TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE Book Reviews 191 remains essentially political. We would do well to acknowledge that fact and turn our attention to broadening and deepening participa tion of the public at the beginning of the process. It may not be the easiest course to follow, but for the sake of participatory democracy, it is probably the only course open to us. Such a solution requires, however, that a program in general educa tion of the sort that James B. Conant originally conceived for the Harvard undergraduate (his leaders of tomorrow) be revitalized and transformed into standard fare for each and every one of us. Else, rising public alienation and the growing cynicism and lack of confidence in public policy processes are destined to engulf and destroy the very framework on which our unique political strength is built. Stanley Goldberg Dr. Goldberg is preparing a biography of General Leslie R. Groves, head of the Manhattan Project. American 'Science Policy since World War II. By Bruce L. R. Smith. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1990. Pp. ix + 230; fig ures, tables, notes, index. $34.95 (cloth); $14.95 (paper). The time is right to examine the development of U.S. science policy since the Second World War. Nearly a half century of growth and change are available for inspection, and many say that the present moment is a watershed, when the implicit social contract between science and government is up for renegotiation. Bruce Smith’s timing could therefore have been superb for providing what he describes as a “re statement of core concepts” (p. 5) in postwar science policy. His task, he writes, is both to describe how the nation has used its technical resources and “to cast some light on ways it can do so more effectively” (p. 15). Unfortunately, the light cast is less a beacon showing the way than soft background illumination for a well-known display. Smith’s treat ment of science policy is thoroughly conventional, strangely unbal anced, and myopic. After a platitude-filled introductory chapter, the body of the book is organized in a matrix. Chapters 2—5 each deal with a period of science-government relations. Chapter 2 reviews prewar develop ments, chapter 3 takes the story to 1965, and chapter 4 carries it to 1980. Chapter 5 focuses entirely on the Reagan era, a treatment that is much too long (one-fourth of the book’s length), contains much undigested information, and is already dated. Within each chapter, the matrix is created by crosscutting themes: basic research, applied research, commercialization, regulation, and international issues. These elements cut across the conventional cat egories of “science” and “technology” policies, and the international 192 Book Reviews TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE theme, which draws on Smith’s experience at the State Department, seldom appears in this sort of discussion. The themes might therefore have provided insight through juxtaposition, but they are not closely integrated in Smith’s treatment. The final chapter, “The Unfinished Agenda,” unveils an unstated but unmistakable agenda of the book, to counter proposals for a combined Department of Science and Technology with a reaffirma tion of the accomplishments of the current pluralistic funding system. It also includes such startling recommendations as setting priorities for research, paying government scientists more, strengthening uni versities, modernizing industry, keeping the peer review system, and solving environmental problems through more research and devel opment. No analytical thread ties these pronouncements to the preceding descriptive chapters. The book is short on discussion of biomedicine, a glaring omission given that about half of U.S. government support for science goes to that endeavor. The list of other items not treated is equally puzzling. There is no recognition of the growth of world science around the U.S. scientific enterprise, and thus no discussion of competition from Japan or Europe for technical leadership. Fraud is just barely mentioned, and animal rights controversies do not appear at all. Despite the extensive treatment of the 1980s, controversy over university-industry relations does not play any major role in the discussion. Indeed, although Smith is well known for his part in a landmark study of the state of academic science in the 1970s, he reveals no concept...
Read full abstract