COVID-19 and the Paradox of Scientific Advice

Zeynep Pamuk

doi:10.1017/s1537592721001201

Abstract

The scientific advisory committee is a neglected political institution whose importance became clear during the COVID-19 pandemic. What I call “the paradox of scientific advice” consists in that the two basic expectations from scientific advisory committees—neutrality and usefulness—are inherently in tension. To be useful, advisers must help governments set and attain their goals. Judgments about values and ends are necessary for useful advice, as are subjective judgments in the face of uncertainty and disagreement. This puts the committee in a double bind: if it tries to be more useful, it compromises the neutrality that is the source of its authority and legitimacy; if it tries to remain neutral, it sacrifices usefulness. I argue that this dilemma cannot be solved within the committee but that broader democratic scrutiny could mitigate its force. Advisory committees, in turn, should be structured to facilitate this scrutiny.

Highlights

The scientific advisory committee is a neglected political institution whose importance became clear during the COVID-19 pandemic
The suggestion for opening up the advisory process to a broader audience is similar to Moore’s (2017) argument for more public scrutiny of expertise, but my argument for this proposal is rooted in the tension between neutrality and usefulness and the difficulties it creates for the provision of good scientific advice, whereas Moore offers it as a way to legitimate epistemic authority in politics broadly speaking
I have argued that there is an inevitable trade-off between the neutrality and usefulness of scientific advice and that advisory committees must favor one or the other

Summary

Introduction

The scientific advisory committee is a neglected political institution whose importance became clear during the COVID-19 pandemic. His “honest brokers” and “issue advocates,” by contrast, favor usefulness and engage closely with the values and choices of the decision maker by making one or a few policy recommendations.4 Not just individual advisers but different kinds of scientific advisory committees can be categorized by their choice between neutrality and usefulness.

Results

Conclusion