Elevating Science and Technology Policy at the State Department
Summary
Science and technology (S&T) must play a prominent and strategic role at all levels of United States foreign policy. On Day One, the Biden-Harris Administration should reinvigorate and reassert U.S. strength in science, technology, and data-driven decision making. S&T issues at the Department of State (Department) have historically been concentrated into specific offices and personnel, which has constrained the use of S&T as a tool to advance U.S. foreign policy goals. On Day One, the Administration can better identify, allocate, and elevate S&T issues and personnel throughout the Department. Building and rewarding diverse teams with the right mix of skills is good management for any organization, and could create significant progress toward breaking down the silos that prevent the realization of the full benefits of the S&T expertise that already exists among U.S diplomatic personnel.
Enabling Federal Agencies to Tackle Complex Problems with the Help of Makers-In-Residence
Summary
Across the U.S., there are approximately 2,000 makerspaces and Fab Labs where makers with a broad and diverse set of skills have developed innovative approaches to solving pressing problems in their communities. The next administration should implement a Maker-In-Residence (MIR) fellowship program that allows federal agencies to leverage the incredible skills and knowledge of the American maker community to address complex problems specific to their missions.
Implementation of the MIR fellowship program would enable American makers and innovators to:
- Contribute their knowledge and unique and diverse skill sets to fulfilling the missions of federal agencies while learning first-hand about federal policy and the policymaking process
- Utilize their learnings to solve complex societal problems and affect policy change in their local communities.
Improving Science Advice for Executive Branch Decision-Making
Summary
The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the crucial need for science to inform policy. However, the science-policy interface has a broader history of systemic challenges spanning sectors, from climate, to energy, to water resources, to cybersecurity and beyond. The near-term policy window created by the pandemic offers an ideal time to act while the attention of policymakers and the public is focused on the key role of science in policy. There are five key areas of action to create meaningful progress in carving improved pathways for science advice:
- Sharpening the focus of the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policy Act (P.L. 115-435) to define scientific knowledge as a key subset of “evidence” and develop formal structures for non-federal academic experts to participate in the development of the required agency learning agendas.
- Widening the role of Federally-Funded Research and Development Centers., especially the Science and Technology Policy Institute.
- Leveraging the Intergovernmental Personnel Agreement (IPA) to bring more non-federal subject matter experts into key government positions.
- Reducing administrative barriers to the establishment of Federal Advisory Committees under the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
- Revising the Broader Impacts Requirements for National Science Foundation grantees to include more direct pathways for the outputs of scientific research to reach decision-makers.
Increasing Public Engagement and Transparency at the FCC by Holding a Second Monthly Meeting
Summary
How can public engagement and transparency at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) be improved? Congress has wrestled with this question repeatedly over the last several years. While Congress should continue to pursue legislative reform, the next FCC Chair can immediately improve transparency and public debate on pending agency actions by adding a second monthly meeting of the FCC Commissioners.
This proposal outlines a series of actions to introduce a second monthly meeting of the FCC Commissioners. During the additional meeting, FCC staff should present on major items that might be brought before the Commission for a vote in the next several months. This forward-looking monthly meeting gives the public information needed to provide meaningful input to the Commission prior to its decision-making. The meeting would also improve the Commissioners’ own ability to respond to policy recommendations.