New sciences, new risks,

new science governance:

the changing context for science-

society relations

Alan Irwin
New challenges for the
governance of science in
Europe
• Science, innovation and global
competition
• Science and the policy process
• Science and the ’publics’
New challenges for the
governance of science in
Europe
• Science, innovation and global
competition
• Science and the policy process
• Science and the ’publics’
’Britain will be sidelined in
global science revolution,
warns Demos…’
’We used to expect new ideas to come from the
universities and research laboratories of major
companies in the US and Europe. Technology flowed
from this innovative core to the technologically dependent
periphery. No more. The core and periphery are being
scrambled up. Places that were on the margins of
innovation ten years ago (.. Bangalore, Pune, Daejon,
Shanghai and Shenzen..) are now essential stopping-off
points in the continuous flow of people, ideas and
technologies around the world.’

Demos, The Atlas of Ideas. 2007

• Lisbon strategy (2000)
• Barcelona (2002)
• Kok report (2004)

’Europe needs to dramatically improve its

attractiveness to resarchers, as too many
young scientists continue to leave Europe on
graduating, notably to the US. Too few of the
brightest and best from elsewhere in the world
choose to live and work in Europe.’
‘In a changing world characterised by the
accelerating globalisation of research
and technology and the emergence of
new scientific and technological
powers… the European Research Area
is more than ever a cornerstone for a
European knowledge society.’

European Commission, The European

Research Area: new perspectives.
Green Paper 04.04.2007
Independent Expert Group on R&D
and Innovation (2006)

‘Europe must break out of structures and

expectations established in the post-
WW2 era which leave it today living a
moderately comfortable life on slowly
declining capital. This society, averse
to risk and change, is in itself
alarming but it is also unsustainable
in the face of rising competition from
other parts of the world.’
Tony Blair at the
crossroads

‘path of timidity in the face of the

unknown’
A ‘nation at ease with radical knowledge,
not fearful of the future, a culture that
values a pragmatic, evidence-based
approach to new opportunities’
New challenges for the
governance of science in
Europe
• Science, innovation and global
competition
• Science and the policy process
• Science and the ’publics’
New challenges for the
governance of science in
Europe
• Science, innovation and global
competition
• Science and the policy process
• Science and the ’publics’
‘Eating British beef is completely safe.
There is no evidence of any threat to
human health caused by this animal
health problem (BSE)… This is the view
of independent British and European
scientists and not just the meat industry..
This view has been endorsed by the
Department of Health.’ (The Times, May 18,
1990)
Phillips Report into BSE
(2000)
‘ The Government did not lie to the
public about BSE. It believed that the
risks posed by BSE to humans were
remote. The Government was pre-
occupied with preventing an alarmist
over-reaction… this campaign of
reassurance was a mistake.’
 Openness and
transparency

• ‘Openness requires recognition of uncertainty,

where it exists’
• ‘The public should be trusted to respond
rationally to openness’
• ‘Scientific investigation of risk should be open
and transparent’
• ‘Trust can only be generated by openness’
• ‘The advice and reasoning of advisory
committees should be made public’
Lord Phillips, 2000
UK Chief Scientist’s guidelines on
handling scientific advice to
policymaking

• in any scientific issue, seek advice

widely, deliberately including
dissenting views
• do it all openly
• frankly acknowledge uncertainty
• try to manage potential risks in a
proportionate manner, offering
choice whenever possible
 Two models of expertise
Old New
• Closed • Open
• Homogenous • Diverse
• Demanding public • Trusting the public
trust • Expecting plural and
• Expecting consensus conditional advice
and prescription • Distributed control
• Managerial control • Presenting evidence,
• Presenting the judgement and
evidence uncertainty
New challenges for the
governance of science in
Europe
• Science, innovation and global
competition
• Science and the policy process
• Science and the ’publics’
New challenges for the
governance of science in
Europe
• Science, innovation and global
competition
• Science and the policy process
• Science and the ’publics’
House of Lords Select
Committee on Science
and Technology (2000)
‘We recommend…. that direct
dialogue with the public should
move from being an optional add-
on to science-based policy-
making…. And should become a
normal and integral part of the
process’
Science and Society Action
Plan
‘The proposed action plan marks the
beginning of a long process, the
objective of which is to change the
relationship between science and
society.’

European Commission, 2002

Performances of engagement

• Greater transparency and openness

• Public consultation exercises
• Consensus conferences
• ’Lay’ membership on scientific advisory
bodies
• Large-scale public debate (eg GM)

Engagement as performative
 GM Nation?
• Agriculture and Environment
Biotechnology Commission as social
innovation 
• Public debate: 3rd June – 18th July, 2003 
• Focus groups, open meetings, interactive
web site, closed groups -> steering board
final report (September 2003)
• 37,000 feedback forms, 2.9 million
website hits, 600 meetings
‘the U.K. experience was prolonged,
costly, and cantankerous. It did not touch
the broad mass of the public. It suffered
from agenda manipulation and did not
reach conclusions that were seen as
clear-cut or legitimate. It informed
policies, but it did not guide them.’

Walls, Rogers-Hayden, Mohr and O’Riordan, Environment. Sept

2005, p.29
New sciences, new risks,
new science governance
• How do we balance knowledge and
democracy in a competitive
context?
• What choices can be made about
scientific and technological futures?
• How do we draw upon public
understandings and knowledges as
a resource for change?
Scientific Citizenship: imaginations,
frameworks, performances

• Scientific citizenship as contested area

• Fundamental tensions between ’science’
and ’democracy’
• Restricted (but significant) social
experiments so far
• Problematic frameworks of meaning
• Relationship to wider agenda of science,
progress and innovation