262 • Impacts of Applied Genetics — Micro-Organisms, Plants, and Animals 
inadequate (as occurred after the first set of 
Guidelines for Recombinant DNA Research 
were promulgated). However, option A can be 
implemented in two ways. In the first, the op- 
portunity for public involvement is always pro- 
vided, but need not be taken if there is no public 
interest in the topic. In the second, public in- 
volvement is required. A requirement for public 
involvement would pose the problem that if the 
public does not wish to participate in a par- 
ticular decision, then opinion will sometimes be 
sought from an uninterested (and therefore 
probably uninformed) public simply to meet the 
requirement. Option A poses additional prob- 
lems: What is a “major” policy? At what stage 
would public involvement be required— only 
when technological development and applica- 
tion are imminent or at the stage of basic 
research? Finally, it should be noted that under 
option A, if the public’s contribution significant- 
ly influences policy, the trend away from deci- 
sionmaking by elected representatives (rep- 
resentative democracy) and toward decision- 
making by the people directly (“participatory” 
democracy) may be accelerated. 
Option B would be less cumbersome and 
would permit the establishment of ad hoc mech- 
anisms when necessary. On the other hand, by 
the time some issues are raised, strong vested 
interests would already be in place. The grow- 
ing role of single-issue advocates in U.S. politics, 
and their skill in influencing citizens and policy- 
makers, might abort certain scientific develop- 
ments in the future. 
Regardless of which option is selected, it 
would be desirable to encourage different 
forms of structuring public participation and to 
evaluate the success of each method. Many dif- 
ferent approaches to public participation have 
been tried in the United States and Western 
Europe in attempts to resolve conflicts over 
science and technology. Some have worked bet- 
ter than others, but most have had rather 
limited success. Because public demands for 
involvement are not likely to diminish, the best 
'"Dorothy Nelkin and Michael Pollack, "Pmhlenis and Proce- 
dures in the Regulation of Technological Risk," in Societal fUsk /l.s- 
sessment, R. Schwing, and W, Alhers (eds.) (New York: Plenum 
Pi'ess, 1980). 
ways to accommodate them need to be iden- 
tified. 
ISSUE: How can the level of public 
knowledge concerning genetics 
and its potential be raised? 
If public involvement is expected, an in- 
formed public is clearly desirable. Increasing 
the treatment of the subject, both within and 
outside the traditional educational system, is the 
only way to accomplish this. 
Within the traditional educational system, at 
least some educators feel that too little tini(> is 
spent on genetics. Some, such as members of 
the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study Pro- 
gram, are considering increasing the share of 
the curriculum devoted to genetics. Because* 
science and technology cause hi'oad changes in 
society, not only is a clearer perce'ption of 
genetics in particular needed, hut more* unele*r- 
standing of science in general. I'e)r ahe)ut half 
the U.S. populatiefii, high sche)e)l hie)le)gy is the*ir 
last science course. Educate)rs must fe)e’us e)ii 
this course to increase puhlie* unele'rstaneling e>f 
science. Because students ge*neM'ally finel pe*e>ple* 
more interesting than rats, anel he*e'ause* human 
genetics is a \’ery [)e)pular teipie* in the* high 
school biology course, eulue'ateM’s re)spe)nsihle* le)r 
the Biological Sciences Uurrie'ulum Stueh' Pre)- 
gram are considering ine’reiasing time* spe*nt e>n 
its study in hejpes e)f incre*asing puhlie* kneew l- 
edge not only e)f genetie:s hut e>f se'ie*ne e* in ge*n- 
eral. 
At the unixei'sity lene*l, me)re* funels coulel he* 
provided te> de\e;le)p e:e)urse?s e)ii the* re*lation- 
ships between scie)ne:e), teu’hne)le)gy, anel ,se)e ie*l\ , 
which could he elesigne*el he)th fe)i’ sluele*nts anel 
for the general puhlie'. 
Several se)ui'ce;s e)utsieie* the* traelitie)nal .se hoe)l 
system already we)rk te> ineTe*ase* puhlie’ unele*r- 
standing of scieneie) anel the* l■(*latie)nships he* 
tween science anel se)e:ie*ty. .Among lhe*m are*: 
• Three pre)grams ele*\ e*le)|)e*el by the* \alional 
Science Fe)unelatie)n le) improve* puhlie- 
understaneling of anel iin e)l\ e*me*nl in sci 
ence: Scienea* fe)r the* Uili/e*n: Puhlie I ndi*r 
standing e>f Se:ie*ne'e*: anel l.lhii’.s .mel Values 
in Se:iene'e* anel re*e'hne)le)g\ . 
