Public Engagement for Informing Science and Technology Policy: What Do We Know,What Do We Need to Know,and How Will We Get There?

This article examines social science relevant to public engagements and identifies the challenges to the goal of meaningful public input into science and technology policy. Specifically, when considering “which forms, features, and conditions of public engagement are optimal for what purposes, and why?” we find social science has not clarified matters. We offer a model to guide systematic research that defines and empirically connects variations in features and types of public engagement activities to specifically defined variations in effective processes and outcomes. The specification of models, as we have done, will guide policy makers, practitioners, and the public in determining what kinds of engagement techniques are optimal for what kinds of purposes. Our model is presented to start conversations and inspire research that in the future should help to ensure meaningful public participation that meets the promise of contributing thoughtful societal values and perspectives into governmental policies impacting science and technology research.     

Biology,Ideology, and Epistemology: How Do We Know Political Attitudes Are Inherited and Why Should We Care?

Evidence that political attitudes and behavior are in part biologically and even genetically instantiated is much discussed in political science of late. Yet the classic twin design, a primary source of evidence on this matter, has been criticized for being biased toward finding genetic influence. In this article, we employ a new data source to test empirically the alternative, exclusively environmental, explanations for ideological similarities between twins. We find little support for these explanations and argue that even if we treat them as wholly correct, they provide reasons for political science to pay more rather than less attention to the biological basis of attitudes and behaviors. Our analysis suggests that the mainstream socialization paradigm for explaining attitudes and behaviors is not necessarily incorrect but is substantively incomplete.     

Where Do We Go from Here?

The left needs a fundamental rethinking of its politics for a new era. The first task is to understand the contemporary conjuncture: the dynamic combination of events and circumstances which structure a political settlement. Two such conjunctures have occurred in recent history. The first produced the postwar welfare settlement of 1945, which broke down in the economic crisis of the 1970s. The second took shape in the 1980s around the revival of liberal market economics and what became known as Thatcherism. It failed following the 2008 financial crash, and has begun to break apart with the vote to leave the EU. New political and cultural faultlines are confounding the orthodoxies of the governing class and cutting across the partisan loyalties of the main political parties. They herald the renewal of politics. But Labour is on the edge of an abyss. This article considers what the left can learn from Labour's previous periods of defeat and revisionism, and suggests where—if it survives—it should go next.     

What Body Parts Do We Owe Each Other?

The American experience in organ transplantation illuminates the attitudes and practices that underlie the ongoing failure to establish a national health insurance system. In both spheres, the public makes a sharp divide between the well-being of intimates and the well-being of strangers. Private and public duties remain distinct; obligations recognized on a personal level do not expand public commitments. As a result, individuals must shift for themselves, whether they require an organ donor or a doctor. In the world of transplantation as in the world of health care more generally, we are all on our own.

Intelligence Failures: What Are They Really and What Do We Do about Them?

Intelligence failures occur for more reasons than just sloppy tradecraft and are often attributable to decision-makers as well as to the intelligence community. Before exploring the subjective nature of intelligence failures, this article first discusses three foundational concepts underlying them: process vs. product, fact vs. judgment, and prediction. It then outlines major components of intelligence failures: accuracy, surprise, and the role of decision-makers, particularly unrealistic expectations and the use or non-use of intelligence. The article concludes with a discussion of what the intelligence community and decision-makers can do to deal with these three components.     

Public Sector Collaboration: Are We Doing It Well and Could We Do It Better?

Improving collaboration by public sector agencies is an important element of many public sector reforms. Common approaches include introducing responsibilities under legislation and policy decisions, the provision of information and guidance, and strengthening third‐party oversight. To identify how collaboration is being practised, this paper reviews evidence from over one hundred reports by Auditors‐General and Ombudsmen in Australia and New Zealand to identify key attributes of collaboration, and assesses these further by examining three reports in detail. It concludes that problems that have been known for many years continue to constrain public sector effectiveness. Although continuing existing approaches may assist in improving collaboration, the paper argues that there is a need to adopt more systematic approaches to organisational capacity for collaboration. It further identifies that changes in the external environment such as technology‐based innovation may demand rapid progress and change in relation to collaboration.     

Do We Want a Referendum on the Common Market?

In March 1975 Britain quarrelled about whether to hold a referendum on membership of the European Community. The Hansard Society organised an important debate about it between Enoch Powell, Geoffrey Howe, John Mackintosh and Keith Kyle. This is a report on that event drawn from a recently discovered recording. Many of the arguments deployed then are being repeated in today's debate about a ‘people's vote'—including the long‐term effects on the UK's constitution of having recourse to the referendum device.     

Asked and Answered: Knowledge Levels When We Will Not Take “Don't Know” for an Answer

A pivotal claim in research on citizen competence is that the typical citizen knows very little about politics. Public opinion surveys provide a considerable body of evidence in support of this position. However, survey protocols with respect to factual questions about politics violate established norms in psychometric research on educational testing in that don't know answers are encouraged rather than discouraged. Because encouraging don't know responses potentially confounds efforts to identify substantive understanding, this practice may lead to the systematic understatement of political knowledge. We explore this possibility with data drawn from three split-ballot tests: one conducted as part of a survey in the Tallahassee, Florida, metropolitan area, one conducted as part of the 1998 NES Pilot, and one conducted as part of the 2000 NES. Results reveal that the mean level of political knowledge increases by approximately 15% when knowledge questions are asked in accordance with accepted practices in educational testing.     

The Federal Antideficiency Act at 150—Where Do We Stand?

The Antideficiency Act of 1870 codified Congress's power of the purse to curb unauthorized agency spending. Is it still working? This paper analyzes all violations of the Act over 12 years by agency and type, causes and consequences, and how violations were detected. The number of violations has trended down slightly. While agency preventive controls have failed, detective controls are working. Employees and agencies are comfortable self‐reporting violations, which are neither pervasive nor material. The risk of violations increases during fiscal year transitions and periods of change. The Act remains effective at stopping unauthorized and overspending, but does not address wasteful spending.     

Do They Really Know? On Party Representatives’ Knowledge of the Extent to Which Their Parties Make Election Pledges

The assumption that representatives hold knowledge about their parties’ programmes underlies models of representative democracy. However, representatives’ party knowledge is rarely discussed in theoretical detail, nor is it often systematically empirically investigated. This article takes the first steps and discusses what type of knowledge of their parties representatives need and what knowledge they actually have. Specific focus is given to parties’ election pledge‐making. By comparing the number of parties’ pledges in Swedish election manifestos to Swedish party representatives’ perceptions of the extent to which parties make pledges, the article presents empirical evidence indicating low levels of knowledge. Knowledge is higher among top‐level politicians and politicians who trust parties to generally keep their pledges, but the main conclusion is that research should not assume detailed knowledge of pledge‐making in manifestos among elected representatives, which has not previously been shown in systematic studies.     

Are We Civilized Yet?

The term “civilization” has been used in many contexts where accusations of Western imperialism, racism, and the like do not at all apply. Works on the history of science and technology in ancient cultures provide one such example, when they speak of Egyptian civilization or early Chinese civilization. It is also not true that works of the Enlightenment view the non-western world as less civilized and inferior. An entire genre of writing inspired by Jesuit accounts discovered in China a higher form of society that Europe should emulate. Two such works were Oliver Goldsmith’s Letters from a Citizen of the World and François Quesnay’s Le Despostisme de la chine, which offer, respectively, an extended satire and a sharp critique of European society.     

Do We Understand What the Public Hears? Stakeholders’ Preferred Communication Choices for Discussing River Issues with the Public

Communication between stakeholders and the larger public is an increasingly important issue in today's policy world. This communication often takes the form of policy narratives; however, few studies have empirically examined what type of communication style stakeholders prefer for communication with the public. This study uses a survey of 87 river stakeholders to determine the preferred communication choices of stakeholders. The study finds that 39% of the stakeholders chose a duty‐based narrative, 28% choose a science statement, 23% choose an engaged citizen narrative, and 10% choose a do nothing statement. Some of these preferences were related to issues of trust, other policy preferences, and demographic background. Based on previous research, the findings demonstrate that stakeholders can make decisions about how to communicate with the public that are not necessarily reflective of the own values.     

How Do We Solve a Problem Like the Donald? The Democratic Challenge of Trump Supporters and the Politics of Presidential Removal

Political observers have debated whether and how to remove Donald J. Trump from the office of the presidency. This article explains the difficulties associated with both the Twenty-Fifth Amendment’s incapacity route and impeachment. These difficulties illuminate a larger underlying problem with American democracy that the Trump presidency both crystallizes and reinforces: the emergence of an energized core of political participants who unite around racialized identity and reject some core principles of democracy.     

Can We? Administrative Limits Revisited

The idea of administrative limits—in the sense of constraints or bounds on what can be achieved by the activity of administration in general and public administration in particular—is important for a proper understanding of twenty‐first‐century public administration. What are the effective limits of taxable capacity in the modern state, as debt‐ridden governments seek to reduce debt levels and budget deficits after the financial crashes and economic recession of the late 2000s? What are the limits of safety and security that can be realistically achieved by administrative structures and procedures in a so‐called risk society? What are the limits to the achievement of ambitious social engineering to improve the human lot by conventional organizations and bureaucracies? Such issues are not new. Questions of this kind have long been asked by scholars in the intersecting fields of public administration, policy studies, and political science. Nonetheless, the author argues, they address issues that are of continuing, central importance to government and society in today’s world.     

Why Do Experienced Challengers Do Better than Amateurs?

Politically experienced challengers are more successful in seeking political office than amateurs. The relationship is found so regularly that political experience has become the standard ex ante indicator of challenger quality in studies of American elections. Despite this, little work has investigated why experienced challengers are so successful. Many scholars attribute the relationship to inherent differences between experienced challengers and amateurs: experienced challengers have stronger electoral skills and greater access to material resources. I argue that these differences play a role, but an indirect one. Rather, experienced challengers are lead by both their resource advantage and the high amount of risk they are exposed to in seeking office to run in races in which their party has a good chance of winning. Thus, the direct cause of the experienced challengers’ success is self-selection into winnable races. Empirical analysis supports the self-selection model over a model in which resources directly lead to success.

What Do We Learn from Graduate Admissions Committees? A Multiple Rater, Latent Variable Model, with Incomplete Discrete and Continuous Indicators

What do we really know about applicants to graduate school?How much information is in an applicant's file? What do we learnby having graduate admissions committees read and score applicantfiles? In this article, I develop a statistical model for measuringapplicant quality, combining the information in the committeemembers' ordinal ratings with the information in applicants'GRE scores. The model produces estimates of applicant qualitypurged of the influence of committee members' preferences overostensibly extraneous applicant characteristics, such as genderand intended field of study. An explicitly Bayesian approachis adopted for estimation and inference, making it straightforwardto obtain confidence intervals not only on latent applicantquality but over rank orderings of applicants and the probabilityof belonging in a set of likely admittees. Using data from applicationsto a highly ranked political science graduate program, I showthat there is considerable uncertainty in estimates of applicantquality, making it impossible to make authoritative distinctionsas to quality among large portions of the applicant pool. Themultiple rater model I develop here is extremely flexible andhas applications in fields as diverse as judicial politics,legislative politics, international relations, and public opinion.     

The Right to Know? State Politics of Fracking Disclosure

U.S. energy firms are increasingly expanding their production of natural gas oftentimes by relying on a controversial extraction technique known as hydraulic fracturing. While proponents cite a litany of benefits including economic development and reduced carbon emissions, opponents articulate concerns typically centering on environmental quality. Caught between these opposing points of view, states are turning to disclosure requirements. Yet all disclosure statutes are not created equally. In order to better understand this variation, I utilize Abel, Stephan, and Kraft's (ASK) 2007 performance model, which evaluates the effectiveness of information‐based disclosure rules for industry. The model here, however, is applied in an attempt to understand why disclosure regulations emerge and vary across states. Results generally validate the ASK approach but with one caveat. I find that in the context of differing disclosure regulations, the ASK model's pollution severity/risk measure may be refined by including risk perception.     

Should We Support Illiberal Religious Democracies?

The terms on which the US will agree to settle the conflict in Afghanistan reflect a much greater issue that the US faces in the Middle East: will it support only those who seek to establish democratic regimes that also respect individual, or ally itself with the often much more powerful groups that may be democratic, but are likely to foster regimes based on Shari'a law? At the very least, the West should urge all to respect the right to life, call on regimes to negotiate with protesters rather than machine‐gunning them, and insist that protesters follow the Egyptian and Tunisian model of peaceful uprising. Beyond such liberal basics, it is best to let each nation work out its own regime. As a matter of policy, in order to support democratic groups and evolving democratic regimes in the Middle East, western governments had best be prepared to ally themselves with political forces whose liberal credentials, one must recognise, are evolving but not yet particularly high.     

Can We Have a Public Bioethic?

This essay examines the viability of a publically held, articulated, and enacted bioethic in America's democratic regime. The essay takes the writings of several thinkers associated with the President's Council on Bioethics as its point of departure. The essay draws attention to some of the enduring moral, political, religious, and intellectual currents inherent in American civil society that will continue to provide both resources for and obstacles to any publicly held bioethic in America.