White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Releases Several
Scientific-Integrity Policy Proposals. (August 17, 2011)|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News & Views item - August 2011 |
White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Releases Several
Scientific-Integrity Policy Proposals. (August 17, 2011)
On March 9, 2009 shortly after assuming office, US President Barack Obama issued
a
memo directing the Office of Science and Technology Policy
(OSTP) to develop a plan to
restore scientific integrity to federal policymaking. The plan was due by July
9, 2009. It read in part: "Political officials should not suppress or alter
scientific or technological findings and conclusions. If scientific and
technological information is developed and used by the Federal Government, it
should ordinarily be made available to the public. To the extent permitted by
law, there should be transparency in the preparation, identification, and use of
scientific and technological information in policymaking. The selection of
scientists and technology professionals for positions in the Executive Branch
should be based on their scientific and technological knowledge, credentials,
experience, and integrity."
This directive was later amplified by President Obama in a directive to John Holdren in his capacity as OSTP Director as follows:
(a) The selection and retention of candidates for science and technology positions in the Executive Branch should be based on the candidate's knowledge, credentials, experience, and integrity;
(b) Each agency should have appropriate rules and procedures to ensure the integrity of the scientific process within the agency;
(c) When scientific or technological information is considered in policy decisions, the information should be subject to well-established scientific processes, including peer review where appropriate, and each agency should appropriately and accurately reflect that information in complying with and applying relevant statutory standards;
(d) Except for information that is properly restricted from disclosure under procedures established in accordance with statute, regulation, Executive Order, or Presidential Memorandum, each agency should make available to the public the scientific or technological findings or conclusions considered or relied on in policy decisions;
(e) Each agency should have in place procedures to identify and address instances in which the scientific process or the integrity of scientific and technological information may be compromised; and
(f) Each agency should adopt such additional procedures, including any appropriate whistleblower protections, as are necessary to ensure the integrity of scientific and technological information and processes on which the agency relies in its decision-making or otherwise uses or prepares.
On June 18, 2010 John Holdren replied to questions as to: "Why is there such a delay in restoring scientific integrity to the federal government? What are the sticking points? Can you give me a date when you expect a plan, directive, or Executive Order to be released?"
There should not be any doubt that these principles have been in effect—that is, binding on all Executive departments and agencies—from the date of issue of the Memorandum on March 9, 2009. All that has been awaiting the requested action by the Director of OSTP is recommendations to the President on what further instructions he might issue in augmentation of these principles in order to advance the goal of achieving the highest level of scientific integrity across the Executive Branch... I am the first to admit that the process has been more laborious and time-consuming than expected at the outset... [i.e.]determining how to elaborate on the principles set forth in the Memorandum in enough detail to be of real assistance in their implementation... I anticipate finalizing and forwarding [the OSTP's recommendations] to the President in the next few weeks.
Today, in NatureNews Eugenie Samuel Reich reports that 19 federal agencies have submitted policies (most in draft form) to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP). Still outstanding are submissions from the Department of Energy and the Department of Health and Human Services (which includes the National Institutes of Health).
Nature has produced a table outlining five of the six proposals which have been publicly released to date.
Only one of the policies (that of the Department of the Interior) is in final form. It is expected that the draft policies will be open for public comment and subject to revision.
Neal Lane, a physicist at Rice University in Houston, Texas and former director of both the OSTP and the National Science Foundation, told Nature he is concerned about an opaque reference to "clearance procedures" in the EPA draft (see the table above). He also points out that while all of the policies released so far allow employees to speak publicly, the EPA's phrase suggests that there can still be scope for scientists to be muzzled. Nevertheless, Professor Lane says that whatever their flaws the policies are a step forward. "Having these policies on the books will make managers think twice before interfering with a scientist."
Finally, Rick Weiss, speaking on behalf of the Director, says the office intentionally allowed agencies to respond to the effort in different ways, and the OSTP expects to work with agencies to finalize the policies by this autumn.
It would be unsurprising were this matter to be discussed during the September 16, 2011 meeting of the President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST).
[Note added August 18, 2011: The American Association for the Advancement of Science has released a short statement that the: "AAAS Supports Draft NOAA Scientific Integrity Guidelines. AAAS issued comments supporting the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's draft Scientific Integrity Policy. In particular, AAAS commended NOAA for recognizing the value of scientific peer review, the importance of openness in research, and the ability of scientists to communicate with the media.]
|
|
