london

The British government has formed a group of experts to provide it with advice on communicating risk, in a bid to restore public confidence in the ability of government to handle issues such as food safety. Public faith has been shattered in particular by the crisis over bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE).

The 28-member group includes leading academics, journalists, heads of non-governmental organizations, and government officials. It includes Sir Robert May, the government'schief scientific adviser, Liam Donaldson, the chief medical officer, and Jon Snow, a prominent UK TV news presenter. Its deliberations will feed into a government seminar on risk management to be held in the coming weeks.

The group's creation coincides with the publication of a report from the UK Consumers' Association, which concludes that a science-based approach cannot alone be relied upon to reach socially acceptable decisions on issues involving the communication of risk. The report, Confronting Risk — A New Approach to Food Safety, says: “Whilst science has an important role to play, it can only take us so far. It is important to recognize that scientific assessment itself is not a value or a judgement-free process. And even if it were, it is often surrounded by uncertainty.”

The report concludes that the government needs to be more open and transparent in the way it manages risk, acknowledging scientific uncertainty, and involving as many relevant people — particularly from the public — as possible in the decision-making process.

It also recommends that meetings of scientific advisory committees should be held in public wherever possible, and that “minority scientific views” should be considered when picking experts to sit on these committees. The government is currently reviewing the structure and workings of its scientific advisory committees related to biotechnology.

A survey conducted last month by the polls company MORI revealed alarmingly low levels of public trust in government officials, including government scientists. Almost two-thirds of respondents “trusted most” independent university scientists and pressure groups — such as Greenpeace — to advise on the risks of pollution. Only 23 per cent trusted government scientists, and just 6 per cent ministers. Responses on the risks of BSE showed a similar pattern.

When asked to rate the government'shandling of 13 issues, respondents placed genetically modified foods as the area handled least well. Modified foods topped the chart of issues where those polled felt that more legislation was required.

Sixteen per cent of respondents felt that they were well informed of the health risks of genetically modified foods, a similar proportion to those who felt informed about raw, unpasteurized milk. In contrast, 90 per cent felt well informed about the risks of smoking.