# Presentation: 230488

## How to Influence 

**Science and Space Policy**** **

**Jon D. Miller**
**Professor and Director**
**Center for Biomedical Communication **
**The Feinberg School of Medicine**
**Northwestern University**

## In this presentation, I will:

**define science policy as the attainment policy objectives such as increased federal funding for scientific research with a minimum of direct federal control.**
**define space policy as the attainment of policy objectives such as increased federal funding for space exploration and space science.**
**treat space policy as a specialized subset of science and technology policy**
**describe the role of policy leaders and attentive publics in the formulation of science policy**
**outline a strategy for influencing science and space policy.**

## Neither science policy nor space policy are salient topics for most American adults.

**Few Americans discuss science policy or space policy issues over breakfast.**
**Most citizens and most candidates for office have  little understanding of a molecule, a stem cell, or the concept of an expanding universe.**
**There is no evidence that any congressional, senatorial, or presidential election was ever decided by a science or space policy issue.**

## To understand the formulation of science policy or space policy in the 21st century, it is important to understand:

**The growth of political specialization**
**The growth of issue specialization**
**The emergence of policy leadership in the context of issue specialization**

## Political specialization refers to the decision of some citizens to follow political and public policy issues and the decision of other citizens to not follow public affairs.

**In the latter half of the 20****th**** century, only half of eligible American citizens take the time to vote in presidential elections.**
**In the same period, only one in three eligible American citizens take the time to vote in congressional elections in non-presidential years.**
**An interest in public policy issues is now a specialized interest in the United States.**

## Among those citizens who decide to follow public policy matters, there is a second process that is referred to as issue specialization.

**In recent decades, the number of issues on the public policy agenda has continued to grow, making it virtually impossible for any individual to follow a large number of issues. **
**At the same time, the complexity of many issues has increased, requiring the interested citizen to know about each issue to understand competing views about the issue.**
**As a result of these processes, most Americans who follow public policy matters at all are able to keep up with only two or three issue areas.**

## The citizens who follow a particular issue area are referred to as the attentive public for that issue area.

**National surveys over the last 20 years have found that approximately 12% of American adults are attentive to science and technology policy, or about 24 million adults. **
**The same surveys have found that abut 6.4% of American adults are attentive to biomedical policy, or about 13 million adults.**
**It is important to see these results as a reflection of our pluralism rather than a failure of democracy. **

## Only a small proportion of Americans are attentive to any issue.

## The attentive public for science and technology  policy includes:

**approximately 18 million citizens who have a high level of interest in new scientific discoveries or new inventions and technologies and who feel that they are reasonably well-informed about those issues.**
** ****16 percent of men,**
** ****7 percent of women,**
**10 percent of non-college graduates,**
**19 percent of college graduates (baccalaureates),**
**10 percent of young adults (ages 18 through 34), and**
**13 percent of older adults (age 65 and over).**

## The attentive public for space exploration includes:

**approximately 13 million citizens who have a high level of interest in space exploration and who feel that they are reasonably well-informed about space exploration.**
** ****10 percent of men,**
**  ****3 percent of women,**
**  ****6 percent of non-college graduates,**
**10 percent of college graduates (baccalaureates),**
**  ****6 percent of young adults (ages 18 through 34), and**
**  ****6 percent of older adults (age 65 and over).**

## A stratified model of the formulation of public policy

**Decision Makers**

**Policy Leaders**

**Attentive Public**

**Interested Public **

**Residual Public**

**A stratified model of the formulation of public policy**

## Within this pyramidal system of policy formulation, policy leaders play a critical role by:

**Monitoring public policy from the perspective of the scientific or space community and defining critical issues that need to be addressed.**
**Organizing other leaders to identify policy solutions and to advance those policy solutions to decision-makers.**
**Negotiating with decision-makers about policy choices.**
**Organizing the appropriate attentive public or publics when direct negotiations with policy makers are not productive or when there is significant disagreement among policy leaders themselves.**

## In 1981, 1984, and 1986, I conducted national studies of science policy leaders to document their activities within the specialized political system and to understand how leaders acquire and use policy relevant information. All three of those studies were conducted before the electronic communication revolution. It was time to revisit these issues.

## Following the same general protocol used in the 1981, 1984, and 1986 studies, I conducted a new study of science policy leaders in the fall of 2002. I have not conducted a separate study of space policy leaders, but there is a substantial overlap with science policy leaders and it is important to understand the backgrounds and characteristics of science policy leaders.

## The population list for science policy leaders included:

**The officers and board members of national scientific and engineering societies and associations.**
**Members of the NAS, NAE, and IOM.**
**Officers and board members of major corporations involved in science or engineering.**
**Officers of universities engaged in a significant level of scientific or engineering research.**
**Winners of a Nobel Prize or a Fields Medal.**
**Individuals who testified before a congressional committee (House or Senate) on a science policy matter.**
**Members of major executive branch science advisory committees at the secretarial or agency level.**
**Full-time science and technology journalists with a national outlet,**** ****including syndication.**

##  Indicators of Policy Leadership, 2002

|  | Science Policy
Leaders |
| --- | --- |
| Speech to science or technical audience in last year |    76% |
| Speech to public audience in last year | 62 |
| Contacted decision-maker on policy issue in last year | 54 |
| Editorial board member of scientific/technical journal | 41 |
| Governing board of scientific/technical research center | 23 |
| Board of scientific/engineering corporation | 21 |
| Governing board of foundation that supports research | 16 |
| Governing board of college or university | 11 |
| Mean score on Policy Leadership Index (0 – 8) | 3.0 (.10) |
| Median core on Policy Leadership Index | 3 |
| Number of Respondents | 333 |

** ****Indicators of Policy Leadership, 2002**

## It is useful to look at some of the changes in the composition of the science policy leadership group over the last 20 years.

## Changing Characteristics of Science Policy Leaders, 2002

|  | Science Policy Leaders |  |  |  |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|  | 1981 | 1984 | 1986 | 2002 |
| Age |  |  |  |  |
|      Less than 50 |    42% |    41% |    36% |    17% |
|      50 to 59 years | 31 | 30 | 30 | 32 |
|      60 to 69 years | 22 | 24 | 28 | 30 |
|      70 years or more | 5 |   5 |   6 | 21 |
| Gender |  |  |  |  |
|      Female | 11 | 12 | NA | 19 |
|      Male | 89 | 88 | NA | 81 |
| Number of respondents | 287 | 630 | 508 | 333 |

**Changing Characteristics of Science Policy Leaders, 2002**

## One of the major functions of science policy leaders is to shape the science policy agenda by identifying the issues that demand attention and working within the leadership community to find solutions that command broad acceptance among science policy leaders and that are acceptable to decision-makers.To explore this agenda-setting process, the 2002 Science Policy Leadership Study asked each leader to list the most important and second most important science policy issues now facing the United States.

## Most Important Science Policy Issues, 2002

|  | Most
Important
Issue | Second Most
Important
Issue | Combined
Mentions |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Global warming and climate change |    17% |    11% |    28% |
| Genetic modification, stem cell use, cloning | 15 | 10 | 25 |
| Environmental issues, biodiversity | 13 | 15 | 28 |
| Energy supply and use | 12 | 11 | 23 |
| National security, terrorism, and defense | 12 | 10 | 22 |
| Research funding |   7 |   8 | 15 |
| Scientific literacy, education, and support |   8 |   6 | 14 |
| Research resources and regulation |   3 |   5 |   8 |
| Health care and related services |   3 |   4 |   7 |
| AIDS, infectious diseases, antibiotic resist... |   1 |   3 |   4 |
| Genetically modified foods |   1 |   2 |   3 |
|      Number of leaders = 333 |  |  |  |

**Most Important Science Policy Issues, 2002**

## To explore the substantive attitudes of science policy leaders, each leader was asked to agree or disagree with each of a series of policy-related statements.

## Attitudes on Selected Science Policy Issues, 2002

|  | Strong
Agree | Agree | Not
Sure | Dis-
agree | Strong
Dis-
agree |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| The quality of science and mathematics education in the United States is inadequate. |    54% |    36% |      4% |      5% |      1% |
| The development of genetically-improved plants will substantially increase the world’s food supply in the next 20 years. | 33 | 53 |   9 |   5 |   0 |
| If the present rate of fossil fuel use continues, serious long-term environmental damage will occur. | 35 | 40 | 10 | 14 |   1 |
| It is very likely that sometime in the next 20 years, the United States will experience a major biological terrorist attack. | 22 | 52 | 20 |   5 |   1 |
| The United States should ratify the Kyoto Protocol. | 37 | 27 | 16 | 11 |   9 |
| New inventions will always be found to counteract any harmful consequences of technological development. |   5 | 34 | 19 | 29 | 13 |

**Attitudes on Selected Science Policy Issues, 2002**

## What are the information needs of science policy leaders?

## Self-reported Adequacy of Knowledge about Selected Issues 

|  | Very well
informed | Moderately
Informed | Not well
informed |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| The low level of scientific literacy in the U.S. |    48% |    42% |    10% |
| Global warming and climate change. | 40 | 54 |   6 |
| The long-term supply of energy in the U.S. | 39 | 52 |   9 |
| The conduct of experiments involving genetic
 modification. | 27 | 51 | 22 |
| The spread of viruses and infectious diseases. | 22 | 52 | 26 |
|      Number of leaders = 333 |  |  |  |

**Self-reported Adequacy of Knowledge about Selected Issues **

## Self-reported Understanding of Selected Scientific Constructs

|  | Clear
Understanding | General
Sense | Less
Familiar |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| The concept and causes of global warming or climate change. |    53% |    45% |      2% |
| The function of DNA in cells. | 46 | 44 | 10 |
| The concept of plate tectonics. | 44 | 39 | 17 |
| The process of nuclear fission. | 43 | 45 | 12 |
| The operation of a nuclear reactor. | 39 | 50 | 11 |
| The process of nuclear fusion. | 36 | 46 | 18 |
| The origin and composition of a laser beam. | 35 | 44 | 21 |
| The functions and uses of stem cells. | 29 | 52 | 19 |
| The place of quarks in atomic theory. | 15 | 35 | 50 |

**Self-reported Understanding of Selected Scientific Constructs**

## How do science policy leaders obtain information about emerging policy issues?

## Science Policy Leader Use of Information Sources, 2002

|  | Science Policy
Leaders |
| --- | --- |
| Reads newspaper:                                              Everyday
                  Most days
2 or 3 days each week
less than twice a week |    
    77%
15
  2
  6 |
| Reads one or more magazines for science information | 92 |
| Reads one or more books for science information | 60 |
| Uses the Internet to find information about science or energy issues | 88 |
|      Number of leaders | 333 |

**Science Policy Leader Use of Information Sources, 2002**

## Use of Electronic Communication Resources, 2002

|  | Science Policy
Leaders |
| --- | --- |
| Uses work (office) computer regularly |    97% |
| Uses office computer for e-mail | 93 |
| Uses office computer to search Internet | 92 |
| Uses notebook computer when traveling  | 72 |
| Uses notebook computer for e-mail when traveling | 61 |
| Uses notebook computer for Internet when traveling | 57 |
| Uses home computer for work purposes | 91 |
| Has high-speed line for home computer | 63 |
| Uses a computer to search for science information on the Internet | 88 |
| Mean score on Index of Electronic Access (0-9) | 7.0 (.12) |

**Use of Electronic Communication Resources, 2002**

## To understand the current information acquisition behaviors of policy leaders, each leader in the 2002 Science Policy Leadership Study was asked to report his or her two most important sources of information about global warming/climate change. The responses were collected in an open-ended format.

## Major Sources (2) of Information about Global Warming, 2002

|  | Science Policy
Leaders |
| --- | --- |
| Professional journals |    44% |
| Internet and online sources | 43 |
| Newspapers | 24 |
| Colleagues, personal conversations | 20 |
| Magazines (other than professional journals) | 16 |
| Books and reports | 14 |
| Non-governmental organizations (including firms) |   5 |
| Libraries |   4 |
| Television (including news and documentaries) |   3 |
| Radio (including NPR) |   2 |
| Government agencies (including national laboratories) |   2 |

**Major Sources (2) of Information about Global Warming, 2002**

## To understand the trend in information acquisition, each science policy leader was asked to describe the source of information that he or she would use to obtain more information about global warming/climate change in the next month.

## Primary Source for Additional Information about GW, 2002

|  | Science Policy
Leaders |
| --- | --- |
| Internet and online sources |    49% |
| Colleagues, personal conversations | 15 |
| Professional journals | 14 |
| Books and reports |   6 |
| Libraries |   3 |
| Government agencies (including national laboratories) |   2 |
| Non-governmental organizations (including firms) |   2 |
| Newspapers |   1 |
| Magazines (other than professional journals) |   1 |
| Television (including news and documentaries) |   0 |
| Radio (including NPR) |   0 |

**Primary Source for Additional Information about GW, 2002**

## Although these results show that science policy leaders are active in acquiring new information about a wide range of scientific topics, it is important to know much confidence they have in various information sources. 

## Confidence in Selected Science Information Sources, 2002

|  | Science Policy
Leaders |
| --- | --- |
| A report from the National Academy of Sciences | 8.6 (.07) |
| An article in Science or Nature | 8.3 (.07) |
| A report from a national laboratory | 7.4 (.09) |
| An episode of the television show Nova | 6.5 (.11) |
| A story in the New York Times | 6.2 (.12) |
| A report from the Environmental Protection Agency | 6.2 (.12) |
| A report from the Federal Department of Energy | 6.2 (.11) |
| A story in the Wall Street Journal | 5.9 (.11) |
| A report from a Congressional committee on S/T | 5.9 (.11) |
| A story in Time or Newsweek | 4.7 (.12) |
| A report from the Sierra Club | 4.5 (.13) |
| A story on CNN | 4.2 (.11) |
| A story on a network television news show | 3.3 (.11) |

**Confidence in Selected Science Information Sources, 2002**

## Given the profiles of science policy leaders and the attentive public for space exploration, what strategies should scientists pursue to influence science and space policy?

**Have a clear, limited, and focused set of policy objectives.**
**Build a broad and strong base of support among science policy leaders and space policy leaders.**
**Create and maintain a focused program of communications to the attentive publics for science policy and space policy.**

## Electronic copies of this presentation may be obtained by sending a request to j-miller8@northwestern.edu