Biotext

Technology assessment in Australia

Working as a consultant science writer and editor does not provide many chances to develop personal academic interests or to write journal articles. This is because such activities are time-consuming and are not usually ‘billable’ (to use the jargon of the freelance and small business world). This is frustrating because issues and ideas that deserve further development and publication often come up in the course of our work at Biotext. I was therefore very pleased when a colleague approached Biotext to help with a funded project to research and write a paper about technology assessment in Australia.

Over the years, I have been involved in a number of national projects to assess emerging technologies and develop policy about whether or not, and with what regulations, such technologies should be used in Australia. Examples include a major public consultation by the National Health and Medical Research Council on animal-to-human transplantation, and a review of Australian legislation on human cloning and embryo research. Through this work, I have become interested in how scientists, policy makers and the public interact to discuss issues that have social and ethical consequences.

At the same time, I have been following with interest the move in science communication away from a teaching model that assumes the public will be more sympathetic to new technologies if they have more knowledge about science. This so-called deficit model has been replaced by a public engagement (or dialogue) approach, which encourages other values and perspectives to be shared as well as the science.

The technology assessment project provided a great opportunity to explore these interests. The paper I co-authored is now available online at
http://www.springerlink.com/content/102982/?Content+Status=Accepted.

Some other papers that I have managed to write ‘on the side’, while holding down my ‘day job’ are at http://www.biotext.com.au/about-other.html#engaging.