<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="6.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Gaskell, G.</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">COMMUNICATION: Enhanced: Social Values and the Governance of Science</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Science</style></secondary-title><short-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Science</style></short-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2005</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">12/2005</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">310</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1908 - 1909</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">The article presents findings of a survey on the ethical, legal, and social implications of science and technology. People from U.S., Canada and European Union were asked who the public thinks should make decisions on science policy and what criteria should guide such decisions. Overall, two-thirds opted for a scientific basis to decision-making and just under three-quarters wanted experts to be in the driving seat. When asked whether they were optimistic or pessimistic about the prospects for society of computers and information technology, biotechnology, and nanotechnology, the scientific elitists were more optimistic than the other groups, with the exception of the Canadian moral elitists on nanotechnology. A relatively consistent pattern of response for stem cell research and genetically modified food was found when comparing the scientific elitists and the moral populists. In summary, among the critics of sound science, it appears that in the U.S. and Canada, it is who decides rather than on what basis that is most important, while in Europe, it is the reverse, the grounds are more important than who makes the decision.</style></abstract><issue><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">5756</style></issue></record></records></xml>