Humanizing Science and Engineering

Then it was the future, though what’s arrived / isn’t what we had in mind, all chrome and / cybernetics, when we set up exhibits / in the cafeteria for the judges / to review what we’d made of our hypotheses.

After more than a decade leading the US Carbon Cycle Science Program Office, Gyami Shrestha shares lessons learned from coordinating multiagency activities around carbon dioxide removal (CDR) research.

Gene therapies have the potential to cure diseases that are prevalent in low- and middle-income countries, but making them accessible in such countries will require new infrastructure and funding models as well as better health care delivery systems.

The economist Anne Case discusses her research into the reversal of life expectancy gains for Americans without a college degree—and what policymakers could do about it.

It is now time to work together to transform the research organizations, management strategies, and policy approaches surrounding the relationship between researchers and the public.

Wireless, wearable health care technologies have long embodied tensions between ideals and markets, transparency and control, and promise and practice.

Collaboration between communities and experts requires ongoing negotiations of differences and extended deliberations about where to focus and how to change efforts over time. This is long-term work that requires learning how to inhabit and cross multiple worlds to try to identify how they might connect, and also to learn how to move differently within each.

Taking part in California’s interdisciplinary research on Valley fever changed the way an early-career scientist conducts research, prioritizes community collaboration, and engages with policy.

Dr. Nettrice Gaskins is a widely recognized African American digital artist who creates works that combine images of individuals with an artificial intelligence (AI) application that synthesizes patterns. When her larger-than-life portraits… Read More

After years of development, an innovative science and technology policy fellowship program now provides nonpartisan information to the legislature of a state with thriving science, technology, and biotech industries.

This collection of essays explores how the CHIPS and Science Act can deliver on its promises for competition with China, manufacturing and workforce preparedness, place-based development, and sustainability—and whether it marks “an inflection point” for America’s technological leadership.

To succeed, the CHIPS and Science Act must be matched by a long-term national commitment to invest in research, technology, and a qualified workforce.

The CHIPS and Science Act reflects a widespread recognition of the need to distribute investment more evenly across the American landscape.

The CHIPS and Science Act presents a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to center sustainability in ongoing R&D and investment and mitigate the myriad environmental impacts of chips before they become even more ubiquitous.

The CHIPS and Science Act should be used as a fulcrum to usher in a cultural change—within the federal government and beyond—reflecting the recognition that, combined with the search for novelty, technological advances and scientific discoveries are intimately linked.

Although the CHIPS and Science Act’s increased investment in semiconductor research and development is welcome, whether it can improve US global competitiveness and prevent the rise of China is uncertain.

Building an information marketplace about how government data are used can enable new types of informed governance, strengthen science, and engage the public.

The American public should have access to the knowledge produced by the nation’s research and innovation enterprise. Here’s how to ensure that access to federally funded research is open, equitable, and secure.