NAPAP: A lesson in science, policy

Perplexing environmental questions, such as acid rain and global warming, cry out for policy solutions based upon solid scientific evidence. Scientists and politicians agree on this but have trouble finding an effective way to do it. Milton Russell of the University of Tennessee and Oak Ridge National Laboratory describes a major, but only partially successful, effort that he believes contains valuable lessons for scientists and policy makers in the future. It is the National Acid Precipitation Assessment Program (NAPAP), launched in 1980 to generate the latest scientific evidence to guide national debate on clean-air legislation. The program open-quotes created an unprecedented body of scientific research on an environmental issue of the first order,close quotes Russell says. Yet, he admits, its influence was virtually nil on the legislation that ultimately emerged on the subject. Russell blames this lack of influence on NAPAP's failure to provide adequate assessment of its research findings, its failure to communicate the results on a timely and effective basis, and on open-quotes political forces that sought legislation rather than a full explication of issues.close quotes Out of the experience, Russell finds lessons for the future: open-quotes First, if the scientific finding are to have an impact on policy, assessment must become a priority as important as scientific research. Second, for projects designed to help decision makers, scientific research must be considered a resource, not an end product. Third, timely, lucid communication must be an essential element of the project, not a marginal activity.close quotes NAPAP, Russell concludes, open-quotes proved a long-term scientific success and a short-term policy disappointment.close quotes Then he warns, open-quotes Future science programs ignore the NAPAP experience at their own risk.close quotes