Science and Engineering Ethics

, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp 395–406

Scientific Self-Regulation—So Good, How Can it Fail?

Commentary on “The Problems with Forbidding Science”
Original Paper


To be a functional alternative to government regulation, self-regulation of science must be credible to both scientists and the public, accountable, ethical, and effective. According to some, serious problems continue in research ethics in the United States despite a rich history of proposed self-regulatory standards and oversight devices. Successful efforts at self-regulation in stem cell research contrast with unsuccessful efforts in research ethics, particularly conflicts of interest. Part of the cause for a lack of success in self-regulation is fragmented, disconnected oversight, and failure to embody genuine scientific and public consensus. To be accountable, credible and effective, self-regulation must be inclusive and multidisciplinary, publicly engaged, sufficiently disinterested, operationally integrated with institutional goals, and must implement a genuine consensus among scientists and the public. The mechanisms of self-regulation must be sufficiently broad in their oversight, and interconnected with other institutional forces and actors, that they do not create fragmented solutions.


Research ethics Conflicts of interest Self-regulation Stem cells ESCROs Responsible conduct of research Misconduct 

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Harvard Medical SchoolChildren’s Hospital BostonBostonUSA

Personalised recommendations