The need for science-based evidence for policy makers to understand issues, manage risks and handle tradeoffs
To formulate policy in democratic societies, leaders often rely on advice from subject matter experts while discussing issues with politicians and citizens. Policies are also made based on the context of the day, and considering tradeoffs and risks.
“The difficult job of being a policy maker in a democratic society is that he/she needs to look through three lenses of values, what he/she knows and how policies can be delivered,” said Sir Mark Walport, UK Government Chief Scientific Adviser (CSA). The three lenses, according to Sir Mark, are: the values held by people and politicians; the delivery of policies; and evidence-based information from subject matter experts such as scientists.
Sir Mark, who was knighted in the 2009 New Year Honours for services to medical research, extols the value of scientific findings for policy making. He was speaking in a seminar at the Singapore Management University on June 16, 2017, in conjunction with the Commonwealth Conference 2017.
“When you look at governments around the world, they can do much more in taking into account of evidence when making their policies,” said Sir Mark. “When you look around the world, there are probably seven or eight governments that have chief scientific advisors with similar roles. The role acts as a transmission between the outside world of sciences and the inside world of the government.
“My job is to find and provide expertise to the government.”
The UK example
There are scientific advisers in UK government departments to provide information for policy formulation, such as a professor of transport for the Ministry of Transport. For major issues and projects, the CSA will work with scientific advisers, engineers and scientists from various government departments. This helps pool skills and expertise to advise leaders and help them manage risks in policy-making.
However, scientific advice is often offered based on incomplete information. Drawing the analogy of a doctor’s advice following an initial diagnosis, Sir Mark said scientific advice is often presented with evidence pending further findings. Just as further observation is necessary for a more accurate diagnosis, governmental decisions are made with office holders accepting the disadvantages inherent in science-based policy-making.
“The world of policy makers is always the world of tradeoffs. Decisions have to be made based on incomplete evidence,” he said. Scientific advisers thus need to provide advice based on the best answers they have. “You need to answer to what you don’t know, as well as what you do.”
Hearing all views
When scientists and engineers are consulted on issues for policy makers, there will undoubtedly be differing views, interests, values and recommendations. The elected leaders will then consider these viewpoints and make decisions on behalf of the electorate. However, some issues such as those surrounding genetically modified foods go beyond science to values and ethics. To hear views from lobby groups, businesses and individuals and encourage suggestions and solutions, policy makers need to encourage public debate.
“We must have open discussions and make decisions based on them rather than pretending they are all scientific issues. It is a scientific issue on one hand and a society issue on the other,” said Sir Mark. “There are discussions on whether genetically modified organisms are good or bad. It always depend on what gene, what organism and for what purpose.
“This makes a general point on technology: We should never consider technology in a generic sense. It can be used for good or bad purposes, wisely or unwisely. When we are discussing technology and making sense of decisions, we need to always consider the context of its specific use.”
He concludes: “The nature of the discussions is different based on various interests in different political systems. People have different positions. So there isn’t a single universal human answer but you will have different solutions.”
Managing risks
Policy makers need to manage risks and possible consequences of what innovation can bring, which can either be beneficial or bring harm to society depending on how it is received and used.
“There are unintended consequences and you cannot anticipate how new technologies will turn out,” said Sir Mark, citing examples such as the invention of the Internet. While it has in its early stages helped people communicate across time and space, the presence of social media has provided people with a platform for cyber bulling and terrorism.
Similarly, nuclear power could power up cities more effectively than coal and natural gases, but the invention of nuclear bombs poses security risks to nations. As policy makers manage possible risks and tradeoffs when using technology and innovation, science can help them make better-informed decisions.
Without risk-taking, Sir Mark explained, there would be no innovation and its subsequent benefits. However, technology is both human- and capital-intensive. While there is a high level of acceptance of technology in societies, who pays for it? The advances in human healthcare such as new medicines, vaccines and surgical approaches often come with a hefty price tag. People from the developing world may not get the benefits of these inventions in face of emerging infectious diseases due to cost.
The situation is similar for climate change: “Should it be us to pay for our children, grandchildren and great grandchildren? We know that the longer we take to tackle climate change, the harder it will be to do,” he said.
“But I think it is more important to think about intergenerational equity. And a lot of the struggle about climate is that even if science is accepted by the majority, the question is should we pay now or should we postpone the decision?”
These issues will take more discussions, public votes, scientific evidence and time for policy makers to make decisions. And just as science has been integral in enhancing the quality of life and pursuit of innovation, it remains an important piece in the puzzle for policy making in order to keep the machinery of society oiled.
Follow us on Twitter (@sgsmuperspectiv) or like us on Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/PerspectivesAtSMU)
Last updated on 27 Oct 2017 .
