Download Science Policy and Social Change

Science Policy and Social Change
December 2003
S&T Drive Economic Growth
Scientific and technical changes accounts
for as much as 50% of long-run economic
growth, even perhaps as much as 75%.
Public Science is Pillar of Industry
73% of science
papers cited by U.S.
industrial patents
were based on
research financed by
government or
nonprofit agencies.
Trends in Basic Research Funding
FY 1976-2004
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
1976 1980 1984 1988 1992 1998 2002 2004
Science is a Principal Driver of Change
SOCIAL CHANGE
Internet
HEALTH AND
MEDICAL
CHANGE
Biotechnology
SCIENCEBASED
ECONOMY
ENVIRONMENTAL
CHANGE
Climate
NATIONAL
SECURITY
CHANGE
Weapons of
Mass
Destruction
Science has the
power to completely
transform civilization.
For some, science
has made life
comfortable and
secure. For others, it
has meant death and
destruction
Science Policy Can Drive Outcomes
Emergence of
New Problems
Types of Benefits
SCIENCE
POLICY
Distribution of
Benefits
Distribution of
Problems
Given the impact of
science, science
policy is the key
variable, yet almost
entirely ignored.
DISCUSSION
What are the major science policy issues
in China and how do they affect you?
Evolution of the U.S. NIS
Laissez-Faire (1790-1940)
War and Post-War (1940-1950)
Federalization (1950-1975)
Laissex-Faire (1790-1940)
Government has no distinct S&T policy or
mission
Key institutions in NIS were independent
corporate R&D labs
In the late 19th century, universities
emerge as the home of basic science and
advanced training
War and Post-War (1940-1950)
 Government establishes R&D institutions and
expanded academic role to support the war
effort
 Large-scale federal investment, federally
mandated objectives, targeted funding and
industry-government cooperation are the norm
 By end of war, hundreds of new labs established
and potential of large-scale R&D to meet
national objectives is demonstrated
Science the Endless Frontier
President Roosevelt asks Vannevar Bush,
the director of the war-time OSRD, to look
ahead to the role of science in peacetime
Science the Endless Frontier becomes the
foundation for U.S. science policy
Foundations of U.S. Science Policy
Republic of Science
Self-regulation by scientists
Market Failure Model
Basic science as a public good
Unpredictability
Science as experimentation
Current Approach to Science Policy
Inputs
Processes
Products
Outcomes
Addresses
Conduct of S&T
Products and processes of S&T
Assumes
All societal outcomes will be positive
Linear model of innovation and societal benefit
Federalization: NIS Institutions
Hundred of large industrial labs
Dozens of large federal labs
Thousands of small technology-oriented
labs and companies
Hundred of unconnected and unplanned
federal labs
Hundreds of thousands of researchers at
universities
But where are we going?
Indications of Societal Transformation
GMO controversy
Affordability of AIDS drugs
Lack of medical insurance
Aging of the population
Changing climate
Satisfaction (is not tied to wealth)
Health (is not entirely tied to wealth)
Health (is not always tied to spending)
Country
Disability-Adjusted
Life Expectancy
Country
Health Expenditures
as % of GDP
Japan
France
Sweden
U.K.
U.S.
China
Iran
India
74.5
73.1
73.0
71.7
70.0
62.3
60.5
53.2
U.S.
France
Sweden
Japan
U.K.
Iran
China
India
13.7
9.8
9.2
7.1
5.8
5.5
5.3
5.2
DISCUSSION
How can science and science-based
technology most effectively contribute to
an improved quality of life for the greatest
number of people?
Malaria is the leading cause of death in young
children. It is estimated that if malaria had been
eradicated in Africa by 1960, GDP would be
32% higher than it is today.
Until the 1950s, polio crippled thousands of
children every year in industrialized countries.
Dual Agenda: Science and Social Equity
The challenge is to develop S&T policy
that reaches a significant proportion of the
population
S&T and social issues are critically
interdependent
Technology strategy drives government
spending and its social outcomes
Linear thinking in technology policy is linear
thinking in social outcomes
DISCUSSION
How does the science that we do affect
the social choices we make?
The two atomic bombs dropped during WWII
killed 150,000 people.
More than 100 million women are on birth
control pills. More than 80% of women in the
U.S. born after 1945 have used the pill.
DISCUSSION
How do the S&T programs we implement
affect the distribution and equity of
outcomes?
Sub-Saharan Africa holds 2% of the world’s
population, but 30% of the AIDS population
Three million people worldwide died of AIDS
this past year, 2.3 million of them in southern
Africa
Lessons from Old Science Policy
Desired outcomes can drive the science
Societal value of new knowledge is
determined by how it is used and by whom
it is used
Societal outcomes reflect who is making
science policy
Desired outcomes emerge when scientific
advance is well-matched by societal needs
Cycle Dynamics
Education
New skills
Societal
Outcomes
Economic
Outcomes
New social
structures
POLICY
New industries
New institutions
S&T
Outcomes
Knowledge
Networks
Conduct Tech transfer
of Science
Knowledge transfer
New Science Policy
New Science Policy aims to create
knowledge, cultivate public discourse and
foster policies that help society grapple
with the immense power of science.
A New Science Policy Framework
Outcome-driven
Integrated
Informed
Self-correcting
Recognizes and responds to the
inextricable links between science and
technology and societal evolution
Morality and Science
What is the collective good we want
inquiry to promote?
Philip Kitcher, Professor of Philosophy, Columbia University