Public V private science: it is all about perception

By Jason Major

Technyou

Given the recent controversy over GM wheat and Greenpeace claims that CSIRO research is compromised because of its links to industry – indeed that would apply to a lot of university research in Australia nowadays – then this UK survey on public attitudes to science  presents some interesting results. I wonder how well they extrapolate to Australia? I suspect quite well.

Public science good, private evil-ish

One of the key findings is that the public trust in scientists working in public institutions is high.  In contrast trust in scientists working for private industry is low, though still way above politicians, which I would (almost) bet the farm on is similar in Australia.

Eoin Lettice who is the Communicate Science blog writes a nice summary of the report

I recall previous surveys in Australia that found the public trust in CSIRO up there with God. It would be interesting if that is still the case,. I am sure it is still high, but is it equal to its historical peak. The same could be asked of university scientists.  If not what does this mean? As Eoin Lettice suggests does this mean any scientist funded by industry has to engage more? Will this make a difference? I certainly know that when I throw a scientist into the public fray and the public  get a chance to chat with him or her, it makes a huge difference to the trust levels. Suddenly they are human, have families, care, think and drink beer.

How much difference someone like Monsanto or BP can make in the short-term by making a huge push in public engagement remains to be seen.