Regulatory Science: The Maturation of an Evolving Scientific Discipline


  • A. Alan Moghissi Institute for Regulatory Science
  • Tomoko Steen Institute for Regulatory Science & Georgetown University
  • Richard Calderone Georgetown University
  • Jean Pierre Auffret Institute for Regulatory Science
  • Lisa Jaeger Georgetown University
  • Liwei Sarah Xu Institute for Regulatory Science
  • Carolyn Wixson McBride Institute for Regulatory Science
  • Dennis McBride Institute for Regulatory Science



history and status of regulatory science


Regulatory science encompasses the participation of a large array of scientific disciplines involved in the regulatory process. Although each discipline addresses different phenomenology and exploits different methodologies, the common scientific core is the same:  objective pursuit of verifiable and useful knowledge.  This paper updates the definition and scope of the practice of regulatory science, starting with a concise historical overview. It then examines the different phases of regulatory science applications: initial, exploratory, and standard operating. The paper also reviews the definitions of regulatory science used by various agencies and provides abbreviated scientific definitions. The paper summarizes Best Available Regulatory Science (BARS) and Metrics for Evaluation of Scientific Claims (MERSC), along with key elements and tools of regulatory science: peer review; regulatory science ethics, including the so-called Jeffersonian principle; mathematical models; cost benefit analysis; and stakeholder participation. The paper concludes with a brief description of these key tools and elements, highlighting their importance in the field of regulatory science.


Arrow, K.J., Cropper, M.L., Eads, G.C., Hahn, R.W., Lave, L.B., Noll, R.G., Portney, P.R., Russell, M., Schmalensee, R., Smith, V.K. and Stavins, R.N. (1996). Is there a role for benefit-cost analysis in environmental, health, and safety regulation? Science, 272, 221-222.

CBS News. (2014, December 8). Gruber apologizes to Congress for calling Americans stupid. [Television Broadcast]. CBS. to-congress-for-Obamacare-comments.(Accessed December 14, 2021).

Comptroller of the Currency. (occ.treas/gov.) (Accessed July 3, 2023).

EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), Guidelines for Preparing Economic Analyses, Review copy prepared for EPA's Science Advisory Board's Economic Guidelines Review Panel. 2020 ($File/GuidelinesReviewDraft.pdf. (Accessed April 29, 2021).

Executive Order 12291: Regulatory planning process: Requirement for federal executive agencies to perform a cost-benefit analysis for each major rule. (Feb. 17, 1981). 46 FR 13193, 3 CFR, 1981 Comp., p. 127.

Food and Drug Administration. (2010). The promise of regulatory science (

Food and Drug Administration. (2022). Advancing regulatory science at FDA: Focus areas of regulatory Science. (Accessed July 3, 2023).

Federal Products Description 41 CFR101-29. (Accessed July 3, 2023).

OLD:, S. (2001) Regulatory Toxicology. Routledge.

Institute for Regulatory Science. (2023). http//

Institute of Medicine. (2010). Building a national framework for the establishment of regulatory science for drug development: Workshop summary. National Academy Press.

Institute of Medicine. (2012). Strengthening a workforce for innovative regulatory science in therapeutic development: workshop summary. National Academy Press.

Ioannidis, J.P.A. (2008). Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Medicine. 2: 0696-0701.

Intergovernmental Panel of Global Climate Change. Accessed November 8, 2021

Moghissi, A.A., Calderone, R.A., McBride, D.K., and Jager, L. (2017). Innovation in regulatory science: Metrics for evaluation of regulatory science claims. Journal of Regulatory Science 5; 50-59.

Moghissi, A.A., Gurudas, N.A., Shiqian, P. S., McBride, D.K., and Swetnam, S.M. (2015). Ethical Requirements of Application of Science in Policy Including Regulations. Technology and Innovation. 17; 61-73.

Moghissi, A.A., Straja, S.R., Love, B.R., McBride, D.K., and Stough, R.K. (2014). Innovation in regulatory science: Evolution of a new scientific discipline. Technology and Innovation 16; 155-165.

Moghissi, A.A., Love, B.R., Straja, S.R. (2013). Peer review and scientific assessment: A handbook for funding organizations, regulatory agencies, and editors. Institute for Regulatory Science.

Moghissi, A.A., Swetnam, M.S., Amin, M., and McNulty, C. (2012). Ruckelshaus Effect.

Synesis, 3; G6-13.

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act. Public Law 104-113 (1995).

Regulatory Affairs Professional Society. (Accessed December 29, 2021).

Ruckelshaus, W.D. (1983) Science, risk, and public policy. Science 221; 1026-1028.

Weinberg, A.M. (1970). Science and Trans-Science. Minerva 10; 209-222.



2023-11-14 — Updated on 2023-11-15




Policy Commentaries

Most read articles by the same author(s)