Noting that “confidence that scientists act in the best interests of the public has fallen significantly” over the last five years” and that “falsification of data by leading researchers has led to high-profile retractions of federally funded research,” President Trump today issued an Executive Order that directs the White House Office of Science & Technology Policy Director to issue guidance by June 22 for agencies to implement “Gold Standard Science” in conducting and managing their scientific activities.
The Executive Order defines Gold Standard Science to be science conducted in a manner that is reproducible, transparent, communicative of error and uncertainty, collaborative and interdisciplinary, skeptical of its findings and assumptions, structured for falsifiability of hypotheses, subject to unbiased peer review, accepting of negative results as positive outcomes, and without conflicts of interest.
Upon issuance of the guidance, agencies are directed to promptly update their policies on the production and use of scientific information, including scientific integrity policies, for consistency with the guidance and the Executive Order. Agency status updates on implementation are due by July 22.
Agencies are also directed to review actions taken between Jan. 20, 2021 and Jan. 20, 2025, and consistent with law, take all appropriate steps to ensure alignment with the Executive Order.
The Executive Order also includes a series of rules on the use, interpretation, and communication of scientific data that agencies must adhere to by June 22 (unless otherwise provided by law). These rules include:
- Public disclosure of data, analyses, and conclusions associated with certain scientific and technological information used by the agency, as well as the models and analyses used to generate influential scientific information
- Transparent acknowledgment and documentation of uncertainties associated with scientific information used in decision-making
- Using science that comports with legal standards applicable to the policy or legal determination at hand
- Transparent communication about the likelihood of assumptions and scenarios used (only using highly unlikely or precautionary assumptions and scenarios when required by law or pertinent to the agency’s action)
- Application of a “weight of scientific evidence” approach when scientific or technological information is used to inform agency evaluations and subsequent decision-making
In describing its Policy and Purpose, the Executive Order among other things notes that the National Marine Fisheries Service justified a Biological Opinion by using a worst-case scenario projection for the North Atlantic right whale population “that it believes was ‘very likely’ wrong,” adding that NMFS’ proposed actions “could have destroyed the historic Maine lobster fishery” and that a federal appellate court later overturned the Biological Opinion because use of the worst-case scenario “skewed its approach to the evidence.”