It has been a few days
since I returned from the IHEST meeting (see Blogging from France posts). Upon reflection, I
realize that it was a number of firsts for me. It was the first time a foreign
government invited me to speak. And it was the first time I was translated in
real time during a talk. But the thing that stands out most in my mind is that
it is the first time I’ve ever spoken to an audience largely comprised of
government officials.
When I first heard that
the event was being called a summer school, I thought it was very much a
misnomer. I’ve been to European summer schools before. Typically, they are
arranged by faculty to give graduate students from around the continent a
chance to learn from experts in the field. These gatherings help to make up for
the fact that few universities have a critical mass of faculty in topics as
specific as Science and Technology Studies by giving students a chance to get
to know more experts in the field. But IHEST didn’t invite graduate students,
so how could this be a summer school?
Once I got to Saline
Royale, I began to understand why they didn’t call it a conference, workshop or
symposium. The majority of the participants were not there to give talks. They
were government officials from across the country who went on this retreat to
learn about and reflect on the role of the public in science policy decisions.
The participants were as varied as people who helped to organize the local
French nano debates to environmental regulators. And, just like graduate students
pursuing degrees, they worked hard. After a full day of listening to talks and
questioning presenters, they had break out sections to further discuss what
they had learned well into the night, only to be called on early the next
morning to report back their findings.
It was somewhat
refreshing talking to policymakers instead of academics. The questions asked
were noticeably different from what I am used to. There was no quibbling over
the specific use of a piece of jargon. Instead, the questioners were more interested
in the details about how various organizations responded to issues. In essence,
they were looking to learn from the experience of others about how to better
handle the issues they face in their daily work. I tried to adjust my talk
accordingly, yet I doubt that I said anything so memorable that it will have an
observable effect on French policy. But
it is satisfying to think that I played a role in a mechanism designed to
bridge the gap between government and academia. The summer school was sort of
an extension service for science policy.
Sitting at my desk in
Arizona, I lament the fact that I had to fly all the way to France to meet with
so many policymakers. Why don’t events like this happen in the United States
more often? Maybe the French technocratic inclinations have something to do
with it? Perhaps I’m being a bit shortsighted. The truth is that we do have a
number of mechanisms in the United States that bring academics and government
officials together, including hearings, advisory boards and short-term
government appointments for faculty. But it was inspiring to have a group of
academics and policymakers get together for a short retreat to discuss some of
today’s pressing issues.
About the Author: Jameson Wetmore is an
assistant professor with CSPO and CNS-ASU, and ASU’s School of Human Evolution
& Social Change.


Nice post. I wonder if part of the difference is that in the US, "science policy experts" are generally scientists, engineers, economists, and businesspeople, and on occasion, bioethicists. Not STS-types. By contrast, I think that there is generally greater openness to STS-type ideas in Europe. At the very least, the complex relationships between science, technology, and society seem to be more accepted.
Another explanation, of course, is that given the recent controversies over S&T in Europe, there is less "trust" in the institutions charged with regulation. Therefore, those institutions are more open to new ideas. By contrast, US S&T controversies have not really affected the legitimacy of these same institutions.
-S