Scientific Integrity is, and Always Has Been, Key in all Levels of Government and Public Policy
In January, Environmental Protection Network volunteers Dr. Thomas H. Sinks, Dr. Elizabeth Southerland, Dr. Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta, and Dr. William Jordan published a research paper about the importance of scientific integrity (SI) in public policy and how to uphold and strengthen scientific integrity practices. In light of the change in administration, it’s important to note that scientific integrity will be tested and at risk. The Heritage Foundation’s “Mandate for Leadership” series, for example, encourages political interference in science. And, during President Donald Trump’s first term, there were several instances of his administration attempting to undermine the scientific process, including interference with pesticide and toxicity assessments and the exclusion of scientists while drafting policy such as the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Rule.
The paper, “Scientific Integrity Promotes the Best Science and Informs the Public of Regulatory Policy Decisions,” highlights the importance of scientific integrity and lays out a detailed plan on how to protect it based on the research conducted.
The paper opens with “Scientific integrity policies and procedures promote academic and institutional environments where high quality and objective science can be conducted and results communicated to the public.” This sentiment is echoed by the authors throughout the rest of the article.
Scientific integrity is not just a buzzword — it’s the foundation for credible research and informed policymaking. Scientifically educated civil servants are crucial in the drafting of law, policy and court opinion. Replacing them with political appointees will undermine the work of agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and negatively impact public trust in government.
Due to its importance, scientific integrity needs to be protected and codified under the law. An executive order is not enough, as it is not a long-term solution and can be easily reversed by future administrations. Amending the America Competes Act of 2007 to require scientific integrity policies at all federal agencies would be a big step in the right direction. Congress must take action and amend the act to institutionalize practices that prevent political interference, ensure transparency and protect scientists from retaliation.
While the fight for scientific integrity is an uphill battle, the paper ensures to acknowledge the robust framework and protections EPA has already put in place.
“The agency’s SI policy, quality assurance, and independent peer review rank among the best across all federal agencies,” the authors write.
A key element of this SI policy is its explicit prohibition of political interference — pushing political appointees away from opportunities to suppress, delay or alter scientific findings. This further ensures that decision making is informed by credible evidence and should be a blueprint for SI policies across all agencies.
EPA has also established procedures such as independent peer reviews and transparent quality assurance protocols to ensure the quality and reliability of scientific findings. Data are reviewed by external experts to minimize bias and maintain credibility.
The agency has made efforts to educate employees about the SI policy and a survey conducted in 2018 showed that 93% of employees were aware of the policy.
More recently, the EPA employees’ union, The American Federation of Government Employees, ratified a contract that includes a clause offering additional protections for scientists against retaliation or interference.
While these efforts to protect SI should be celebrated, the enormous uphill battle ahead is where the focus should be; lest scientists be driven away from public service and, in turn, decimating institutional knowledge and credible policymaking decisions.
“Scientists in every discipline should conduct their work without fear of retaliation, manipulation, or suppression,” the authors state. “Actions taken now to restore public confidence in government science and strengthen science infrastructure will protect people’s health and the environment, and the scientific soundness of tomorrow’s actions.”