53 
at which a decision can be made with a reasonable certainty that a 
majority of concerned parties have had an opportunity to be heard, is a 
more difficult problem to resolve. In the case of the decisions regarding 
the regulation of DNA recombinant research, Dr. Michael voiced the 
view that the level is wrong. It is a worldwide problem but it received 
its primary public focus at the local level and then at the Federal 
level. Although other nations are considering the problem there is no 
solid international program which would permit a worldwide decision- 
making process that satisfies the social concerns of all nations. Al- 
though there is no way of imposing international law on DNA recom- 
binant research, Dr. Lowrance believes that the begi nnin g efforts of all 
Federal agencies to work with international organizations could 
serve to increase sensitivity to such issues. Such discussions at least 
have isolated agreement that the issue is important and warrants a 
coordinated examination even though the solution may not be stand- 
ard in each nation. 
Dr. JVengert 
Norman Wengert, Professor of Political Science, Colorado State 
University, commented on his experience in studying issues of policy 
development and control. As he pointed out, public participation can 
mean many things. In some instances, it is a matter of good policy 
because it represents democracy in action. In other instances, it is a 
strategic use of the public to support a particular position. (On 
occasion, as pointed out by Ms. Nelkin, public participation even 
while increasing the level of knowledge does not resolve conflict while 
in other instances, public discussion and dissemination of knowledge 
does reduce conflict.) For some members of the public, the opportunity 
to participate in public discussion of issues is a form of therapy. 
In spite of all of the efforts which have been made, Dr. Wengert is 
still of the opinion that we are not doing a successful job of educating 
the average citizen to cope with debates involving scientific issues. He 
believes that there is a need to find some way of exposing students to 
the policy dimensions of science, as contrasted with the teaching of 
the processes and techniques of science. There is a need to develop an 
analytical and questioning attitude on the part of students about the 
facts which are presented to them in their courses of study. Dr. Wengert 
cited a number of examples to illustrate how it is often difficult even 
for scientists to be heard by other scientists if the ideas being proposed 
are controversial in terms of existing data. If scientists have such a 
hard time among themselves in keeping an open mind about new 
ideas then it should not be surprising to discover that the lay citizen 
has a difficult time in establishing a reasonable position on scientific 
issues on which scientists cannot agree. 
Dr. Wengert mentioned several factors which are related to informa- 
tion processing and scientific policy development. These include: (1) 
peer review; (2) such laws as the Freedom of Information Act; (3) 
more attention to the timing of the release of public statements 
concerning new developments (often premature release of new ideas 
which are later disproved or which cannot be replicated produces 
unnecessary public reaction) ; (4) an improvement in the communica- 
tion of information to the public through the news media; and (5) 
the possibility of supporting a public office of some sort to serve as a 
focus of public input on policy issues. 
[Appendix B — 102] 
