How Healthy Is Science in the United States?

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

How Healthy Is Science in the United States? HOW HEALTHY IS SCIENCE IN THE UNITED STATES? A Speech by Ralph J. Cicerone, President National Academy of Sciences Prepared for presentation at the Academy’s 146th Annual Meeting April 25–28, 2009 Events of 2009 President Barack Obama graciously accepted Th e new President of the United States, my invitation to address the members of the Barack Obama, has made some very strong National Academy of Sciences at our 146th positive statements on science. In his Annual Meeting. Because the visit of Presi- Inaugural address he said: “For everywhere we dent Obama (page 2, Figure 1) occurred in the look, there is work to be done. Th e state of our time scheduled for my annual address, I did economy calls for action, bold and swift . And not deliver this speech at the NAS meeting. we will act, not only to create new jobs, but to I want to recognize our 2009 Public lay a new foundation for growth. We will build Welfare Medalist, Dr. Neal Lane, for his distin- the roads and bridges, the electric grids and guished contributions to the advancement of digital lines that feed our commerce and bind science and the use of science in advancing us together. We’ll restore science to its rightful society. Truly, as Director of the National place, and wield Science Foundation and Presidential Science technology’s wonders Advisor, he has shown us how to develop to raise health care’s policy for science and science for policy. quality and lower its cost. We will harness As you know, we are planning a restora- the sun and the tion of this historic building on Constitution winds and the soil to Avenue, our permanent home since 1924. We fuel our cars and run must revitalize our home to meet the current our factories. And we and future needs of the NAS and to reaffi rm will transform our our national commitment to science. At schools and colleges tomorrow’s business meeting, I will discuss and universities to the status and potential schedule of our plans. meet the demands of Th ere is a new feature inside the NAS a new age. All this Building, a bust of Charles Darwin (page 3, we can do. All this Figure 2), as a tribute to his lasting contribu- we will do.” tions to science. When you view the bust in Ralph J. Cicerone, President, the Rotunda at the west end of the fi rst fl oor, National Academy of Sciences please read the plaque that describes it. On March 9, 2009, in his remarks on in which he mentions NAS can be viewed at signing an Executive Order regarding research www.nasonline.org/obama-education. involving human embryonic stem cells, he President Obama’s administration already said: “But let’s be clear: promoting science isn’t includes more NAS members than at any just about providing resources — it is also previous time in memory, perhaps ever about protecting free and open inquiry. It is — Steve Chu as Secretary of Energy, John about letting scientists like those here today do Holdren as Science Advisor and Director their jobs, free from manipulations or coercion, of the White House Offi ce of Science and and listening to what they tell us, even when Technology Policy, Jane Lubchenco as it’s inconvenient — especially when it’s inconve- Administrator of the National Oceanic and nient. It is about ensuring that scientifi c data is Atmospheric Administration, and Larry never distorted or concealed to serve a political Summers as Director of the White House agenda — and that we make scientifi c decisions National Economic Council. In addition, based on facts, not ideology.” Nina Fedoroff is the Science and Technology He has also spoken of the need to ensure Advisor to the Secretary of State, and Eric scientifi c integrity in government decision Lander and Harold Varmus will co-chair (with making and federal advisory committees, Holdren) the President’s Council of Advisors about education, and about the founding of on Science and Technology. Several more the National Academy of Sciences. A fi lm clip outstanding appointments are pending. Already, we have seen budgets for Fiscal Year 2009 increased by 14% at NSF and 19% for DOE’s science programs over FY 2008 although the NIH budget was held constant. Extra funds were also provided under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the economic stimulus package), $10 billion for NIH, $3 billion for NSF and $1.6 billion for DOE’s Offi ce of Science. Th e Health of Science in the United States Today, I will focus on the health of the science enterprise in our country, how to evaluate it, and what we can do to improve it. President Obama’s statements about science, his excellent appointments to related federal posts and advisory committees and the recent budget increases of federal support for Figure 1 President Obama speaking at the science are very good news and they lay the National Academy of Sciences on groundwork for the reinvigoration of science April 27, 2009. Photograph by in the United States. We must join in this Lois Finley, Event Digital. cause. 2 How to Take Stock of Science Nonetheless, there are constructive reasons in the United States for us to focus on our country. Our impact Are we entering a new golden age of science? at home can be large. Sadly, our nation has What is the current status of science in the fallen behind in work on scientifi c discovery United States? Gauging the health of science in some fi elds, and the education of scientists requires us to assess the level of support for at every level — from the youngest school the conduct of science, how well science is children to our most advanced postdoctoral being used for policy, how well the general students — must be strengthened. Further- public is being engaged by science, and the more as long as we use a valid framework, status of science education. Th ese broad ask appropriate questions and adopt high questions arise because our goals for science standards, science assessment, like science are similarly large: to advance science itself; itself, has no national boundaries. to foster science to create technologies and to To this end, I have in mind a new project grow economies; and to provide the scientifi c for us: let us annually assess the health of the basis for advancements in health and suste- science enterprise in the United States. What nance of the environment. should be our criteria? Must all of our answers What is the health of American science? consist of statistical data? Th is is an important question and although diffi cult to answer, it is a fair one. It is also Measures and Indicators fair to address this question to the National A healthy science enterprise depends on Academy of Sciences, because it relates adequate funding for science, public goodwill directly to our mission and to that of the toward science and scientists, and opportuni- National Research Council. We have been ties for talented individuals through educa- charged by the nation to maintain a clear tion. and informed vantage point and to form judgments about science when and where necessary. To ask this question only about “American science” might sound as if we are being provincial because in important ways, science is international or even anational, to coin a term. An illustration of this point is the presence here of two of our closest colleagues on international communication and collaboration in science: Martin Rees, President of the Royal Society and Jules Hoff mann, immediate past-president of the French Academy of Sciences. Indeed, there are approximately 35 of our Foreign Associates here today. Figure 2 Bust of Charles Darwin on display at the National Academy of Sciences. Photo by JD Talasek. 3 Federal Funding for Research federal research and development spending Th e United States government funds research depends on clear defi nitions, insightful in universities, government and national planning and careful allocations (1). In laboratories and elsewhere, through various addition, national R&D investments are much federal agencies. Two of the most important larger when corporate spending is included agencies are the National Institutes of Health as they are in international comparisons such (NIH) and the National Science Foundation as those compiled by the Organization for (NSF). Th e funding increases for Fiscal Year Economic Cooperation and Development 09 which I mentioned were most welcome (OECD). because the fraction of successful proposals in In any given year, federal science spending 2008 were at discouragingly low levels, only is a prime factor, but the health of science is 22% at NIH and 25% at NSF. Average grant also governed by other factors, for example sizes were $379,000 and $100,000 at NIH the quality of people in leading federal posts and NSF, respectively. Rigorous, competitive is critical. President Obama’s early appoint- peer review characterizes both of these grants ments are exemplary, and we look forward programs, and many nations are attempting to to similarly strong people being named to replicate their processes. When success rates the important posts that remain and to many are so low, however, some investigators (new advisory bodies. and continuing) cease to submit proposals, Federal spending for science can rise and and peer reviewers seem to become ever fall quickly, refl ecting some confl icting views. more cautious, tending to support proposals Concern over rising federal budget defi cits whose goals are incremental rather than can lead to reducing expenditures even in pathbreaking. Are these two federal agencies, the face of evidence of economic growth due which have been so fundamental to the to scientifi c research.
Recommended publications
  • Beyond the Big Bang • the Amazon's Lost Civilizations • the Truth
    SFI Bulletin winter 2006, vol. 21 #1 Beyond the Big Bang • The Amazon’s Lost Civilizations • The Truth Behind Lying The Bulletin of the Santa Fe Institute is published by SFI to keep its friends and supporters informed about its work. The Santa Fe Institute is a private, independent, multidiscipli- nary research and education center founded in 1984. Since its founding, SFI has devoted itself to creating a new kind of sci- entific research community, pursuing emerging synthesis in science. Operating as a visiting institution, SFI seeks to cat- alyze new collaborative, multidisciplinary research; to break down the barriers between the traditional disciplines; to spread its ideas and methodologies to other institutions; and to encourage the practical application of its results. Published by the Santa Fe Institute 1399 Hyde Park Road Santa Fe, New Mexico 87501, USA phone (505) 984-8800 fax (505) 982-0565 home page: http://www.santafe.edu Note: The SFI Bulletin may be read at the website: www.santafe.edu/sfi/publications/Bulletin/. If you would prefer to read the Bulletin on your computer rather than receive a printed version, contact Patrisia Brunello at 505/984-8800, Ext. 2700 or [email protected]. EDITORIAL STAFF: Ginger Richardson Lesley S. King Andi Sutherland CONTRIBUTORS: Brooke Harrington Janet Yagoda Shagam Julian Smith Janet Stites James Trefil DESIGN & PRODUCTION: Paula Eastwood PHOTO: ROBERT BUELTEMAN ©2004 BUELTEMAN PHOTO: ROBERT SFI Bulletin Winter 2006 TOCtable of contents 3 A Deceptively Simple Formula 2 How Life Began 3 From
    [Show full text]
  • Dr. Nina V. Fedoroff
    TESTIMONY BEFORE THE HOUSE SCIENCE SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH AND SCIENCE EDUCATION HEARING ON SCIENCE DIPLOMACY Rayburn House Office Building, Room 2318. Wednesday, April 2nd, 10 AM Dr. Nina Fedoroff Science and Technology Adviser to the Secretary of State and the Administrator of USAID MAKING SCIENCE DIPLOMACY MORE EFFECTIVE Chairman Baird, Ranking Member Ehlers, and distinguished members of the Subcommittee, thank you for this opportunity to discuss science diplomacy at the U.S. Department of State. The U.S. is recognized globally for its leadership in science and technology. Our scientific strength is both a tool of “soft power” – part of our strategic diplomatic arsenal – and a basis for creating partnerships with countries as they move beyond basic economic and social development. Science diplomacy is a central element of the Secretary’s transformational diplomacy initiative, because science and technology are essential to achieving stability and strengthening failed and fragile states. S&T advances have immediate and enormous influence on national and global economies, and thus on the international relations between societies. Nation states, nongovernmental organizations, and multinational corporations are largely shaped by their expertise in and access to intellectual and physical capital in science, technology, and engineering. Even as S&T advances of our modern era provide opportunities for economic prosperity, some also challenge the relative position of countries in the world order, and influence our social institutions and principles. America must remain at the forefront of this new world by maintaining its technological edge, and leading the way internationally through science diplomacy and engagement. Testimony of Dr. Nina Fedoroff Page 2 The Public Diplomacy Role of Science Science by its nature facilitates diplomacy because it strengthens political relationships, embodies powerful ideals, and creates opportunities for all.
    [Show full text]
  • A Complete Bibliography of Publications in the Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society (1950–1999)
    A Complete Bibliography of Publications in the Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society (1950{1999) Nelson H. F. Beebe University of Utah Department of Mathematics, 110 LCB 155 S 1400 E RM 233 Salt Lake City, UT 84112-0090 USA Tel: +1 801 581 5254 FAX: +1 801 581 4148 E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] (Internet) WWW URL: http://www.math.utah.edu/~beebe/ 25 August 2019 Version 1.00 Title word cross-reference 14 [Kam94]. 10 [TNN71]. 13 [Kai70, Shi70]. 1398 [Kam71]. 1772 [Rau73]. 1777 [Sio51]. 1786 [CR52]. 1790s [Dur87]. 1875 [Ros75]. 1916 [Bro85]. 1920s [GS86]. 1930s [GS86]. 1940s [Bir93a]. 1956 [Kro57, Sel56]. 1959 [Ano60m]. 1980s [Gar80]. 1988 [Hea88]. 1991 [Gom95]. 1993 [McK94]. 2000-Year-Old [Nor73]. 25 [Hea88, McK94]. 27 [Kam71]. 2nd [vH93]. 3.7.12-14 [Dum63b]. 3.7.7-10 [Dum63b]. 406 [Mer88]. 440 [Mer84]. 1 2 546 [Gre92]. 600 [Ost95]. A. [Pel95]. A.D. [Con58]. Aaron [Woo99]. Abb´e [Bei51, Chi50, Per53, Per58]. Abdallah [RT99]. Abdication [Hor65]. Abdus [Dys99]. Abilities [Thu50]. Abode [Men69a]. Abolitionist [Sch71]. Aboriginal [HK77]. Abroad [Wri56]. Abrogation [Ega71]. ABSCAM [Gri82]. Absentee [Mor74a]. Abstract [dT58b]. Academic [Car57a, Gid50, Ing57, Tay57]. Academies [Adr56, Fr¨a99]. Academy [Dup57, DM65, Rai92, Pen50]. Acadia [Olm60]. Acceleration [Dic81]. Accelerators [Sim87]. Acceptance [Lew56b]. Accessibility [Ano50a, Ano50b, Ano50c, Ano50d, Ano50e, Ano50f, Ano51a, Ano51b, Ano51c, Ano51d, Ano51e, Ano51f, Ano52a, Ano52b, Ano52c, Ano52d, Ano52e, Ano52f, Ano53a, Ano53b, Ano53c, Ano53d, Ano53e,
    [Show full text]
  • Science Diplomacy in the 21St Century Nina Fedoroff Science
    Agricultural Outlook Forum Presented: February 18-19, 2010 U.S. Department of Agriculture Science Diplomacy in the 21st Century Nina Fedoroff Science & Technology Advisor U.S. secretary of State; USAID Administrator Nina Fedoroff Science & Technology Advisor to U.S. secretary of State and to USAID Administrator Dr. Nina V. Fedoroff was selected by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to be the new Science and Technology Adviser in August 2007. In September 2007, USAID Administrator Henrietta Fore invited Dr. Fedoroff to serve her in the same capacity. Dr. Fedoroff is the Willaman Professor of Life Sciences and Evan Pugh Professor in the Biology Department and the Huck Institutes of the Life Sciences, Pennsylvania State University. Dr. Fedoroff is a 2006 National Medal of Science laureate. Dr. Fedoroff is a leading geneticist and molecular biologist who has contributed to the development of modern techniques used to study and modify plants. She received her Ph.D. in molecular biology from the Rockefeller University in 1972. In 1978, she became a staff member at the Carnegie Institution of Washington and a faculty member in the Biology Department at Johns Hopkins University. In 1995, Dr. Fedoroff joined the faculty of the Pennsylvania State University, where she served as the founding director of the Huck Institutes of the Life Sciences. Dr. Fedoroff has done fundamental research in the molecular biology of plant genes and transposons, as well on the mechanisms plants use to adapt to stressful environments. Her book, Mendel in the Kitchen: A Scientist’s View of Genetically Modified Foods, published in 2004 by the Joseph Henry Press of the National Academy of Science, examines the scientific and societal issues surrounding the introduction of genetically modified crops.
    [Show full text]
  • Dr. Nina Fedoroff
    WRITTEN STATEMENT OF DR. NINA FEDOROFF BEFORE THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE RE: THE COSTS AND IMPACTS OF MANDATORY BIOTECHNOLOGY LABELING LAWS MARCH 24, 2014 Chairman Conway, Representative Peterson, Members of the Committee, thank you very much for the opportunity to testify before you today. My name in Nina Fedoroff and I am a professor of plant molecular biology and genetics. My laboratory pioneered in the adaptation of genetic modification of GM techniques to plants more than 35 years ago. I am a member of the US National Academy of Sciences and a National Medal of Science Laureate. I served as the Science and Technology Adviser to Secretaries of State Condoleeza Rice and Hillary Clinton. I authored a book titled Mendel in the Kitchen: A Scientist’s View of Genetically Modified Foods1. I am here to tell you why mandatory labeling of foods containing GM ingredients is counterproductive to Americans’ ability to make healthful food choices. More than that, I will tell you why such labels could well undermine humanity’s efforts to achieve food security. A recent poll of scientists and the public on GMOs gave startling results: only 37% of the public believes GMOs are safe, compared with almost 90% of scientists2. So what’s the evidence? GM crops have been in commercial production for almost 20 years3. They have an impeccable safety record and multiple environmental benefits4. Despite anecdotal reports, often never published or subsequently retracted, no allergies, illnesses or deaths have been reproducibly linked to the consumption of GM food or feed5,6,7. Environmental impacts for the period 1996-2012 include the application of 503,000 tons less pesticide (active ingredient), greenhouse gas reductions of 16 million tons CO2 and increased soil carbon sequestration from no till farming estimated 4 at more than 200 million tons CO2 .
    [Show full text]
  • AWARENESS | Fall 2016 Illume | VOLUME 49 Issue 2 Fall 2016 34
    illumeUniversity of Southern Indiana AWARENESS | Fall 2016 illume | VOLUME 49 issue 2 Fall 2016 34 How Travis Got Here 16 Scoreboard 2 Big Picture The You Said You 12 features departments State of the U 4 Behind the Scene 32 The House that Wayne Built 20 An alum and judge who’s changing the lives of convicted felons Coneucopia 6 Open Dialogue 35 Student POV 14 Colleges 36 Staying on Track for a Better Tomorrow 24 How USI’s Counseling Center helps students maintain mental health From the Desk of 15 World Class 40 Poetry 18 Class Notes 42 Homelessness 30 Tailfeather 48 on the cover | illustration by David Branstetter. The ripple effect. Impacting a community. YOU said | feedback FRESH AND NEW So, let me tell you about Someone Else’s USI Health Prof @USI _ CNHP EDITOR I just got my copy of illume magazine. It’s Kidney. The Indiana State Games & C. L. Stambush mommy_to_paige beautiful! Congratulations on the start of University of Southern Indiana @USIedu make national news. illume WRITERS something new and fresh! Someone Else’s Kidney was placed in my The Day in Photos husband when he was 17. Someone Else’s John Farless ’98 Susan Wedeking Gregory ’82 Kidney let him attend high school and Barb Goodwin college as a normal person his age, without Almira Havic M ’16 dialysis. Someone Else’s Kidney let him Ben Luttrull M ’19 A CLASS ACT experience these years of his life while C. L. Stambush I just wanted to congratulate you on the taking anti-rejection medications.
    [Show full text]
  • The Myth of Junk DNA
    The Myth of Junk DNA JoATN h A N W ells s eattle Discovery Institute Press 2011 Description According to a number of leading proponents of Darwin’s theory, “junk DNA”—the non-protein coding portion of DNA—provides decisive evidence for Darwinian evolution and against intelligent design, since an intelligent designer would presumably not have filled our genome with so much garbage. But in this provocative book, biologist Jonathan Wells exposes the claim that most of the genome is little more than junk as an anti-scientific myth that ignores the evidence, impedes research, and is based more on theological speculation than good science. Copyright Notice Copyright © 2011 by Jonathan Wells. All Rights Reserved. Publisher’s Note This book is part of a series published by the Center for Science & Culture at Discovery Institute in Seattle. Previous books include The Deniable Darwin by David Berlinski, In the Beginning and Other Essays on Intelligent Design by Granville Sewell, God and Evolution: Protestants, Catholics, and Jews Explore Darwin’s Challenge to Faith, edited by Jay Richards, and Darwin’s Conservatives: The Misguided Questby John G. West. Library Cataloging Data The Myth of Junk DNA by Jonathan Wells (1942– ) Illustrations by Ray Braun 174 pages, 6 x 9 x 0.4 inches & 0.6 lb, 229 x 152 x 10 mm. & 0.26 kg Library of Congress Control Number: 2011925471 BISAC: SCI029000 SCIENCE / Life Sciences / Genetics & Genomics BISAC: SCI027000 SCIENCE / Life Sciences / Evolution ISBN-13: 978-1-9365990-0-4 (paperback) Publisher Information Discovery Institute Press, 208 Columbia Street, Seattle, WA 98104 Internet: http://www.discoveryinstitutepress.com/ Published in the United States of America on acid-free paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society Vol. 120, Num
    Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society Vol. 120, Num. 1. Año 1976 Held at Philadelphia for Promoting Useful Knowledge Fred L. Whipple. “Comet Kohoutek in Retrospect” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. Vol. 120, Num. 1. Año 1976; pagina 1-6 Myron P. Gilmore. “The Berensons and Villa I Tatti” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. Vol. 120, Num. 1. Año 1976; pagina 7-12 Helen B. Taussig. “The Development of the Blalock-Taussing Operation and Its Results Twenty Years Later” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. Vol. 120, Num. 1. Año 1976; pagina 13-20 Ward H. Goodenough. “On the Origin of Matrilineal Clans: A “Just So” Story” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. Vol. 120, Num. 1. Año 1976; pagina 21-36 Leon N. Cooper. “How Possible Becomes Actual in the Quantum Theory” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. Vol. 120, Num. 1. Año 1976; pagina 37-45 John Owen King. “Labors of the Estranged Personality: Josiah Royce on “The Case of John Bunyan”” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. Vol. 120, Num. 1. Año 1976; pagina 46-58 Stanley A. Czarnik. “The Theory of the Mesolithic in European Archaeology” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. Vol. 120, Num. 1. Año 1976; pagina 59-66 Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society Vol. 120, Num. 2. Año 1976 Held at Philadelphia for Promoting Useful Knowledge Jonathan E. Rhoads. “New Approaches in the Study of Neoplasia: Preliminary Remarks for the Symposium” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society. Vol. 120, Num. 2. Año 1976; pagina 67-68 Sol Spiegelman. “The Search for Viruses in Human Cancer” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society.
    [Show full text]
  • American Association for the Advancement of Science
    Bridging Science and Society aaas annual report | 2010 The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) is the world’s largest general scientific society and publisher of the journal Science (www.sciencemag.org) as well as Science Translational Medicine (www.sciencetranslationalmedicine.org) and Science Signaling (www.sciencesignaling.org). AAAS was founded in 1848 and includes some 262 affiliated societies and academies of science, serving 10 million individuals. Science has the largest paid circulation of any peer- reviewed general science journal in the world, with an estimated total readership of 1 million. The non-profit AAAS (www.aaas.org) is open to all and fulfills its mission to “advance science and serve society” through initiatives in science policy; international programs; science education; and more. For the latest research news, log onto EurekAlert!, www.eurekalert.org, the premier science- news Web site, a service of AAAS. American Association for the Advancement of Science 1200 New York Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20005 USA Tel: 202-326-6440 For more information about supporting AAAS, Please e-mail [email protected], or call 202-326-6636. The cover photograph of bridge construction in Kafue, Zambia, was captured in August 2006 by Alan I. Leshner. Bridge enhancements were intended to better connect a grass airfield with the Kafue National Park to help foster industry by providing tourists with easier access to new ecotourism camps. [FSC MixedSources logo / Rainforest Alliance Certified / 100 percent green
    [Show full text]
  • 2003 Janfebnews
    ASPB News THE NEWSLETTER OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF PLANT BIOLOGISTS Volume 30, Number 6 November/December 2003 President’s Letter The Year Ahead Inside This Issue Since succeeding Dan Bush as biology. The Foundation is intended to complement New Officers/Commit- the Society’s president, I have the work of the Society by helping to raise funds and tees Assume Posts been working on my ASPB “to to develop programs. Its mission is to Plant Biology 2004: Call do” list. I thought I’d take this • promote a broad understanding of the importance for Abstracts opportunity to share some of of plant science in providing an ongoing supply of my major “to do” items with Call for Applications: affordable, high-quality food, fiber, and renewable SURF you and to solicit your help in resources Travel Grants ensuring that ASPB is the first • provide education on the importance of plants to place people turn to for all things plant biology. agriculture, medicine, environment and environ- New Web Page! First on the list is hiring a new executive director. mental cleanup, cosmetics, clothing, building, and John Lisack, who ably served as executive director for more the past five years, is now CEO of the American Asso- ciation of Pharmaceutical Scientists. We are working • make available accurate information on the latest with Margot Lansing of Lansing & Associates to iden- developments regarding genetically modified crops tify an individual who will provide vision and and biotechnology leadership for our Society, as well as supervision and • improve the range of knowledge of school children fiduciary oversight for the Society’s staff of 22 and by increasing the focus on plant science in the K– budget of over $5.4 million.
    [Show full text]
  • Session at AAAS Annual Meeting
    SESSION on DESIGN THINKING TO MOBILIZE SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND INNOVATION FOR SOCIAL CHALLENGES The aim of this symposium is to highlight the innova- tive approaches towards address social challenges. There has been growing interest in promoting “social innovation” to imbed innovation in the wider economy by fostering opportunities for new actors, such as non-profit foundations, to steer research and collaborate with firms and entrepreneurs and to tackle social challenges. User and consumers are also relevant as they play an important role in demanding innovation for social goals but also as actors and suppliers of solutions. Although the innovation process is now much more open and receptive to social influences, progress on social innovation will call for the greater involvement of stakeholders who can mobilize science, technol- ogy and innovation to address social challenges. Thus, the session requires to be approached from holistic and multidisciplinary mind and needs to cover the issue from different aspects by seven inter- national speakers. Contents Overview ■1 Program ■4 Session Description ■6 Outline of Presentation ■7 Lecture material ■33 Appendix ■55 Program Welcome and Opening 8:30-8:35 • Dr. Yuko Harayama, Deputy Director of the OECD’s Directorate for Science, Technology and Industry (DSTI) ● (moderator) (5min) Session 1: Putting ‘design thinking’ into practice 8:35-9:20 • Dr. Karabi Acharya, Change Leader, Ashoka, USA(15min) ● Systemic Change to Achieve Environmental Impact and Sustainability • Mr. Tateo Arimoto, Director-General, Research Institute of Science and Technology for Society, Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST / RISTEX) (Co-organiser and Host), Japan (15min) Design Thinking to Induce new paradigm for issue-driven approach −Discussant (5min) • Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Indefinable.Pdf (414 Pages, 12,959,446 Bytes, 30 December 2017, 20:00 GMT)
    Download all in a zip file (19,519,483 bytes) and check out readme.html or readme.pdf (9 pages) inside, as well as pp. 123-130 and pp. 132-156 in gravity.pdf (30 December 2017, 19:42 GMT) and FRAUD.pdf (30 December 2017, 19:32 GMT). Please be aware that I am interested only and exclusively only in hyperimaginary numbers (p. 20 in Hyperimaginary Numbers), which may offer unique solutions to various problems in point-set topology, set theory, and number theory. Therefore, I cannot address any issue, which is not directly related to hyperimaginary numbers, and will have to ignore it due to the lack of time. D. Chakalov chakalov.net December 30, 2017, 19:50 GMT Gravity-Matter Duality D. Chakalov Abstract Gravity-matter duality is suggested as the first step toward quantum gravity, ensuing from the idea that the phenomenon dubbed ‘gravitational field’ is a new form of reality, known as Res potentia — “just in the middle between possibility and reality” (Heisenberg, Slide 7). The essential similarities and differences between gravity-matter duality and wave-particle duality are briefly examined, with emphasis on the proposed joint solution to exact localization of gravity and “quantum waves” at spacetime points. The latter are endowed with brand new structure and topology due to the fundamental flow of events suggested by Heraclitus — Panta rei conditio sine qua non est. gm_duality.pdf, 9 pages November 1, 2017, 17:40:13 GMT Also viXra:1707.0400vE, 2017-11-01 My objections to EU-funded Einstein Telescope and LISA can be downloaded from this http URL.
    [Show full text]