The Government is failing to clearly and effectively communicate climate science to the public. There is little evidence of co-ordination amongst Government, government agencies and public bodies on communicating climate science, despite various policies at national and regional level to mitigate and adapt to climate change. The mandate to act on climate can only be maintained if the electorate are convinced that the Government is acting on the basis of strong scientific evidence. Ministers therefore need to do more to demonstrate that is the case and consistently reflect the Government approach in all their communications, especially with the media. The report also criticises the BBC for its reporting on the issue. It points out that BBC News teams continue to make mistakes in their coverage of climate science by giving opinions and scientific fact the same weight. The BBC is called to develop clear editorial guidelines for all commentators and presenters on the facts of climate that should be used to challenge statements, from either side of the climate policy debate, that stray too far from the scientific facts. It is important that climate science is presented separately from any subsequent policy response. Government should work with the learned societies and national academies to develop a source of information on climate science that is discrete from policy delivery, comprehensible to the general public and responsive to both current developments and uncertainties in the science

The Government launched its new horizon scanning programme last July, stating that 'in a tight economic climate, it is more important than ever to have the best possible understanding of the world around us, and how that world is changing'. However, as it stands, the new programme is little more than an echo chamber for Government views. The new bodies that have been created consist entirely of Civil Servants, effectively excluding the vast pool of expertise that exists outside of government. The new programme does not even have a dedicated web presence to keep interested parties informed. The programme's failings are partially attributed to a lack of ministerial oversight. The Government also needs to recognise the potential role to be played in the new programme by the Government Office for Science (GO-Science), specifically the Foresight Unit. The relative lack of impact that the Foresight Unit has historically had on policy is largely a result of its non-central location in government. GO-Science is located in the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS). In contrast, the new horizon scanning programme is located in the Cabinet Office. In choosing to situate the new horizon scanning programme in the Cabinet Office, the Government has recognised the importance of location and has thereby acknowledged the strength of this argument. GO-Science should be relocated from BIS to the Cabinet Office, where it can play a more central role in the new programme and more effectively fulfill its role of ensuring that the best scientific evidence is utilised across government

Bringing together experts from a range of disciplines, this collection critically examines science journalism, paying special attention to the points of tension that science journalists navigate in their work today. Faced with the twin crises of climate change and a global pandemic, science journalism has never before been so prominent. This book showcases perspectives that transcend the particulars of the specific news events and outlets studied, in order to provide an overview of the key areas of scholarly interest regarding the nature of science journalism. The volume is organised into three sections: the first provides historical case studies illustrating the demarcation of science journalism from science as science journalism emerged as a recognisable news beat in the twentieth century; the second examines the relationship between science journalists and their sources, particularly scientists, and the mediation of this relationship through organisations, foreign journalism and political constraints; and the final section considers the style and voice of science journalism content. Case studies and original empirical research are compiled from across the globe, including the UK, US, Germany, Vietnam, and Russia, and are synthesised to offer a readable and engaging insight into the beat. Insights on Science Journalism is recommended reading for advanced students and researchers of science journalism and communication and will also appeal to those working in the fields of science and technology studies and risk communication.

In its broadest sense, biometrics is the measurement and analysis of a biological characteristic (fingerprints, iris patterns, retinas, face or hand geometry) or a behavioural characteristic (voice, gait or signature). Biometric technologies use these characteristics to identify individuals automatically. Unlike identity documents or passwords, biometrics cannot be lost or forgotten since they are a part of the user and are always present at the time of identification. They are also difficult, though not impossible, to forge or share. Three future trends in the application of biometrics were identified during the inquiry: (i) the growth of unsupervised biometric systems, accessed via mobile devices, which verify identity; (ii) the proliferation of "second-generation" biometric technologies that can authenticate individuals covertly; (iii) and the linking of biometric data with other types of 'big data' as part of efforts to profile individuals. Each of these trends introduces risks and benefits to individuals, to the state and to society as a whole. They also raise important ethical and legal questions relating to privacy and autonomy. The Committee are not convinced that the Government has addressed these questions, nor are they satisfied that it has looked ahead and considered how the risks and benefits of biometrics will be managed and communicated to the public.