Miller J D
Recomb DNA Tech Bull. 1985 Dec;8(4):141-64.
Biotechnology is an increasingly visible and important item on the national science policy agenda. With growing corporate and governmental funding, basic research in recombinant DNA and related technologies is expanding rapidly. In a parallel and related process, new agricultural, medical, and other applications are being developed and a growing list of genetically-engineered products is ready for field testing and market distribution. In the months and years ahead, the flow of genetically-engineered products into the marketplace and the media coverage related to those new products will increase the public's awareness of biotechnology. In addition, it is possible that some public policy debate will occur over the issue of field testing new genetically-engineered materials. Media coverage of this type of controversy will also heighten awareness and influence the aggregate level of public awareness of biotechnology. The prospect of a public debate or controversy over any biotechnology issue illustrates a fundamental problem in the formulation of science policy within a democratic political system. The processes and techniques involved in genetic engineering and complex and require some level of scientific background knowledge. A 1979 study found that only seven per cent of American adults met a minimal definition of scientific literacy. It is clear that the current levels of public awareness and knowledge about biotechnology will not allow a public policy debate similar to those associated with controversies involving Social Security or gasoline prices. How, then, does a democratic society establish public policies on advanced technical issues like biotechnology? This report will outline a model of policy formulation for specialized issues and describe the results of a national study of relevant policy leaders concerning biotechnology. To understand the formulation of public policy toward biotechnology, it is necessary to focus on the role of the policy leaders in a stratified model. In general, when there is agreement on a given policy between the decision-makers and the policy leaders, the policy is implemented and there is no wider involvement in the policy formulation process. A large number of science and technology policy issues have been handled in this manner in the decades since the Second World War and it is likely that most science policy matters will continue to be resolved directly between policy leaders and decision-makers. Looking at the general science policy formulation process, it is clear that policy leaders are an important component.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)
生物技术在国家科学政策议程上正日益成为一个引人关注且重要的议题。随着企业和政府资金投入的增加,重组DNA及相关技术的基础研究正在迅速扩展。在一个并行且相关的进程中,新的农业、医疗及其他应用正在被开发出来,越来越多的基因工程产品已准备好进行田间试验和市场推广。在未来的数月乃至数年里,基因工程产品流入市场以及媒体对这些新产品的报道,将提高公众对生物技术的认知。此外,围绕新基因工程材料的田间试验问题,有可能引发一些公共政策辩论。媒体对这类争议的报道也会增强公众的关注度,并影响公众对生物技术的总体认知水平。就任何生物技术问题展开公开辩论或争议的前景,凸显了民主政治体制下科学政策制定过程中的一个根本问题。基因工程所涉及的过程和技术十分复杂,需要一定程度的科学背景知识。1979年的一项研究发现,只有7%的美国成年人达到了科学素养的最低定义标准。显然,公众目前对生物技术的认知水平和了解程度,无法引发一场类似于围绕社会保障或汽油价格争议那样的公共政策辩论。那么,一个民主社会要如何就像生物技术这样的先进技术问题制定公共政策呢?本报告将概述针对特定问题的政策制定模式,并描述一项针对生物技术领域相关政策领导人的全国性研究结果。为理解针对生物技术的公共政策制定过程,有必要关注政策领导人在分层模式中的作用。一般来说,当决策者和政策领导人就某一特定政策达成一致时,该政策就会得以实施,且政策制定过程不会有更广泛的参与。自第二次世界大战后的几十年里,大量的科技政策问题都是以这种方式处理的,而且很可能大多数科学政策问题将继续由政策领导人和决策者直接解决。审视一般的科学政策制定过程,很明显政策领导人是一个重要组成部分。(摘要截选至400字)