IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v28y2001i2p99-112.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Politics of expert advice: Lessons from the early history of the BSE saga

Author

Listed:
  • Erik Millstone
  • Patrick van Zwanenberg

Abstract

This paper analyses the dynamics of the interactions between scientific and non-scientific considerations in providing scientific advice to policy, focusing on the first scientific committee to advise on BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy) policy-making in the UK and the political and social roles it was expected to play, and in practice played, in policy-making. The paper argues that the Committee was both deliberately and inadvertently utilised to provide spurious scientific legitimation for policy decisions which government officials believed ministers, other government departments, the meat industry and the general public might not otherwise accept. It demonstrates how those social roles rendered the spectrum of policy choices available on BSE opaque, allowed officials to undermine the democratic accountability of ministers, and contributed to making a very serious problem considerably worse. Some practical lessons are outlined for the organisation of scientific expertise in political affairs. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Erik Millstone & Patrick van Zwanenberg, 2001. "Politics of expert advice: Lessons from the early history of the BSE saga," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(2), pages 99-112, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:28:y:2001:i:2:p:99-112
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.3152/147154301781781543
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Victor Pelaez, 2005. "Science And Governance In The National Systems Of Innovation Approach," Working Papers 0010, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Department of Economics.
    2. Ian Forbes, 2004. "Making a Crisis out of a Drama: The Political Analysis of BSE Policy‐Making in the UK," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 52(2), pages 342-357, June.
    3. Krapohl, Sebastian & Zurek, Karolina, 2006. "The Perils of Committee Governance: Intergovernmental Bargaining during the BSE Scandal in the European Union," European Integration online Papers (EIoP), European Community Studies Association Austria (ECSA-A), vol. 10, May.
    4. Alam, Thomas, 2009. "La vache folle et les vétérinaires. Récit d’une victoire inattendue et paradoxale sur le terrain de la sécurité sanitaire des aliments," Review of Agricultural and Environmental Studies - Revue d'Etudes en Agriculture et Environnement (RAEStud), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 90(4).
    5. Matthias Kaiser & Tatjana Buklijas & Peter Gluckman, 2021. "Models and numbers: Representing the world or imposing order?," Papers 2104.00029, arXiv.org.
    6. McKee, Martin & Altmann, Danny & Costello, Anthony & Friston, Karl & Haque, Zubaida & Khunti, Kamlesh & Michie, Susan & Oni, Tolullah & Pagel, Christina & Pillay, Deenan & Reicher, Steve & Salisbury, , 2022. "Open science communication: The first year of the UK's Independent Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(3), pages 234-244.
    7. Les Levidow & Susan Carr, 2007. "Europeanising Advisory Expertise: The Role of ‘Independent, Objective, and Transparent’ Scientific Advice in Agri-Biotech Regulation," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 25(6), pages 880-895, December.
    8. Rothstein, Henry, 2002. "Neglected risk regulation: the institutional attenuation phenomenon," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 35989, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. Rokia Ballo & Warren Pearce & Jack Stilgoe & James Wilsdon, 2024. "Socially-distanced science: how British publics were imagined, modelled and marginalised in political and expert responses to the COVID-19 pandemic," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:28:y:2001:i:2:p:99-112. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.