Search

The article explores the concept of "impact" in academia and its various categories, such as its influence on legislation, general thinking, and people. It acknowledges the challenges of measuring impact and proposes the use of the "knowledge value collective" framework to better understand and navigate impact pathways. The article also suggests the development of an "impact catechism" to guide academics in envisioning and achieving impact. The author, David H. Guston, is an associate vice provost at Arizona State University and has expertise in the societal implications of nanotechnology. The article emphasizes the importance of universities prioritizing impact and supporting their faculty, staff, and students in creating meaningful change. [Extracted from the article]

THERE'S A growing sentiment in the country that technology doesn't always serve the public interest. Civil-rights proponents are frustrated by the use of facial recognition in policing, and concerned about [...]

In the years following World War II, the United States established a scientific enterprise that became the envy of the world. This enterprise rested on a vision of science as […]

Focuses on efforts to democratized the alleged politicized science in the U.S. in 2004. Allegations against the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush regarding the scientific reports and advisory committees; Definition of democratization in science; Guidelines for the implementation of balanced membership in advisory committees.

Suggests a science and technology policy for the administration of United States President George W. Bush. Traditional approach to the management of research; Research and development for social outcomes; Mechanisms needed to enhance public participation in the process of technological choice.

Deals with the impact of the social contract for science on the effectiveness of science policy. Origin of the social contract for science; Essential elements of science policy; Changes in how politics and science go about solving the problem of delegation.

Assesses how legislators acquire and use technical information and analyses for them to make critical decisions. Legislative staffs and state universities as sources of technical information; Importance of a centralized, non-partisan research staff; Option of continuing education, training and field work for an existing staff.

The problem of science policy is the problem of delegation. How do nonscientists get scientists to do what we all, as citizens, have decided? An analytical framework known as principal-agent theory is introduced to examine the problents of delegation. A number of areas of empirical interest in science policy are highlighted and recast as problems specific to delegatory relationships. The implications of science as an agent of society are addressed. The conclusion is that none of the values of science, such as scientific autonomy or scientific truth, is threatened by taking a principal-agent perspective on science.

Presents several letters to the editor referencing Tony Rothman's article "Cold Fusion," about the deplorable state of affairs with respect to the development of fusion power, previously published in the journal. Advantages of fusion power; Criteria of Rothman to evaluate all government programs; Discussion on space stations.

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "A Focused Approach to Society's Grand Challenges," by Lewis Branscomb in the Summer 2009 issue.

Presents a letter to the editor in response to the article "The View From California," by Heather Barbour in the spring 2005 issue.