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
