Science and Public policies: A challenging dialog

Transcription

1 Science and Public policies: A challenging dialog Franck Leprévost University of Luxembourg UNICA Rector s Meeting 2014 May 20, 2014 Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 1 / 18

2 Public policies: The hypothesis "Ce dont nous avons besoin, c est d une politique qui fasse du futur sa tâche fondamentale." in "El futuro y sus enemigos: Una defensa de la esperanza política", Paidós, Barcelona 2010 (French translation: "Le futur et ses ennemis - de la confiscation de l avenir à l espérance politique", Flammarion). Daniel Innerarity ( ) Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 2 / 18

3 Science and Public Policy: The ideal cooperation? in "Mathe macht lustig", Lappan 2012 Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 3 / 18

4 Science and Public Policy The necessary dialog between policy makers and scientists Why? How? Limits? Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 4 / 18

5 Dialog between policy makers and scientists: Why? Why? Policy-makers need decision-making help Scientists can say where we are, and what happens if we go to the right or to the left Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 5 / 18

6 Dialog between policy makers and scientists: How? How? Data collecting is not enough: Which data? What for? Translate the expected information from "Politician" to "Scientist" Translate data into a clear and useful information for the decision-making process Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 6 / 18

7 Dialog between policy makers and scientists: Limits? Limits? The initial condition: "A future-oriented policy" Ideology-driven research The 2 communities obey different timelines (still partially valid for "big" programs but less and less for "concrete" projects) The danger of a "republic of experts": Confusion of the respective roles Decrease of the political choices Reliable science: A challenge for the scientific community Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 7 / 18

8 The responsibility of the scientific community The responsibility of the scientific community Strong science is required! Scientific misconduct: Addressed somewhere else Épistèmè vs Doxa: Partially addressed now Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 8 / 18

9 The responsibility of the scientific community Épistèmè vs Doxa Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 9 / 18

10 The responsibility of the scientific community Épistèmè vs Doxa Amgen could reproduce only 6 out of 53 "landmark" studies in cancer research (2013) Bayer could reproduce only 25% of 67 important articles (2013) Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 10 / 18

11 The responsibility of the scientific community Épistèmè vs Doxa A. M. Newman and J. B. Cooper: Lab-specific gene expression signatures in pluripotent stem cells. Cell Stem Cell 7, , 2010 Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 11 / 18

12 The responsibility of the scientific community Épistèmè vs Doxa C. Reinhart and K. Rogoff: Growth in a time of debt. T. Herndon check. Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 12 / 18

13 The responsibility of the scientific community Épistèmè vs Doxa Common features of the preceding examples? in "Mathe macht lustig", Lappan Dependency on statistical data Reproductibility of results Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 13 / 18

14 The responsibility of the scientific community Further reflexions: Are mistakes welcome? Should the verification of results be supported? Long-term reproductibility of results: access to data, standardization of protocols, plans of employed materials? What about "negative" results? Publish less but better Addressing ambitious problems takes time Are mistakes welcome? Sometimes the verification may be more productive than the original result... A "Bayesian" approach? What is science? Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 14 / 18

15 The responsibility of the scientific community Key messages Key messages Politicians and scientists: A potentially productive dialog Politicians: Have reasonable expectations regarding what the scientific community can provide, and adapted to the profile of the institutions Be aware that the European model is not the US model Scientists: Take risks, and give your advice. Even if not asked. But be sure of what you say. Reproductibility of results, address ambitious problems, make "good" mistakes, be aware of your role and responsibility in society Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 15 / 18

16 The responsibility of the scientific community The 21sth century: The Age of Enlightenment EUROPE Knowledged-based economy Research-driven policy Is there a need for more ministers from the scientific community? "If you think education is expensive, try ignorance." Derek Bok ( ) Former President Harvard University Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 16 / 18

17 References (non-exhaustive list!) References (non-exhaustive list!) How science goes wrong. The Economist - October 19th ERC Scientific Misconduct Strategy. Minutes of the Scientific Council Pleanry meeting October 2009, Brussels. European Science Foundation: Fostering Research Integrity in Europe. December Anne Fagot-Largeault: L honnêteté intellectuelle / Scientific Integrity. S. Godercharle, B. Nemery, K. Dierickx: Guidance on research integrity: no union in Europe. Vol. 381, March 30, S. Godercharle, B. Nemery, K. Dierickx: Integrity Training: Conflicting Practices. Science, Vol. 340, 21 June D. S. Kornfeld: Integrity Training: Misconduct s Source. Science, Vol. 340, 21 June E. Krudy: How a student took on two Harvard economists over their pro-austerity study and won. E. Murphy: Math in a time of Excel: Economists error undermine influential paper. Daily Finance, April 19th, A. M. Newman, J. B. Cooper: Lab-Specific Gene Expression Signatures in Pluripotent Stem Cells. Cell Stem Cell 7, , August 6th, N. Bernard: Raisonnement scientifique et inférence bayésienne, B. Warusfel: Expertise de la crise et crise de l expertise publique. Sc. Po. No. 156, Septembre Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 17 / 18

18 Abstract Abstract Science and Public Policy is the subject of this talk. On the one hand, the way policy makers make their decisions is often perceived as relying rather on ideologies as opposed to scientific evidence, sometimes even denying them. On the other hand, the timeline of the agenda of science is also often perceived as too long term, and with little impact on the daily life, hence of little value for governments acting in a fast-changing environment. As a consequence, the dialog between both communities policy makers and scientists is a complex project. This being said, Europe expressed the ambition to become a knowledge-based economy, what requires the involvement of scientists. This involvement comes with a shared responsibility in the decision-making process. This talk aims at addressing some of the issues raised by the dialog mentioned above, and some of the challenges the scientific community may have to face in this context. This conference is concluded by some (un?)conventional thoughts around the following different although somehow positively-correlated questions: How science sometimes goes wrong? Are mistakes welcome? What is science? Franck Leprévost Épistèmè vs Doxa 18 / 18