CONFLICT, CONSENSUS, AND CREDIBILITY: A FORUM ON REGULATORY PEER REVIEW May 29, 2002 - Sheraton Crystal City, Arlington, Virginia
The Society for Risk Analysis presents a one-day Forum devoted not only to raising these questions, but also answering them. Experts from diverse backgrounds and perspectives will discuss the major complaints that have arisen about regulatory peer review. More importantly, they will offer constructive solutions for the problems they see. Our objective is to discover workable remedies that will assist in resolving these disputes while clarifying the important role of science in the policy-making process. In the morning, distinguished authorities will describe similarities and key differences between academic peer review and regulatory peer review. In addition, a clear distinction will be made between regulatory peer review and other kinds of science advice and public comment. A panel of seasoned veterans of science-based regulatory decision-making will identify specific problems in regulatory peer review that impede its effectiveness or undermine its legitimacy. In the afternoon, they will present equally specific ideas about how these problems could be fixed. The day will conclude with an overview and discussion of how solutions to the problems align with the various goals regulatory peer review attempts to meet. For a complete program or registration information go to www.sra.org and print out the pdf file. Or call SRA headquarters at 703-790-1745. --- Daniel M. Byrd III, Ph.D., D.A.B.T. Deputy Director Life Sciences Research Office 9650 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20814-3998
