The lack of scientific expertise in German federal ministries is particularly evident in key departments. Former Federal Minister of Health Jens Spahn only has training as a bank clerk and a Master's degree in Politics from the Fernuniversität Hagen[1][2]. During the Corona pandemic, his lack of medical expertise was frequently criticized.
The current Federal Minister of Food and Agriculture, Cem Özdemir, also lacks specific professional training. He is a trained educator and holds a degree in social pedagogy[6]. This discrepancy between training and area of responsibility raises questions about the quality of political decisions.
Impact on Policy Making
The lack of subject matter expertise leads to a problematic dependence on external consultants and complicates the appropriate evaluation of complex interrelationships[3]. Politicians without a scientific background struggle to correctly interpret scientific findings and translate them into practical policy.
Structural Problem
Lawyers and administrative experts dominate key positions in the federal government[1]. A positive exception is the current Federal Minister of Health Karl Lauterbach, who, as a doctor of medicine and health economist, possesses the necessary subject matter expertise[5].
Consequences
The lack of scientific expertise among decision-makers has direct consequences for the quality of political measures:
– Misjudgments in evaluating scientific findings
– Delays in implementing necessary reforms
– Dependence on external consultants without democratic legitimacy[3]
This situation highlights the need to bring more scientists and subject matter experts into political decision-making positions in order to adequately manage the growing challenges in the respective departments.
The problem becomes particularly clear when considering the decision-making processes between science and politics. Politicians expect clear and reliable knowledge from science, but mostly receive only preliminary findings that require correction7. This discrepancy leads to misjudgments and false expectations.
The sociologist Max Weber already warned 100 years ago about the mixing of scientific findings and political decisions. While scientific studies can express what is technically possible, they cannot dictate what should be politically done3. This distinction is often not sufficiently considered by decision-makers from outside the field.
Statistics show that a large proportion of members of the Bundestag come from the fields of law and politics2. This is also reflected in the ministerial ranks. While medical and scientific expertise is urgently needed, lawyers and administrative experts dominate key positions.
The consequences are evident in current health and research policy. For example, East German federal states criticize massive gaps in healthcare provision and urgently demand an expansion of study places in medical professions4. The lack of professional expertise in the ministries makes it difficult to assess such demands fairly.
Sources:
[1] These professions have learned the federal ministers https://www.capital.de/wirtschaft-politik/welche-berufe-die-bundesminister-gelernt-haben-765501
[2] Jens Spahn Biography and Assets: Career & Success – uamr https://www.uamr.de/jens-spahn-biographie-und-vermoegen/
[3] Science and Power – Deutschlandfunk https://www.deutschlandfunk.de/wissenschaft-und-macht-100.html
[4] Members of the Bundestag try to hide study dropouts https://www.spiegel.de/lebenundlernen/uni/bundestagsabgeordnete-versuchen-studienabbruch-zu-verbergen-a-901966.html
[5] Karl Lauterbach – Wikipedia https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Lauterbach
[6] What is Cem Özdemir's profession? – Praxistipps FOCUS https://praxistipps.focus.de/was-ist-cem-oezdemir-von-beruf_174508
