A commentary by Derek Burke of Cambridge in Nature for June 1 argues that, in the face of growing criticism of the uses to which science and technology are being put, scientists themselves must become much more deeply involved in public debates over controversial issues. This theme is becoming more important in the pronouncements of prominent scientists.
Burke believes that, unless a convincing case can be made for the new techniques which science is introducing, and the pattern of how society uses science to create wealth and a better quality of life, scientists may find themselves pushed to the sidelines. The relationship of scientists with the public, their response to pressure groups which criticise technological developments and, in particular, their dealings with the mass media call for a sophisticated reaction.
As scientists we cannot assume that our explanation of advances will satisfy the public, who may hold a different set of values. Then we must clarify the tricky questions of risk and its perception. Risk is not objective, and different assessments of it are inevitable, based as much on judgment as on evidence. Decisions are often made before all relevant facts are assembled. Thus, conflict has arisen over such topics as mobile phones and bovine spongiform encephalopathy. Scientists cannot be authoritarian over such issues, without being arrogant.
The agrifood industries, with enormous resources, have made their contribution to public opinion, but are almost universally judged to have lacked objectivity. After all, they are deeply interested parties. International bodies and academic institutions try hard to offer reliable objective opinions which will convince a non-expert public.
Burke offers hope for the future: "Recent surveys show that scientists, as a group, still have the public's trust. Surely, therefore, we have a duty to help the public make decisions, particularly in areas where science is the subject of campaigns by environmentalist and other special-interest groups." I wish I could share his opinion about how far scientists are trusted by the public, but I feel uneasy.