Our modern state claims its environmental and health regulations are based upon “science,” usually in the form of large compendia, such as the period reports of the United Nations’ Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. But, what happens if science is being systematically distorted by the incentive structure for advancement in one’s profession?

Is science a neutral, value-free profession? Can that be the case, in tier-one academia, when one’s success is largely related to the amount of money, most of it public, the employee brings into a university? Are there incentives in Washington, where there is intense competition for federal monies, to exaggerate various problems and issues? What effect does this have upon the scientific literature, which is the modern canon of knowledge? Affirmative answers to these questions may explain the virulent epidemic of withdrawn papers now spreading through the profession, and the grotesquely distorted policies that result from an organically biased base of modern knowledge.

More on Science and Public Policy

Commentary

President Trump Delivers Lifesaving Deregulation

By Steve H. Hanke. Forbes.com. July 11, 2019.

Overdosing on Regulation: How Government Caused the Opioid Epidemic

By Jeffrey Miron and Laura Nicolae. Real Clear Policy. March 1, 2019.

Department of Justice’s Shameful Attempt to Block a Proven Life-Saving Program

By Jeffrey A. Singer. Philadelphia Inquirer. February 14, 2019.

Cato Studies

Why Does the Federal Government Issue Damaging Dietary Guidelines? Lessons from Thomas Jefferson to Today

By Terence Kealey. Policy Analysis No. 846. July 10, 2018.

Was the First Public Health Campaign Successful? The Tuberculosis Movement and Its Effect on Mortality

By D. Mark Anderson, Kerwin Kofi Charles, Claudio Las Heras Olivares, & Daniel I. Rees. Research Briefs in Economic Policy No. 76. May 17, 2017.

The Case Against a U.S. Carbon Tax

By Robert P. Murphy, Patrick J. Michaels, and Paul C. “Chip” Knappenberger. Policy Analysis No. 801. October 17, 2016.

Public Filings

Governments Need Not Fund Science (at Least, Not for Economic Reasons)

By Terence Kealey. Testimony. October 19, 2017.

Scientific Report of the 2015 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee

By Patrick J. Michaels and Paul C. “Chip” Knappenberger. Public Comments. May 8, 2015.

NASA and Mission to Planet Earth

By Edward L. Hudgins. Testimony. March 19, 1997.

Cato Reviews & Journals

The Troubled History of Cancer Risk Assessment

Edward J. Calabrese. Regulation. Spring 2019.

USDA Is Supposed to Regulate Animal Health, Not Animal Happiness

Henry I. Miller and Jeff Stier. Regulation. Summer 2018.

What Agency Improves Rulemaking the Most?

Sam Batkins. Regulation. Fall 2017.

Events

The Case for Space: How the Revolution in Spaceflight Opens Up a Future of Limitless Possibility

Featuring Chelsea Follett, Berin Szóka, and Robert Zubrin. October 23, 2019. Book Forum.

#CatoConnects: The Science of Nutrition and Public Choice

Featuring Terence Kealey and Caleb O. Brown. November 14, 2017. Cato Connects.

The Search for Truth in Regulatory Science

Featuring Edward J. Calabrese and Patrick J. Michaels. July 20, 2017. Policy Forum.

Speeches

Risk, Policy and Ethics

By Sigrid Fry-Revere. January 22, 2008.

Science is Badly Used in Risk Assessment

By Michael Gough. May 15, 1998.

Cato Unbound

The Case against Public Science

By Terence Kealey. August 2013.