independent;
(b) All scientific research or evidence used
by Government should be exposed to independent and rigorous peer
review.
THE ROLE
AND EFFECTIVENESS
OF THE
GOVERNMENT OFFICE
FOR SCIENCE
AND THE
CHIEF SCIENTIFIC
ADVISERS IN
PROVIDING ENGINEERING
ADVICE ACROSS
GOVERNMENT AND
COMMUNICATING ISSUES
RELATING TO
ENGINEERING IN
GOVERNMENT TO
THE PUBLIC
4. In fulfilling their roles CSAs act as
conduits for scientific advice: by gathering, synthesising and
communicating advice from experts. To deliver effective advice
to Departments they therefore need to access and maintain extensive
networks of contacts in the UK, Europe and the international scientific
community.
5. Where departmental CSAs have been appointed
at a senior level from outside Government this has led to an improvement
in the use of science across Departments and has assisted in the
development of a clear strategy for science. However, it is vital
that the CSA is involved in all the key strategic decisions within
a Department.
6. The cross-departmental overview is a
vital aspect of the Government Chief Scientific Adviser's work
(GCSA). Work to bring together the departmental CSAs (for example
the Government Chief Scientific Advisers Committee) and raise
the profile of key cross-departmental issues, such as climate
change and energy, has had positive impacts.
7. The Global Science and Innovation Forum
(GSIF) provides an opportunity for CSAs to engage not only with
each other, but also other important stakeholders from across
Government. More active participation of CSAs in GSIF should ensure
that it plays its proper role in the development of a coherent,
strategic approach to science and innovation internationally.
8. These are valuable forums for the interchange
of ideas and good practice which enable the CSAs to work together
on cross-cutting issues. Though often private, these meetings
can also provide good opportunities for CSAs and others to engage
collectively with external parties on matters of scientific importance.
9. Input from public and wider stakeholder
dialogue is important when forming policy responses to new developments
in science and technology. While public engagement is not within
the remit of the CSAs as we understand it, it is important for
the CSAs to actively engage with the Science and Society Unit
in the Department of Innovation, Universities and Skills and with
other mechanisms that enable public dialogue on science and scientific
issues, such as the Sciencewise Expert Resource Centre.
10. It is important that public communication
of science and technology issues emphasises the special position
of the CSAs and GCSA who are required to maintain their professional
independence while working as civil servants. This independence
ensures that there is no political interference with the scientific
advice given to Government and, as a result, gives the GCSA an
autonomous media profile. It is important not only that the GCSA
and departmental CSAs are independent, but that they are perceived
as such by the public.
THE USE
OF ENGINEERING
ADVICE IN
GOVERNMENT POLICY
MAKING AND
PROJECT DELIVERY,
INCLUDING EXAMPLES
OF POLICY
DECISIONS OR
PROJECT DELIVERY
THAT HAVE
BEEN OR
WILL BE
TAKEN WITH
OR WITHOUT
ENGINEERING ADVICE
11. Policy decisions should be informed
by the best available scientific advice and analysis; indeed,
it is the Society's objective to "influence policymaking
with the best scientific advice". We need to be mindful of
both our present and future science and engineering needs, in
terms of practical expertise and policy analysis. For example,
our response to the Committee's earlier inquiry on nuclear engineering
(Royal Society 2008)[26]
highlighted the fact that a lack of indigenous nuclear technical
skills could mean that the UK lacks the expertise needed for future
nuclear activity (including expansion, decommissioning etc). This
lack of skills would also diminish the UK's ability to be an intelligent
customer since policy advice and economic, technical and security
judgements might be flawed.
HOW GOVERNMENT
IDENTIFIES THE
NEED FOR
ENGINEERING ADVICE
AND HOW
GOVERNMENT SOURCES
ENGINEERING ADVICE
12. Our response to the House of Commons
Science and Technology Select Committee's 2006 inquiry on scientific
advice, risk and evidence included a suggestion that a panel (or,
in some cases, panels) of independent experts should be available
to each Government Department to support the use of science and
engineering advice in decision making. We note that there are
now approximately 80 Scientific Advisory Committees across government
and welcome the revised Code of Practice for Scientific Advisory
Committees published in December 2007.
13. We believe that these advisory committees
should be involved in all major policy issues involving scientific
evidence. They should include internationally recognised scientists
(covering an appropriate range of disciplines) in addition to
other stakeholders. External advice about the membership of such
committees should be sought from learned societies and appropriate
professional bodies. The chairperson should have access to ministers
when appropriate.
14. Some departments-for example, Defra
and the Home Office-have created independent Science Advisory
Councils to provide independent advice, support and challenge
to the departmental CSA. We believe that there is scope for further
sharing of best practice between departmental Science Advisory
Councils in order to maximise effectiveness.
THE STATUS
OF ENGINEERING
AND ENGINEERS
WITHIN THE
CIVIL SERVICE,
INCLUDING ASSESSMENTS
OF THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF
THE SCIENCE
AND ENGINEERING
FAST STREAMS,
AND THE
ROLE AND
CAREER PROSPECTS
OF SPECIALIST
ENGINEERS IN
THE CIVIL
SERVICE
15. The departments and agencies of the
UK Government are major employers of science and engineering graduates,
including many who work in non-science and engineering posts.
According to the Office for National Statistics there were 532,000
employees in the civil service in September 2007.[27]
For those permanent employees where a profession was reported,
2,280 were employed in engineering posts and, separately, 2,930
were employed in science posts.
16. We welcome the designation of the GCSA
as the pan-governmental "Head of Profession" for science
and engineering. This development, coupled with the creation of
similar Head of Science and Engineering Profession (HoSEP) positions
within each department, should make a positive difference to career
prospects for scientists and engineers within the civil service.
17. The creation of a network for HoSEPs,
which provides an opportunity to meet regularly and share good
practice, is especially welcome, as is the development of a Government
wide `community of interest' of scientists and engineers.
18. To encourage closer and more effective
interaction, understanding and communication between professional
scientists and engineers and the civil service, the Royal Society
and the Government Office for Science (GO-Science) ran a pilot
scheme in 2007 pairing scientists with civil servants working
in relevant policy areas. The scientists and civil servants spent
a week together in Whitehall and the civil servants also visited
the scientists in return to find out more about the working environment
of active researchers. Following the successful pilot, the scheme
will be repeated annually by the Society and GO-Science.
THE ROLE
AND EFFECTIVENESS
OF PROFESSIONAL
ENGINEERS AND
THE ENGINEERING
COMMUNITY IN
PROMOTING ENGINEERING
AND PROVIDING
ENGINEERING ADVICE
TO GOVERNMENT
AND THE
CIVIL SERVICE
19. The Society is supportive of the number
and diversity of bodies representing engineering interests, but
is concerned that, as with other areas of science, it can be confusing
for those outside the community to navigate the various institutions,
or to identify the key messages and consensus issues and to understand
when views diverge. We recognise that, on occasion, it is necessary
for the science and engineering community to speak with one voice.
20. A good example of a collaborative approach
is the Advisory Committee on Mathematics Education (ACME), established
in January 2002 and based at the Royal Society. ACME is an independent
committee which acts as a single voice for the mathematical community,
seeking to improve the quality of education in schools and colleges.
It advises Government on issues such as the curriculum, assessment
and the supply and training of mathematics teachers and was established
by the Society and the Joint Mathematical Council of the UK with
the explicit backing of all major mathematics organisations, and
is supported by the Gatsby Charitable Foundation.
21. Another education partnership to which
the Society belongs is SCORE (Science Community Representing Education).
SCORE operates on a different model to ACME, but also seeks to
bring a collective voice to science education. Although the Royal
Academy of Engineering is not a member of SCORE, SCORE and the
Royal Academy are actively seeking ways to work more closely together
on education issues. In addition, the Royal Academy of Engineering
has a representative on the Royal Society's Education Committee.
September 2008
25 Long-term opportunities and challenges for the
UK: analysis for the 2007 Comprehensive Spending Review, HM
Treasury, November 2006 see: http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/6/F/csr_longterm271106.pdf Back
26
Royal Society response to the Innovation, Universities, Science
and Skills Committee inquiry on nuclear engineering, March 2008
(RS Policy Document 12/08). Back
27
Civil Service Statistics, September 2007 (July 2008, ONS) see:
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/pdfdir/cs0708.pdf Back
| 
