The Advisers: Scientists in the Policy Process.

In this book, Bruce Smith argues that the participation of scientists as advisers in the American political process is important for the legitimation of public policy, and entirely consistent with our open and pluralistic political system. Because much of contemporary policy involves scientific and technological issues, such expertise is a necessary component of political decisions. Smith presents five case studies involving the success and failure of various scientific advisory committees. He places these committees in the context of the theoretical foundations of American government, and in the more specific legal framework within which they function. Smith finds that science advisory committees work best at the agency level where operational matters are the primary consideration, rather than at the presidential level where choices among competing values must be made. Such committees are most successful when they have a clear function to perform, appropriate staff support, and the ear of powerful policy makers in the agencies they advise.

Smith's argument that science advisory committees are illustrative of the pluralistic nature of the American political system is interesting. One wishes he would have followed through with the point more frequently. He raises the theory in the context of the reasons for the establishment of the Constitution, including the political attitudes of the framers and of the American public. It is, however, only referred to sparingly in the case studies. The emphasis in these chapters is on the reasons for the success or failure of advisory committees, not on any overall contribution the understanding of such successes/failures can make to a pluralistic interpretation of the American political system.

Another factor which undermines the theoretical strength of this work, is that the evidence Smith uses to defend his position is open to alternative interpretations. Smith argues that the "permeable outer skin" of American government allows "...ideas, interests, and people to make their way back and forth between public and private sectors with relative ease" (p.206). And, this allows "...[t]he interaction of many separate interests inside and outside of government which would add up to the public interest" (p. 12). In pluralistic theory, this is supposed to lead to an open and roughly democratic political process. However, Smith's evidence at times is more appropriate to elite theory. For example, the players in the policy process that Smith discusses are from the elite educational and industrial institutions of this country. This evidence is strong support for the revolving door that elite theorists argue connects power centers in government, higher education, and the private sector. In addition, Smith fails to mention that James Madison deliberately designed the Constitution to insure that popular majorities would not get control of government, thereby gaining the opportunity to threaten the property of the elite.

These theoretical issues notwithstanding, this book provides an extensive analysis of science advisory committee successes and failures. The case studies are detailed and informative. The discussions of the NASA Advisory Council, science advisers in the State Department, and science advisers at the presidential level, were particularly well presented. Mr. Smith's attempt to link the political process to political theory is laudable. Theory provides a means to judge where we have been, where we are, and what action we should take to get where we want to go. This book has taken a step in that direction.

Catherine Nelson
Sonoma State University