The report, entitled 'Missing Evidence: An inquiry into the delayed publication of government commissioned research' focuses specifically on research that the UK Government has commissioned from third parties, such as independent academics and research organizations.
Missing Evidence, the report from an inquiry into delayed publication of government-commissioned research out today https://t.co/kH0vQaa7OV
— Sense about Science (@senseaboutsci) June 2, 2016
Síle Lane, director of campaigns and policy at Sense about Science, who initiated the report, told Sputnik that the inquiry sought to highlight the lack of public understanding regarding tax funded research and that the report did not suggest malicious intent on the part of the government — rather that it was indicative of poor organization and a system in desperate need of reform.
"It's a matter of the public knowing that what they've paid for is being used and is available to politicians and the civil servants, who make decisions about the policies that the research should be feeding into… We found that only 4 out of the 24 departments keep a publicly accessible database of the research they commission third parties to do. Some other departments were able to generate a list when we asked them, but the majority couldn't tell us."
The report does however refer to delayed publications of findings which may be "politically inconvenient", concluding that "none of the guidance on publication of research recognizes this as a valid reason for delay".
Why is government research going missing, @senseaboutsci report asks https://t.co/ppBPIrv5EU
— Research Fortnight (@ResFortnight) June 2, 2016
Whilst a push for greater transparency is presented as desirable, the report acknowledges that such a move could potentially have an adverse effect on future research. Jonathan Portes, from the National Institute of Economic and Social Research, said:
"There is an absolutely insuperable dilemma with the present system. The more the rules are changed to avoid the obvious current problems (politically motivated delays, endless redrafting, etc.) the more the incentives on ministers will be simply not to commission independent research."
Governments do conduct a great deal of research which remains private — internal polling for example, or issues related to national security — and Síle Lane was keen to point out to Sputnik that the report wasn't advocating universal public access to any and all government research, just that which has been commissioned and paid for with public money:
"There are some pieces of advice that might be based on research that politicians and civil servants would rather talk to each other privately about, we're not saying everything like that should be publicly available."
The UK Government said in a statement released ahead of the report's publication:
"While the publication of individual pieces of research is a decision for individual government departments, we are clear that access to research is fundamental to effective policy development and wider scientific inquiry across government. We are committed to ensuring that transparency, openness and accountability are embedded in everything we do, and we note today's report which is a useful contribution to work in this area."
