listserv messages

Replied by Christopher Hill on 04/18/2017 - 08:43
Also good to check in with NCSES at NSF, which has a long-standing interest in these data and issues. Reform is difficult. The situation is complicated. "Who knew??" Sent from my iPhone On Apr 18, 2017, at 8:31 AM, David Wojick <dwojick@CRAIGELLACHIE.US> wrote: Sounds great, D. You should be talking to OIRA, since they make federal information collection policy, right down to individual collections, and they have the power to enforce it. The National Science and Technology Council, which consists of all the... [Read more]  
Replied by David Baker on 04/18/2017 - 06:28
Thanks, both, for the suggestions; I have forwarded to some on my Board to discuss. These things take time but as the old adage goes: the best time to plant a tree is twenty year ago - the second best time is now.In a not-too-distant past nobody would have thought every single government department on the planet would agree to adopt a single format and approach to their communications - then the web grew.If others on this list sit on these mentioned bodies or have other suggestions please reach out.(D)avid BakerExecutive Director, CASRAI [Read more]  

Posted by Voytek, Kenneth P. (Fed) on 04/17/2017 - 09:06
    [Read more]  

Posted by Loet Leydesdorff on 04/17/2017 - 05:25
Expected Synergy in Spanish Regional and National Systems of Innovation Dividedness and the Expected Synergy in a Non-Linear Model of Spanish Regional and National Systems of Innovation We analyze the Spanish national and regional innovation systems in terms of the expected synergies at NUTS2 (19 regions) and NUTS3 (51 provinces) levels. Synergy is operationalized as generating options for further development among distributions of firm characteristics (N ≈ 1M). Regionalization has been an... [Read more]  

Posted by James Gover on 04/16/2017 - 17:25
Four ways Jared Kushner can modernize governmentAndrew R. Feldman and Robert SheaThursday, April 13, 2017 ... [Read more]  

Posted by Andrew Reamer on 04/14/2017 - 07:18
https://gwipp.gwu.edu/federal-efforts-support-entrepreneurship-reference-guide-working-draftI've added a new first section that provides lists of federal laws supporting small business development in two formats: U.S. Code – Chapters and Sections Concerning Small Business Development Public Laws in Support of Small Business Development: 83rd-115th Congresses (1953-2017) This is still a work-in-progress. Further enhancements to... [Read more]  

Posted by Susan Fitzpatrick on 04/13/2017 - 07:43
I have realized my broadside about my hopes that the academic research community will play it straight even in these threatening times might have been misconstrued as a direct criticism of the Stine and Wagner piece because I responded using a post out of sequence.    I meant it as a more general cautionary note in response to the general messages I have heard coming out – it was triggered more by the “like Beer; like Science” quote than anything else.    (Although, personally, I think there is a lot of science in beer!) .   Susan M. Fitzpatrick, Ph.D.President, James S. McDonnell... [Read more]  

Posted by jobs on 04/13/2017 - 11:51
Outreach Specialist 18 month Temporary Position Union of Concerned Scientists Washington, DChttp://www.ucsusa.org/about/jobs-ucs#csdoutreachspec Do you want to help build a movement to promote the role of science in government decision making on critical public health, environmental, and public safety issues? The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) is seeking an independent, creative organizer to help us build infrastructure that will make federal government science and scientists... [Read more]  

Posted by Deborah Stine on 04/12/2017 - 18:47
Greetings everyone,   Caroline Wagner and I have a new op-ed up on “The Hill” website  -- Cuts to scientific research portend a lost generation of innovation  http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/economy-budget/328565-cuts-to-scientific-research-portend-a-lost-generation-of   I thought you might like to see it, and the idea for it came out of the discussion on this listserve a few weeks ago.    Please pass... [Read more]  
Replied by James Gover on 04/12/2017 - 14:33
Deborah,These very high level endorsements are fine, but incomplete. In the case of research, the devil is in the details. Keep in mind that the majority of federal R&D is sponsored by or conducted by mission driven institutions. For example, lets assume that DOE gives research grants to Ford to develop electric vehicle technology.  This raises the questions: Why does the taxpayer pay a portion of Ford's research? If DOE funds a portion of Ford's research, should it also fund similar amounts of research at GM and Chrysler? And perhaps, Toyota, Honda, BMW, Daimler, Hyundai and... [Read more]  
Replied by Eugene Arthurs on 04/12/2017 - 21:48
Dear Debbie,   Before I comment on your article, let me say that I am strongly opposed to cuts in investment in science, though I do believe there is considerable scope to improve this spending of taxpayers money.   I have always liked to see the Pew data on the public’s support for science. It was not until recently that the important questions on the public’s priorities for spending taxpayers’ money were asked. Science was clearly a top area to cut, if cuts were necessary.  We have a lot of work to do to change the perception of science as a... [Read more]  
Replied by Sam Weiss EVANS on 04/12/2017 - 16:14
Thanks for sharing this, Deborah. I think it is a strong statement supporting funding scientific research, but I have to admit I’m conflicted about the polarization in the argument, and the lack of any statement about how this could be a chance to think about *how* we spend taxpayer money as well as *how much* we spend.  I can totally see how the argument needs to be clear and concise for this audience, and how these are still opening salvos in the slog to sort out the budget. I just wonder if we are holding our cards a little too close to our chest. If we are pointing the... [Read more]  
Replied by Godin, Benoît on 04/12/2017 - 19:05
I totally agree with Eugene. Apart from scientists’ representative organizations, very few people today hold a discourse on science and research as the originator of innovations. The link is a lot more complicated than that and the empirical evidence quite inconclusive. Scientists do not help their cause at all in continuing to support a century years old discourse on a kind of linear model. The discourse on innovation of the last decades has led to the marginalization of research in public policies and public funding, and it would only get worse if scientists do not renew their own... [Read more]  
Replied by Chris Newfield on 04/13/2017 - 06:17
on the same topic, I have an article in today's Inside Higher Ed arguing why a public-goods framework is the only thing that will save research funding.  http://bit.ly/2nHyzjlwith best wishes, ChrisOn Apr 13, 2017, at 4:05 AM, Godin, Benoît <Benoit.Godin@UCS.INRS.CA> wrote:I totally agree with Eugene. Apart from scientists’ representative organizations, very few people today hold a discourse on science and research as the originator of innovations. The link is a lot more... [Read more]  
Replied by Holbrook, James on 04/13/2017 - 04:21
Colleagues,That's a really well-argued piece, Chris! I wonder whether a complementary strategy on the level of individual universities might also be in order (that is, having universities aim to make better connections with their local communities to demonstrate concrete cases of the abstract notion of the public good).Caroline and Debbie, I enjoyed reading your piece, as well. I agree that the proposed cuts would have disastrous consequences. However, I also agree with Eugene and Ben. Even if we can find -- and we can -- many examples of scientific research preceding societal... [Read more]  
Replied by Caroline Wagner on 04/13/2017 - 08:32
Dear SciSIP friends, These are great thoughts – keep in mind that US S&T funding is more likely to be increased in response to threats of being overtaken by others (Sputnik, Japan, Germany, now China) than it is to respond to the promise of general welfare or eventual social goods. Caroline     [Read more]  
Replied by David Stone on 04/13/2017 - 04:55
All,Nicholas Kristof has a useful column in today’s Times that bears on our discussion. The immediate concern – Tom Price’s proposal – requires tactical action, as did the ACA replacement effort last month. Newfield is right in the long run, as are Evans and Arthurs, but I would double down on Britt’s suggestion of staying local. Following the advice in the Kristof column, there is no time to bring the public back around to the positions we would seek to advocate, but almost every member of congress has a university in their district, and for all of them, the case can be made in very... [Read more]  
Replied by Deborah Stine on 04/13/2017 - 10:02
Good morning everyone,                 I must say that as the replies to this piece came in, I chuckled to myself – what in the world did we do to lead to the conceptions people read into this piece.  So, let me say what this piece is NOT:   n  The audience for this piece, in a Capitol Hill “newspaper,”was congressional staff and policymakers, many of whom know little about research, and was not meant for anyone who works in research, particularly those who are scholars in the research process. n  This is not a discussion meant to be... [Read more]  
Building on Britt's idea about local engagement, I'd push the point even further. What's needed is not just a marketing pitch to "demonstrate concrete cases of the abstract notion of the public good"—we actually need to engage these stakeholders in the research agenda itself. Don't just show people that your research is relevant to them, post facto; engage with them continually and direct your research agenda towards helping to solve their problems—as an intended benefit rather than merely a corollary outcome to which we circle back to in order to demonstrate the public... [Read more]  

Pages