The Case for Public Access to Federally Funded Research Data. Policy Analysis

peter.suber's bookmarks 2020-08-23

Summary:

Abstract:  This study examines the importance of public review of federally funded scientific research by looking at several case studies. It shows that independent, nongovernmental review of federal scientific research has had a major positive effect on knowledge in many areas. The study focuses on: the Environmental Protection Agency and airborne asbestos; the panic over endocrine disrupters; the National Cancer Institute and the herbicide 2,4-D; the National Institutes of Health and the Dalkon Shield birth control device; and the Federal Drug Administration and the diet drug fen-phen. In many of those cases, third party review served to correct or prevent costly regulatory mistakes. In some cases, however, independent review of federally funded science occurred too late to prevent significant economic and consumer harm. The report considers the political, regulatory, and theoretical issues surrounding the Shelby Amendment, which requires federal agencies to ensure that all data produced under a grant be made available to the public through procedures established under the Freedom of Information Act. It concludes that the amendment, if fully complied with by federal agencies, will improve the quality of federal scientific research, and accordingly, the quality of federal regulation. (SM)

 

Link:

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED450184.pdf

Updated:

08/23/2020, 07:48

From feeds:

Open Access Tracking Project (OATP) » peter.suber's bookmarks

Tags:

oa.usa oa.taxpayers oa.data oa.advocacy oa.usa.epa oa.environment oa.nih oa.usa.nih oa.usa.fda oa.medicine oa.pharma oa.shelby_amendment oa.quality oa.policies oa.mandates oa.foi

Date tagged:

08/23/2020, 11:48

Date published:

02/02/2002, 06:48