Science and the State: 'Societal control and knowledge in democratic societies'

This summary of the above mentioned paper by Reiner Grundmann and Nico Stehr, introduces the notions of knowledge policy and the politics of knowledge, distinct from research policy. While research policy takes the aims of innovations as largely unproblematic (insofar as they help improving national competitiveness), knowledge policy tries to govern (regulate, control, restrict, or even forbid) the production of knowledge.

Knowledge is a wealth creating power. Not only is it growing at an increasing pace, it is also being transformed in the process. If we talk about knowledge societies, we cannot remain silent about knowledge politics. Concerns about the societal consequences of an unfettered expansion of natural scientific knowledge are now raised much more urgently and are moving to the centre of disputes in society and to the top of the political agenda. Many issues need addressing. Most importantly, a completely new 'politics of knowledge' may emerge, with its own institutions and dynamics. Its basic feature is the use of knowledge to advance not only specific political goals and economic interests, but also certain norms, values and worldviews. The politics of knowledge denotes the contested nature of and the struggle over, scientific and technical advancements.

Science policy as conducted by governments, firms and foundations refers directly to the constitution of scientific knowledge, the individuals who produce such knowledge, the social context within which such knowledge is fabricated, etc. In contrast, stem cell research, for example, pertains to the emerging field of knowledge politics, in which ethical considerations as well as new relations and an informed dialogue between researchers, industrialists, political decision makers and citizens are sometimes included in calls for research proposals.

Self-Regulation of Science? How can we conceptualise the governance of science – the provision of public goods without the proliferation of public ‘bads’? Can we rely on scientists themselves? Consider the following two episodes concerning atomic energy:

· In testimony before the US special senate committee on atomic energy (1946), John von Neumann pleaded with the senators to enact strict government regulations: “it is for the first time that science has produced results which require an immediate intervention of government...” The senate acted upon this and the stringent regulations are still in effect.

· Compare this with the recent controversy about mandatory notification of potential use of biological research for terrorist warfare: “University officials and leading scientists are warning that new government regulations on biological research adopted in the wake of 9/11, and simultaneous efforts to inhibit publication, threaten to undermine the fundamental openness of science and campus life.”

Both episodes show that scientists can be advocates and enemies of a regulation of knowledge. In Merton’s influential description, science is an autonomous, self-regulating system, especially with regard to its normative nature.

This notion of a primary social self-control is a powerful, if mythical, self-description of science, and restricting scientists’ social and intellectual life in a way that is regarded as legitimate, because the spheres of production of scientific knowledge and the execution of political action were considered institutions completely sealed off from each other. Today, science is deeply entangled in politics, and political interests have a determining influence on the development of research. When ‘good’ science produces ‘bad' consequences, it is seen as deplorable. If this were to affect such paramount values as health and safety in an affluent society, political attention and intervention are sure to follow.

Governance of knowledge: Our aim here is to identify institutional frameworks to deal with new and potentially hazardous knowledge.

· We should avoid irreversibility

· We should guarantee and enhance public involvement and democratic decision-making. There is a basic tension in modern societies between democratic and oligarchic principles, since lay people are not knowledgeable enough to participate in decisions about SciTech in a competent manner. A solution to this could be in the education of the public and their inclusion in decision making through a minipopulus.However, the basic rift in such debates is not between lay people and experts, but between two alliances advocating different courses of action based on divergent basic values and knowledge claims. Claims from both sides are tested in public debate.

In short, to satisfy the two criteria, the institutional settings would require wide public participation and open, controversial debate, keeping open as many options as possible.

Globalisation and the nation state: no matter how ambitious and successful single national efforts may be, and no matter what stringent government regulations may be in effect, international competition can undermine such attempts. The most pressing problem is international coordination in order to avoid the Delaware Effect – lowest regulatory standards because of the nations’ preference for attracting business investments. The nation state appears to be helpless in the face of globalised production of knowledge and technical development – an observation that needs to be taken seriously, in the face of transboundary externalities.

Globalisation has led to several governance gaps, which, according to a report to the UN, were identified as:

· Operational: whenever policymakers and public institutions find themselves lacking the information, knowledge and tools they need to respond to complex policy issues.

· Participatory: the difficulties for a common understanding of, and therefore agreement on, critical policy issues.

Beyond classical forms of multilateralism, global public policy networks (actors from different sectors, NGOs, businesses) are promising institutional forms that could help bridge these gaps.

(http://aston.academia.edu/ReinerGrundmann/Papers/280481/Social_Control_and_Knowledge_In_Democratic_Societies)

Do comment.