science policy
Debating science in a court setting may boost public trust
Holding science-based courtroom debates could help educate and engage citizens in shaping public policy.
In short:
- A citizens' jury on genome editing, funded by Wellcome Trust, exemplified a non-traditional method of public engagement in science policy.
- Trust in scientists has declined significantly, highlighting the need for inclusive decision-making involving both experts and the public.
- Science courts, modeled on the U.S. court system, could address policy questions with scientific expertise to foster informed public trust.
Why this matters:
Improving public trust in science through participatory methods can lead to better-informed health policies and greater societal acceptance of scientific advancements. Read more: EPA’s “scientific integrity” program lacks teeth, group alleges.
In short:
- A citizens' jury on genome editing, funded by Wellcome Trust, exemplified a non-traditional method of public engagement in science policy.
- Trust in scientists has declined significantly, highlighting the need for inclusive decision-making involving both experts and the public.
- Science courts, modeled on the U.S. court system, could address policy questions with scientific expertise to foster informed public trust.
Why this matters:
Improving public trust in science through participatory methods can lead to better-informed health policies and greater societal acceptance of scientific advancements. Read more: EPA’s “scientific integrity” program lacks teeth, group alleges.
Refugees are replanting trees in Northern Uganda
Biden narrows in on his next top science adviser
How a Google billionaire helped pay for Biden's science office
Critical measures of global heating reaching tipping point, study finds
A new study tracking the planet's vital signs has found that many of the key indicators of the global climate crisis are getting worse and either approaching, or exceeding, key tipping points as the Earth heats up.