Scientific Expertise and Democracy

• In Event: Poster Session: Political Thought and Philosophy II

Abstract

Major issues facing contemporary democratic societies– including climate change and global pandemics– often rely on expert knowledge. Credentialed scientists, who are rigorously trained in the methods and practices of inquiry in their respective fields, systematically analyze the source and scope of the problems and recommend potential solutions. Indeed, it is nearly impossible to design and administer effective policies to curb carbon emissions or slow the spread of disease, for example, without input and advice from scientific experts. In recent years, democratic theorists have become increasingly interested in how scientific expertise generates both challenges and opportunities for contemporary democracies. This article contributes to current debates over the proper role of scientific advising in democratic decision-making through a sustained focus on impending decisions surrounded the development and governance of germline gene editing technologies, including CRISPR. My central objective is to illuminate how public policies and legal decisions have created incentives for universities and their faculty to commercialize CRISPR research and develop partnerships with corporations to fund their programs. In turn, I argue that the academic-industrial complex has compromised the integrity of scientific expertise in news coverage and the policy advising process. I conclude by suggesting that we must move beyond standard conflict of interest protocols to protect the trustworthiness of scientific advising.

Author

• Amber Knight, University of North Carolina - Charlotte