Accomplishments and Opportunities
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Accomplishments and Opportunities

on

  • 1,461 views

by David H. Guston...

by David H. Guston
Professor of Political Science
Director, Center for Nanotechnology in Society at ASU Co-Director, Consortium for Science, Policy & Outcomes.
Slides for meeting in Fondazione Bassetti

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,461
Views on SlideShare
1,228
Embed Views
233

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0

3 Embeds 233

http://www.fondazionebassetti.org 230
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com 2
http://www.google.it 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Help enhance the contribution of science and technology to society's pursuit of equality, justice, freedom, and overall quality of life. Help decision makers and institutions grapple with the immense power, complexity, and variability of science and technology as society charts a course for the future. Forge an Intellectual Community of Scholars and Practitioners, Create Knowledge and Methods, Educate Students and Leaders, Cultivate Public Discourse and Foster Policies.
  • Make CSPO – and thus ASU – the leading global center in social and policy issues of science and technology. Expand and differentiate CSPO’s ability to conduct research, training, and outreach. Advance CSPO’s unique and productive synthesis of theoretical, empirical, and problem-oriented research and tool development; Create a global network of scholars and professionals who share CSPO’s mission and are trained in the intellectual perspectives and analytical techniques it develops; Foster an international network of academic and research institutions who are advancing a collective intellectual and policy agenda; Establish CSPO as an important, long-term resource for the transformation of scientific and engineering practice through the incorporation of societal dimensions at ASU and beyond; Expand CSPO’s capacity to catalyze this transformation through the operations of its new office in Washington, DC, and Maintain CSPO as a dynamic, engaging, and fun place to work.
  • Interdependence Understanding, analyzing, and articulating the mutual influence of scientific/technical and societal change; Reflexivity and Integration Working with scientists and engineers to ensure that research proceed with a fuller knowledge of its societal (social, ethical, legal, political, economic, environmental) dimensions; Engagement Facilitating the participation of diverse publics and decision-makers on issues of science and technology in formal and informal settings; Anticipation Improving the ability of individuals and institutions to identify, assess, and respond to scientific, technical, and social change at as earlier a stage as possible; and Outcomes Assuring that science and technology policy meaningfully addresses human welfare at local, regional, national, and global scales.
  • Meaning of Outcomes Creating strong scholarship that matters, is relevant, and has impact; Informing analysis with relentlessness, responsibility, and engagement; Directing analyses toward policy formulation and implementation, as well as to decision making and public discourse; Addressing research priorities to real-world problems rather than to academic-disciplinary ones; and Understanding the consequences of science and technology in society. Strategy for Achieving Outcomes Achieving and maintaining a balance between traditional academic research and research of a contract shop; Choosing “use-inspired” research topics derived from practical problems faced by real people such as scientists and policy makers, marginalized social groups, and transnational actors; and Influencing behavior or outcomes through reflective interactions with scientists, engineers, and policymakers.
  • Responsible Innovation: How can we improve the decisions that individuals, organizations, and governments make throughout the process of knowledge-based innovation? EX: CNS-ASU Sustainability and Adaptability: How can we construct and maintain good social and institutional relationships with nature and with one another to respond to a changing planet and ensure a fair and prosperous future for humanity? EX: SPARC Science, Technology, and Global Affairs: How do we create, evaluate, and deliberate on the knowledge and technological systems necessary for a globalizing world, across the multitude of cultural understandings of both deliberation and knowledge in that world? EX: CSPO World Technological Systems and Infrastructures: How can we understand and manage the complex systems and structures we build and depend on – and which seem to have a momentum of their own? EX: Innovation Systems Healthy & Just Societies: How can human well-being and justice become a central element of research, innovation, and development? EX: Public Value Mapping in Healthcare Delivery Securing our Common Future: How can we create a shared sense of individual and mutual security in a politically and technologically dynamic – and culturally diverse – world? EX: Energy Security
  • Graduate Masters and Doctoral Degrees through shared Faculty School of Life Sciences (SoLS), School of Politics and Global Studies, Schools of Human Evolution and Social Change (SHESC), Social Transformation (Justice and Social Inquiry), Public Affairs, and Others. CNS-Biodesign Fellows Program (PhD+) Three graduate students in laboratories in the Biodesign Institute participate in the center’s activities, and write a chapter of their dissertation on societal issues of their technical research Human and Social Dimensions of Science and Technology (HSD) Leadership role in the planning, development and launch of a new doctoral program to both expand the supply of talented students and to create a training program that matches CSPO’s intellectual perspectives. Professional Science Masters (PSM) in Science and Technology Policy Launched in Fall of 2009, offers professional education for students seeking advanced public, non-profit, or private sector careers in science and technology policy and related fields in the United States or abroad. DC Summer Program An intensive 2-week immersion workshop in Washington DC for science and engineering graduate students that explores the relationships among science, policy, and societal outcomes. Undergraduate CLAS “science and society” Courses Learning Community on the Societal Aspects of Nanotechnology and Medicine Honors Theses
  • Local Affiliate Faculty, Collaborating Projects and Institutions Regional Decision Center for a Desert City (Sustainability, Environment and Water Use) Center for Nanotechnology in Society (Regional Nanotechnology Interests) National Nanoscale Informal Science Education Network (NISEnet) Network for Expert and Citizens Assessment of Science and Technology (ECAST) Historical personal and professional connections with policy stakeholders in Washington, DC (National Academies, Federal Agencies, Congress, Foundations, Media, Private Agencies) Global International Characteristics of faculty (Chhetri, Lim, Barben and Selin), post-doctoral fellow (Chhetri), and visiting scholars (CNS research visitors); Global and comparative nature of research agenda (World Wide Views on Global Warming, CSPO World, Alternate Imaginations, Civic Spaces…); Collaborative work with foreign institutions (Miller - International Mechanism on Scientific Expertise on Biodiversity, Grossman - Middle East Technical University in Ankara, Turkey; and Chhetri - Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change); and International reach of the Consortium (Institute of Science, Innovation and Society at Oxford University, and Institute for Science and Technology Studies, Bielefeld University).
  • In addition to the six substantive research programs, CSPO will create a “Tools Shop” to pursue more aggressively its capacity to develop and use various tools, skills, and methods for research that are essential across its own research, training, and outreach programs, e.g.: Real-time Technology Assessment (RTTA); Public Value Mapping (PVM); Scenario Development, Foresight, and Prediction Assessment; Knowledge Systems Analysis; and Visualization and New Media. At any given time, the “Tools Shop” – most likely a small group of research faculty, technical staff, and others – will be both 1) working entrepreneurially to develop the conceptual and operational aspects of these tools, as well as 2) working with specific CSPO projects or programs collaboratively to support their work with the appropriate tools. It will thus operate something like the machining, glass-blowing, and other technical shops that have traditionally supported academic science laboratories – but it will be more integrated with CSPO socially and intellectually. One of the thrusts of the “Tools Shop” will involve communicating research in innovative ways to reach decision-makers and expand the impact of CSPO’s efforts, especially via the new capacities represented by CSPO-DC. “Tools Shop” personnel may also engage in teaching formal courses and informal workshops to school CSPO-affiliated personnel in these tools. The “Tools Shop” will serve a critical centralizing function, as availability of these tools to the research programs is essential to assuring that the programs are capable of adhering to CSPO’s core values. But the “Tools Shop” will also be a resource for projecting ideas to other practitioners, for example, with briefings and workshops in DC aimed at Hill staffers, agency program managers, and NGO analysts.
  • The Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University (CNS-ASU) facilitates the public's involvement in nanoscale research and development, to build new capabilities for understanding and governing the socially transforming power of nanotechnology by means of: 1) Anticipatory Governance; 2 )Real-Time Technology Assessment; and 3)Thematic Research Clusters. The Social-Technical Integration Research (STIR) project studies the extent to which collaborations between social and natural scientists working alongside one another in research laboratories may advance responsible innovation. The STIR project coordinates 20 such studies in laboratories in North America, Western Europe and East Asia. The Science Policy Assessment and Research on Climate (SPARC) project, a joint project of the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado and CSPO seeks to address how these decisions are made and explore their impacts on society. This project conducts research, education, and outreach to improve the ability of climate science policies to support climate-related decision making in the face of uncertainties. The “ Energy Innovation Systems from the Bottom Up: Climate Technology RD&D for Climate Stabilization ” project in partnership with the Bipartisan Policy Center’s National Commission on Energy Policy and the Clean Air Task Force seeks to develop: 1) an intellectual structure for talking about climate change mitigation from an innovation-system perspective; 2) a bottom-up, integrated policy inventory of both well-tested and new policies and arrangements necessary for creating an energy innovation system; 3) application of that inventory to three specific areas of energy technology relevant to climate stabilization; and 4) recommendations for the US climate-related research, development and deployment effort over the next two decades. The “ Integrating Microethics and Macroethics in Graduate Science and Engineering Education: Development and Assessment of Instructional Models ” project is designing and refining innovative instructional models for graduate students in emerging areas of science and technology, assessing the strengths and limitations of each model, and developing models that integrate microethical and macroethical issues. It is funded by a 3-year NSF grant under the Ethics Education for Science and Engineering program.
  • Formation and articulation of research programs at the US National Science Foundation, particularly: Decision-making Under Uncertainty, Nanotechnology in Society, and Science of Science and Innovation Policy; Science assessment process in national and international bodies, including: the Nanotechnology Technical Advisory Group to the US National Science and Technology Council; the UN Millennium Ecosystem Assessment; and the Nobel-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Media coverage of science, technology, and environmental issues Consistently mentioned in outlets including The New York Times, The Arizona Republic, USA Today, The New Republic, Science, The New Scientist, and Nature radio and television appearances by Sarewitz (NPR’s Morning Edition, The Weather Channel), Guston (NPR’s Diane Rehm Show, KAET), Miller (AZ-TV), Lim (Voice of America, ABC Australia), and Chhetri (ABC-15 News, KAET).
  • The Rightful Place of Science? Rethinking the Role of Science and Society In May 2010, CSPO hosted a conference on “The Rightful Place of Science? Rethinking the Role of Science and Society,” “The Rightful Place of Science” which addressed the challenges facing a society that is at once utterly dependent on science and technology and yet equally unprepared to govern the implications of that dependence. In his inaugural address, President Obama promised to “restore science to its rightful place” in U.S. society, but that location is far from obvious. How can we understand this provocative formulation in the context of the complexity, uncertainty, and political, social and cultural diversity that mark our world? Amid art, music, literature, media, humor and more the conference explored the place of science in society and how science and technology can most effectively contribute to an improved quality of life for all. The transformative potential of science and technology challenges our ability to understand and shape our common destiny. What inquiries, communities, networks, and institutions can improve our ability to effectively engage this challenge? The conference program included a mix of keynote speakers to catalyze thinking and provoke conversations; “exemplars” of innovative approaches to managing the promises and complexities of science and technology; participant-led roundtables to broaden future research, education and outreach agenda; and, the next generation of scholars, decision makers, and communicators to take the ideas forward. Among the outcomes of the conference will be a strengthened community of science and technology policy scholars and practitioners and a more developed research, education and outreach agenda to enhance linkages between scientific and technological research and beneficial societal outcomes – a well-centered place for science, in the midst of an engaged society.
  • Graduate seminars and undergraduate learning community on nanotechnology and society CSPO and CNS have developed a series of educational activities to introduce science and engineering students to the world of science policy and the relationship between science, technology and societal outcomes. Next Generation of Science and Technology Policy Leaders In May 2010, CSPO hosted a Workshop for the Next Generation of Science and Technology Policy Leaders to build a small community of particularly promising early career individuals who can participate effectively in science and technology policy (STP) activities. Dissertation Defense Mark Neff, CSPO’s first end-to-end PhD student, successfully defended his dissertation “Producing Environmental Knowledge: Ecology, Research Priorities, and Policy,” on June 2, 2009. In November, the first CNS-supported graduate student at ASU, Sean Hays, defended his dissertation with a genealogical examination of history, society, and human enhancement technology. CSPO students have been successful in securing further training opportunities Former CSPO interns and Honors College advisees Taylor Spears and Zachary Pirtle both recently completed year-long Fulbright grants. CSPO graduate student Ryan Meyer, a current CSPO graduate research associate, has been awarded a Fulbright Postgraduate Scholarship to work with Australia's Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO). Taylor Jackson, a former CSPO graduate student, has been awarded a Fulbright to study sustainable agriculture at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences.

Accomplishments and Opportunities Accomplishments and Opportunities Presentation Transcript

  • Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes at Arizona State University Accomplishments and Opportunities
  • A Network of Creative Individuals & Institutions
    • Network
    • Mission
  • Vision: Leading Global Center in Social and Policy Issues of S&T “ The Idea is to create a system where we’re at least thinking about what it is as we’re doing it. So it’s not about control, it’s not about prediction. It’s about awareness and choice.” “ For every serendipitous finding, there are plenty of examples where scientists successfully pursued research with a clear goal in mind.” View slide
  • Organization: CSPO Hub View slide
  • Core Intellectual Commitments
  • Strategy for Achieving Outcomes
  • Background & History
  • Research Programs
  • Degree Programs
  • Training Programs
  • Engagement Programs
  • Outreach Programs
  • CSPO Tool Shop
  • Major Research Projects Project Description Funding Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University (CNS-ASU) Facilitates the public's involvement in nanoscale research and development, to build new capabilities for understanding and governing the socially transforming power of nanotechnology. NSF; 5-Year, $6.2 million $6.5 million renewal Social-Technical Integration Research (STIR) Studies the extent to which collaborations between social and natural scientists working alongside one another in research laboratories may advance responsible innovation. NSF; 3-Year, $540K Science Policy Assessment and Research on Climate (SPARC) Conducts research, education, and outreach to improve the ability of climate science policies to support climate-related decision making in the face of uncertainties. NSF; 5-year, $750K w/ Univ. of Colorado Energy Innovation Systems from the Bottom Up Develop recommendations for US climate-related research, development and deployment effort over the next two decades from innovation-systems perspective. Bipartisan Policy Center; $285K Integrating Microethics and Macroethics in Graduate S&E Education (EESE) Investigate, design, and develop innovative instructional models for graduate students in science and technology that integrate microethical and macroethic issues. NSF; 3-year, $300K Public Value Mapping (PVM) Develop public value based models for justifying, evaluating and assessing science and innovation policies based on outcomes. NSF; $200K
  • Introduction to CNS-ASU
    • 21 st Century Nanotechnology R&D Act of 2003
    • (PL 108-153)
    • Sec 2(b)(10):
      • Establish societal implications research program
      • Require NSECs address societal implications
      • Integrate societal concerns with nano R&D for benefit of all Americans
      • Provide for regular public input
  • NSF’s Network for Nanotechnology in Society
    • Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University
      • $6.2 million (Oct 2005 – Sept 2010)
      • Renewed ($6.5M Oct 2010-Sept 2015)
      • Partner institutions across the country
      • Individual Partners across the globe
    • Center for Nanotechnology in Society at UC Santa Barbara
      • $5 million (renewed $6.1M)
    • Projects (2005-10):
      • Harvard/UCLA
        • ($1.7 million)
      • University of South Carolina
        • ($1.4 million)
  • CNS-ASU Mission
    • Research the societal implications of nanotechnologies
    • Train a community of scholars with new insight into the societal dimensions of nanoscale science & engineering (NSE)
    • Engage the public, policy makers, business leaders, and NSE researchers in dialogues about the goals and implications of NSE
    • Partner with NSE laboratories to introduce greater reflexiveness in the R&D process
  • NSEC/CNS-ASU Research Programs Real-Time Technology Assessment Provides methodological orientation Research and Innovation Systems Analysis Public Opinion and Values Anticipation and Deliberation Reflexivity and Integration Thematic Research Clusters Provides thematic focus Equity, Equality and Responsibility Urban Design, Materials & the Built Environment (Nano & the City) Anticipatory Governance Provides strategic vision Foresight All governance requires a disposition toward future Engagement Crucial normatively, strategically, pragmatically Integration Scientists know things we don’t, and vice versa Ensemble-ization None of these works in isolation
  • Anticipatory Governance as Strategic Vision
      • A broad-based capacity extended through society that can act on a variety of inputs to manage emerging knowledge-based technologies while such management is still possible.
    Anticipate: from ante- and capere , “to take [into possession]” “beforehand”; related to capable and capacity and not a synonym for “expect,” “predict,” or “foresee” The pumpkin or the tiger? If science is puzzle-solving, when do we begin to pay attention?
  • Anticipatory Governance – Not Government
    • Not “do” or “ban”
      • “ Science finds, genius invents, industry applies, man adapts”
      • Moratoriums proposed by ETC Group and Friends of the Earth
    • Wide array of mechanisms
      • Regulation
      • Licensing/restrictions
      • Liability/indemnification
      • Intellectual property
      • Testing
      • Treaties
      • Public Understanding of Science
      • Informal Science Education
      • Public engagement
      • Public action
      • Codes of conduct
      • Standards
      • Laboratory decisions
  • Anticipatory Governance – Scholarship and Outreach
    • Scholarly publications and presentations:
    • Barben et al (2008; 25 citations)
    • Guston (2008; 9 citations)
    • Karinen and Guston (2010)
    • Politicization of Science (Bielefeld 2009)
    • U Wash 2009 NanoEthics Symposium
    • 4S 2009 Chair’s plenary STS & Policy
    • 4S 2009 meeting – double session combined audience ~150
    • special issue for Social Studies of Science (~2011)
    • special issue of Science and Engineering Ethics (2010)
    • Policy audience and public actors taking up term:
    • Mike Roco (NSF) in nano governance
    • Kevin Hurst (OSTP) in energy and climate
    • Jeff Morris (EPA) in nano and EHS
    • Carol Johnson (city of Phoenix) in city planning
    • International uptake including:
      • Flanders
      • Japan
      • Australia
      • New Zealand
    • AAAS S&T Policy Forum 2009
    • CRS Briefing
    • GAO Meetings (ECAST)
    • STPI Meetings
    • Other interactions:
    • Fisher and Selin on a large grant from the Norwegian Research Council (R. Strand)
    • Workshop with SynBERC Human Practices group (P. Rabinow)
    • WWIC meeting on STS, Sus Sci & Syn Bio
    • Inaugural S.NET meeting training session (30 colleagues)
    • 50+ international visitors from 15 countries
    • NISE Net interaction
    • Consultative Group for Biodiversity
    • Asilomar for Geo-engineering
    • Ant Gov, RTTA, PVM “handbooks” co-produced with CSPO
  • Foresight
    • http://cns.asu.edu/nanofutures/
      • Literature-based
      • Vetted
      • Web-disseminated
    • Scenario development workshops
    • Product design
    • Plausibility Project
  • Engagement
    • National Citizens’ Technology Forum
      • 2008 Nano and Human Enhancement
    • Science Cafes
    • NISE Net
      • Informal Science Education
      • Forums
  • Integration
    • Socio-Technical Integration Research (STIR)
    • Education/Training
      • PhD+
      • DC Summer Session
      • Curricular
        • Undergraduate
        • Graduate
  • Midstream Modulation
    • De facto modulation
    • Research practices are co-produced by cognitive, social, and material elements
    • Reflexive modulation
    • Practitioner recognition of de facto modulation
    • Deliberate modulation
    • Purposive actions and normative commitments are informed by reflexive modulation
  • STIR Project
    • 3 year project
      • National Science Foundation ($540,000)
      • Collaborators (~$450,000)
    • 20 laboratory engagement studies
      • intervention-oriented
      • multi-sited
      • comparative
    • 10 PhD students
      • 9 universities in 8 countries
    • 3 continents
      • North America, Western Europe, East Asia
    (http://cns.asu.edu/stir/)
  • Investigator Site 1 Site 2 Participant United States HSDST Tempe Beijing BioPhysics Political Science Vancouver Oxford Fertility Public Affairs Denver Belfast Materials Anthropology Berkeley Basel Synthetic Biology STS Tempe Seoul Chemistry & Bio European Union & Asia Philosophy Tempe Madrid Physics Business York Leeds Manufacturing Philosophy Golden Dalian Fuel Cells Political Science Walloon Flanders Nano/bio Biotech & Society Delft Tempe Microbiology
  • STIR Decision Protocol OPPORTUNITY what are you doing? CONSIDERATIONS why are you doing it? ALTERNATIVES how might you do it? OUTCOMES where might this lead?
  • CNS-ASU
    • Important scholarly and reference works
    • Encyclopedia of Nanoscience and Society
    • Yearbook of Nanotechnology in Society series
    • Large, multi-year datasets & tools
    • Publications
    • Patents
    • Public opinion
    • Expert opinion
    • Media
    • STIR field data
    • Policy documents
    • Urban design elements
    • Demonstrations of public engagement at scale
    • National Citizens’ Technology Forum
    • FutureScape City Tours
    • Extended networks of individuals and institutions
    • Scores of institutions in public and private sectors
    • More than 100 international visitors
    • Thousands of participants
    • Generative, influential vision & methods
    • Anticipatory governance
    • Real-time technology assessment
    • In-depth study of critical, long-term societal issues
    • Human Identity, Enhancement & Biology
    • Equity, Equality and Responsibility
    • Nano and the City
    • New techniques and methods for
    • Anticipating futures
    • Engaging publics
    • Integrating across “two cultures”
    • Training students
    • Scholarly impact
    • 100-150 peer-reviewed publications
    • 1000-2000 citations
    • Human capital
    • New scholars
    • Enlightened citizens
    • Informed decision-makers
    • Reflexive scientists and engineers
  • Science for Decision Making
    • Briefing Workshop in Washington DC
    • SPARC Researchers
    • Government, Foundation, Non-profit Program Managers
    • Former Presidential Science Advisor
    • Policy Fellows
    • SPARC Project
    • Climate-related decision making in the face of uncertainties
    • Interviews, Workshops, Analysis
    • Reconciling the needs of potential science users and the supply of scientific information.
    • Generalized Conclusion
    • Science best meets the needs of the decision makers when those needs are considered throughout the institutions, policies, and processes that comprise the scientific enterprise.
    • Recommendation
    • Criteria for verifying the usability of scientific results, and specific accounts of the outcomes which R&D programs aim to fulfill, are crucial to managing science for decision-making
    Usable Science: A Handbook for Science Policy Decision Makers
    • Usable Science Workshops
    • Professional Society Conferences
    • Program Managers Network
  • Policy Attention
    • Formation and Articulation of Research Programs at National Science Foundation
    • Decision-making Under Uncertainty
    • Nanotechnology in Society
    • Science of Science and Innovation Policy
    • Special Papers and Reports
    • Innovation Policy for Climate Change: A Report to the Nation
    • Societal Dimensions Research in the National Nanotechnology Initiative
    • Four Policy Principles for Energy Innovation & Climate Change: A Synthesis
    • USABLE SCIENCE: A Handbook for Science Policy Decision Makers
    • Recent Congressional Presentations
    • Sarewitz, Daniel and John Alic. December 02, 2009. "Accelerating Technological Advance for Climate Change: Lessons from Sixty Years of U.S. Innovation Policy." Testimony. U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources, Washington, DC.
    • Guston, David H. March, 2009. "Public Engagement: National Citizens' Technology Forum." Presentation. Nanotechnology and the Public: Data for Decision Makers briefing before the U.S. Congressional Nanotechnology Caucus, Washington, DC.
    • Science Assessment in National and International Bodies
    • Nanotechnology Technical Advisory Group to the US NSTC
    • UN Millennium Ecosystem Assessment
    • Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
    • Media
    • Consistently mentioned in outlets including The New York Times , The Arizona Republic , USA Today , The New Republic , Science , The New Scientist , and Nature
    • Radio and television appearances by Sarewitz (NPR’s Morning Edition, The Weather Channel), Guston (NPR’s Diane Rehm Show, KAET), Miller (AZ-TV), Lim (Voice of America, ABC Australia), and Chhetri (ABC-15 News, KAET).
  • CSPO Conference
    • The Rightful Place of Science? Rethinking the Role of Science and Society
    • Keynotes Mons. Marcello Sanchez Sorondo; Gina Kolata
    • CSPO Prize Winners/Exemplars
    • Next Generation S&T Policy Scholars
    • Young Science Communicators
    • 160+ attendees
    • Active blog site
    • Art, music & culture (high and low)
  • Citizens’ Forums
    • World Wide Views on Global Warming
    • Netra Chhetri (CSPO/School of Geographical Sciences), Nalini Chhetri (CSPO), and CSPO Affiliate Sylvain Gallais (SILC) led ASU’s efforts to host one of four US-based forums for the World Wide Views on Global Warming project. Organized by The Danish Board of Technology and The Danish Cultural Institute, World Wide Views on Global Warming held citizen deliberations on climate change in 45 countries on September 26, 2009.
    • National Citizen’s Technology Forum
    • The Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University (CNS-ASU) and its collaborators at North Carolina State University held the nation’s first “National Citizens’ Technology Forum” (NCTF), on the topic of nanotechnology and human enhancement in March 2008. Organizers selected from a broad pool of applicants a diverse and roughly representative group of seventy-four citizens to participate at six geographically distinct sites across the country. Participants deliberated face-to-face for one weekend at the beginning of the month, and electronically across their geographic groups during the rest of the month. The NCTF concluded with a second face-to-face deliberation at each site. Participants drafted reports that represented the consensus of their local groups.
  • Financial Summary
    • The Consortium for Science, Policy and Outcomes at Arizona State University was established in July 2004 with funding from Presidential Strategic Initiative Funds (PSIF).
    • We have received additional PSIF funding (in both state and local monies) to support the growth of CSPO, including of the CSPO-DC office, and specific projects.
    • In addition, CSPO accounts include a number of external grants and sponsored projects, as well as monies received through research investment distribution (RID) on its grants.
    • A summary of CSPO revenues and expenditures for FY05-FY09 is presented in the following two slides. This summary does not include start up monies or individual investigator allocations for individual CSPO faculty.
  • Revenues: FY05 – FY09
  • Expenditures: FY05 – FY09
  • CSPO & the New American University
    • Commonalities:
      • “ leveraged place” by contributing to analyses of water usage in the Phoenix area and working with the University of Arizona College of Medicine in downtown Phoenix;
      • “ intellectual fusion” through teaching in Learning Communities and other trans-disciplinary educational initiatives;
      • “ social embeddedness ” through collaborations with the Arizona Science Center and Center for Research on Science, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology for informal and formal science education; and
      • “ global engagement” through programs or projects on World Wide Views on Global Warming, Global and Comparative Knowledges, institutional capacity development to adapt to climate change in Vietnam, and on Alternate Imaginations.
    • Shared goals:
      • sustainability , which corresponds to a major research area at CSPO;
      • complexity , which embraces CSPO’s transdisciplinary perspective;
      • origins , which embraces CSPO’s focus on knowledge creation and innovation;
      • health and quality of life , which corresponds to another major research area at CSPO; and
      • global engagement , which corresponds to a major set of research and outreach activities at CSPO.
  • Investment Opportunities: Key Future Priorities
    • Substantive programs of interest – CSPO will maintain research portfolios in at least six programmatic areas;
    • Geographic scale or reach – CSPO outreach will connect on the local, regional, national, and global levels;
    • Educational or outreach partners, or audience ; CSPO’s audience includes not just scholarly colleagues but natural scientists and engineers, decision-makers in the public and private sectors, pre-college teachers and their students, participants in informal science education settings, and other public groups;
    • Intellectual tools, or methods – CSPO is pioneering such intellectual tools as public value mapping, real-time technology assessment, and foresight, and is interested in applying other tools, e.g., visualizations and web 2.0 tools, to its interests;
    • Time index, or orientation – CSPO is interested in analyzing the past, understanding the present, and anticipating the future.
  • CSPO Investment Menu