APPENDIX 1 -
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
Here are answers to some of the most commonly asked questions about the Framework.
1. What is the Framework?
In 2000, the Government of Canada adopted the Framework for Science and Technology Advice and committed all departments and agencies to full implementation by March 31, 2003. The Framework, a federal policy, consists of a series of principles, guidelines and implementation measures that will ensure that government policy, regulatory and management decisions are informed by sound science and technology advice. The Framework’s six principles and 26 guidelines are the key elements of any science advisory mechanism.
2. What is the Framework based on?
In 1998, Cabinet asked the Council of Science and Technology Advisors (CSTA)12 to develop "a set of principles and guidelines for the effective use of science advice in making policy and regulatory decisions." The impetus was the government’s belief that more effective use of science advice could diminish science-related crises of public confidence. The resulting CSTA report, the SAGE report, called on science-based departments and agencies to ensure that their science advisory processes would "lead to sound government decisions, minimize crises and capitalize on opportunities." In response to the SAGE report, the Government of Canada developed the Framework for Science and Technology Advice.
3. Is the Framework critical of current practices?
Not at all. The principles and guidelines espoused in the Framework are consistent with many of the current practices in Canada and elsewhere. Neither the SAGE report, upon which the Framework is based, nor the government’s response (the Framework) should be taken as a fundamental criticism of current science or science advisory processes. In the majority of cases, government science and science advice are operating in ways that are consistent with the Framework principles. However, before the CSTA elucidated a consistent set of government-wide principles – and departments started adopting them – there was no benchmark against which departments and agencies could test the robustness of their science advisory processes. That is not to say that science advisory processes were not working well, but rather that there was no way of knowing, because there were no explicit principles against which to test them.13 The expectation is that most current processes will be found to be working well, but that some could benefit from fine-tuning.
4. Is the Framework prescriptive?
No. It was recognized that it would be difficult to formulate detailed guidelines that could be uniformly applied across all science-based departments and agencies (SBDAs). Due to the diversity of science, policy and regulatory functions that SBDAs engage in, the Framework allows for flexibility in its implementation.
5. What do "policy," "science," "science advice" and "technology advice" include?
Policy can be categorized at different levels, involving different subject matter and through different modes of expression.14 Policy typically includes statutes and laws (including international treaties and protocols), statements and speeches, regulations (delegated legislation), guidelines, codes and directives, and information and communications programs.
Policy is developed at different levels, such as horizontally across the Government of Canada (and internationally), horizontally across departments, vertically within a given sector or branch of a department, regionally within a department or across several departments and other levels of government, and at the level of micro cases or individual decisions that set precedents and thus, on a de facto basis, become policy.
Policy encompasses many kinds of subject matter within a department including human resource policy, financial policy, legal policy, S&T policy, environmental and safety policy and international policy. The Framework applies only to S&T policy.
The Framework defines science broadly to include "sciences, engineering and technology" and indicates that the principles and guidelines may also be applicable to advice from other disciplines. Science is generally defined as a form of knowledge that is empirical, specific, replicable, verifiable and often quantifiable.14 The scientific process (or processes) involves a series of activities in which the scientist or teams of scientists collect and observe data, develop models and test hypotheses regarding expected causes and consequences of the given phenomena being studied, publish findings and conclusions, and undergo peer review of their work.
Science advice is defined in the Framework as "value-added guidance deriving from scientific and technological knowledge, theories, data, findings, and conclusions, to inform policy, regulatory and management decision making."
Technology advice is generally defined as the application of knowledge as a means or technique for achieving largely predetermined purposes.14 That is, technology advice may be needed to provide workable regulations or actions to actually implement any given policy.
6. Does the Framework apply to both science and policy activities?
In short, yes. The principles put forward in the Framework are meant to apply both to the conduct of science and to the processes by which science is translated into policy. The Framework states that:
These principles and guidelines address science advice as one input in government decision making. Clearly, decision making in government must consider a wide range of other inputs (including traditional knowledge, ethical and cultural considerations, etc.) and consult, as appropriate, advisors competent in many aspects of public policy (including law, public administration, international affairs, etc.). Decision makers must exercise their legitimate role to weigh these multiple inputs and make choices.
However, the Framework does not apply to every policy process – only to those that have (or should have) an S&T component. So, implementing the Framework requires departments and agencies to focus primarily on their science policy processes, not all processes. Moreover, not every science advisory process needs to reflect every principle or guideline in the Framework. In many instances (e.g., when there is a need for commercial confidentiality), it will not be possible to apply every aspect of the Framework to a given science advisory process.
Similarly, departmental science advisory processes may rely on more than just one advisory mechanism. What is important is that departments and agencies can show how their advisory processes work together to support decision making.
7. Whose job is it to lead the Framework implementation process?
Science advice champions will be held accountable for progress in their department or agency. It is also expected that there may be an independent review of progress by the Auditor General. Each department will determine its own approach for applying the Framework to its science policy activities.
The S&T Assistant Deputy Ministers Committee is tasked with reviewing the results of departmental activities to discuss and communicate examples of best practices in the use of science and technology advice. Government-wide reporting of progress will take place through the S&T Annual Report.
8. Does the Framework apply to me?
Whether you’re a scientist, technologist, advisor, policy analyst, manager or decision maker, the Framework applies to you. The Framework encourages the key players to work together to ensure:
- timely identification and communication of emerging issues;
- inclusive, open and transparent processes;
- development, assessment and communication of advice, free from conflicts of interest and biases;
- regular reviews of decisions and policy actions; and
- consistent approaches to risk assessment, management and communication.
More and more, it is up to individuals to monitor and assess their own work and the advisory processes they are a part of, in a system of continuous improvement. Understanding and applying the Framework can help you to assess and, if necessary, improve the science advisory processes that you are engaged in. Researchers and policy analysts should be aware of the principles and guidelines in the Framework so they can provide the best possible research and analysis. Managers should ensure that the advisory processes they are responsible for conform to the Framework. Decision makers can use the Framework to assess whether they are receiving the best possible advice.
9. What is the purpose of the self-assessment worksheet?
The purpose of the worksheet is to provide some methods and approaches that can be used for the Framework review process. The idea is to create an accountability trail that would make an external observer confident that departments and agencies have indeed reviewed their science advisory processes to demonstrate adherence to the Framework.
Use of the self-assessment worksheet isn’t mandatory. Each department or agency is encouraged to determine its own approach to adhering to the Framework in the context of previous activities, resources, individual circumstances, and so on. Whatever approach is selected, it should ideally lend itself to creating an accountability trail so that departmental adherence to the Framework can be documented.
10. What’s the bottom line?
What is the point of the Framework? Why has the government committed itself to adopting its principles and guidelines? In the words of the Framework:
Canada requires a science advisory process that leads to sound government decisions, minimizes crises and capitalizes on opportunities. An effective advisory process brings both sound science and the best science advice to bear on key issues, and ensures that:
- Ministers are confident that a rigorous and objective assessment of all available science was made in providing the advice;
- credible science advice is considered by decision makers; and
- the public and parliamentarians are confident that government is using science in the best interests of all Canadians.
The desirable outcome is decision making that is informed by sound science and technology advice and greater public, parliamentarian and ministerial confidence in these decisions.
11. Whom can I contact for more information?
Many departments and agencies have appointed representatives to the interdepartmental Sub-Committee on Science and Technology Advice. (Appendix 3 contains a list of these representatives.) The committee guided the development of a number of the Framework tools and documents.
[ Previous
] [ Table
of Contents ] [ Next
]
|
