Research in the Public Interest

A careful review of the philosophical literature on the public interest reveals several discrete understanding of this concept: 

First, there is the public interest defined in terms of due process.  On this view, the public interest is simply the outcome of fair, inclusive, accessible and transparent decision-making procedures. 

Second, there is the public interest as informed by public opinion surveys.  Here, the public interest is that which is consistent with the interests of a substantial majority of the public.  

Third, there is the utilitarian understanding of public interest with its focus on cost-benefit analysis.  On this view, the public interest is that which results from a careful balancing of different competing interests – individual, sectional and societal interests. 

Fourth, there is the public interest as shared values.  The public interest is that which affirms a shared set of normative principles for a discrete public.

With these definitions, important moral differences between the common good and the public interest emerge.

Read  the full text adapted from:  Baylis, F. (2008). Global norms in bioethics: Problems and prospects. In R.M., Green, A. Donovan, & S. A. Jauss (Eds.). Global bioethics: Issues of conscience for the twenty-first century (pp. 323-339). New York: Oxford University Press.
 

 REFERENCES

Lorraine E. Ferris & Trudo Lemmens (2010) Governance of conflicts of interest in postmarketing surveillance research and the Canadian Drug Safety and Effectiveness Network. Open Medicine 4(2):E123-128

Joel Lexchin et al (2008)National Evaluation of Policies on Individual Financial Conflicts of Interest in Canadian Academic Health Science Centers, Journal of General Internal Medicine 23(11):1896-903

Jocelyn Downie & Matthew Herder (2007) Reflections on the commercialization of research conducted in public institutions in Canada. McGill Health Law Publication Vol 1:1, 25-44

Trudo Lemmens (2004) Leopards in the temple: Restoring scientific integrity to the commercialized research scene, Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, Vol 32, No. 4, 641-657

Gibson, E.,Baylis, F., & Lewis, S. (2002). Dances with the pharmaceutical industry. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 166, 448-450.

Steven Lewis, Patricia Baird, Robert G. Evana, William A. Ghali, Charles J. Wright, Elaine Gibson & Françoise Baylis (2001) Dancing with the porcupine: Rules for governing the university-industry relationship, Canadian Medical Association Journal, 165:6; 783

Carl Elliott (2001) Pharma buys a conscience. The American Prospect, v12, I17, 24-Sep-01

University of California, San Francisco. Drug Industry Document Archive (DIDA)