当前位置: X-MOL 学术Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Public perceptions of federal science advisory boards depend on their composition.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America ( IF 11.1 ) Pub Date : 2020-09-15 , DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2012571117
Caitlin Drummond 1 , Sara Goto Gray 2 , Kaitlin T Raimi 3 , Robyn Wilson 4 , Joseph Árvai 5, 6, 7
Affiliation  

The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Science Advisory Board (SAB) provides expert advice to inform agency decision-making. Recent regulations have decreased the representation of academic scientists on the EPA SAB and increased the representation of industry scientists. In an experiment, we asked how the US public views the goals and legitimacy of the board as a function of its composition. Respondents perceived SABs with a majority of industry scientists to be more likely to promote business interests than SABs with a majority of academic scientists. Liberals were less likely than conservatives to perceive industry-majority SABs as promoting human health and the environment, and making unbiased and evidence-based decisions. Our findings underscore the potential for politicization of scientific advice to the government.



中文翻译:

公众对联邦科学顾问委员会的看法取决于其组成。

美国环境保护局(EPA)科学顾问委员会(SAB)提供专家意见,以指导该机构的决策。最近的法规减少了在EPA SAB上学术科学家的代表,并增加了行业科学家的代表。在一个实验中,我们问美国公众如何看待董事会的目标和合法性是其组成的函数。受访者认为,与拥有多数学术科学家的SAB相比,拥有多数行业科学家的SAB更有可能促进商业利益。与保守派相比,自由派认为行业多数的SAB促进人类健康和环境,并做出无偏见和循证决策的可能性要小。我们的发现强调了向政府提供科学建议的政治化潜力。

更新日期:2020-09-16
down
wechat
bug