The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and open science are symbiotic processes. No SDG reveals this connection more strongly than SDG 13-Climate Action. This perspective uses the SDGs as a lens to explore open science practices and prospects. It illustrates, through the concept of Net-Zero, how open science has been an accelerator of SDG 13-Climate Action. It also shows how open science can be further advanced in the context of SDG 13, discussing related SDGs such as Goal 9-Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure; Goal 16-Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions; and Goal 17-Partnerships for the Goals. In these ways, this perspective describes opportunities for open science and SDG-Climate Action to support and accelerate one another.
{"title":"SDG 13-Climate Action & Open Science: Accelerating Practices","authors":"I. Johnstone","doi":"10.38126/jspg210206","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.38126/jspg210206","url":null,"abstract":"The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and open science are symbiotic processes. No SDG reveals this connection more strongly than SDG 13-Climate Action. This perspective uses the SDGs as a lens to explore open science practices and prospects. It illustrates, through the concept of Net-Zero, how open science has been an accelerator of SDG 13-Climate Action. It also shows how open science can be further advanced in the context of SDG 13, discussing related SDGs such as Goal 9-Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure; Goal 16-Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions; and Goal 17-Partnerships for the Goals. In these ways, this perspective describes opportunities for open science and SDG-Climate Action to support and accelerate one another.","PeriodicalId":222224,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Science Policy & Governance","volume":"327 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124977086","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
One of the core principles of science is to aid socio-economic growth. Open science is a movement that reinforces the primacy of science in the direction of economic and social welfare. UNESCO's recommendation on open science aims to provide an international framework for open science policy and practice. It endorses unrestricted access to scholarly publications and data, the use of digital technologies to drive scientific processes, more collaboration and cooperation among the actors in the scientific ecosystem, sharing of research infrastructure, acknowledgment of diverse knowledge systems, and science for society. Open science could enable a productive science ecosystem in global south countries through efficient knowledge circulation, resource sharing, and collaboration. Analysis of open science policy from a global south country can provide valuable insights. India is preparing to adopt an open science framework recommended in the 5th Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy (STIP) draft, released in December 2020. The STIP draft recommends open access to articles and research data from publicly funded projects, access to research infrastructure beyond the boundary of academic and research institutions, strengthening of Indian journals, and open educational resources. However, the draft lacks an exhaustive implementation plan. The draft falls short in devising strategies to foster collaboration between actors of the STI ecosystem, the inclusion of traditional knowledge systems, and society's role in knowledge creation processes. The science policymakers and advisers of the Department of Science and Technology and the government of India should probe these areas to develop a more effective and inclusive open science framework.
{"title":"Analysis of Open Science Policy Recommendations Proposed in India’s 5th Science, Technology & Innovation Policy Draft","authors":"Moumita Koley","doi":"10.38126/jspg210208","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.38126/jspg210208","url":null,"abstract":"One of the core principles of science is to aid socio-economic growth. Open science is a movement that reinforces the primacy of science in the direction of economic and social welfare. UNESCO's recommendation on open science aims to provide an international framework for open science policy and practice. It endorses unrestricted access to scholarly publications and data, the use of digital technologies to drive scientific processes, more collaboration and cooperation among the actors in the scientific ecosystem, sharing of research infrastructure, acknowledgment of diverse knowledge systems, and science for society. Open science could enable a productive science ecosystem in global south countries through efficient knowledge circulation, resource sharing, and collaboration. Analysis of open science policy from a global south country can provide valuable insights. India is preparing to adopt an open science framework recommended in the 5th Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy (STIP) draft, released in December 2020. The STIP draft recommends open access to articles and research data from publicly funded projects, access to research infrastructure beyond the boundary of academic and research institutions, strengthening of Indian journals, and open educational resources. However, the draft lacks an exhaustive implementation plan. The draft falls short in devising strategies to foster collaboration between actors of the STI ecosystem, the inclusion of traditional knowledge systems, and society's role in knowledge creation processes. The science policymakers and advisers of the Department of Science and Technology and the government of India should probe these areas to develop a more effective and inclusive open science framework.","PeriodicalId":222224,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Science Policy & Governance","volume":"42 12","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114042972","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Surveillance involves monitoring an individual as a method of obtaining information for future use, and is defined as continuous observation of a place, person, group, or ongoing activity in order to gather information. Governments are normally restricted by judicial safeguards such as warrants and common law when it comes to surveillance methods of obtaining an individual’s private data. However, private companies are not. When users agree to terms and conditions on technology apps they often are not aware that they are consenting to being monitored and their information could easily be sold, even to the government. This process of capturing and commodifying personal data for profit-making is commonly referred to as “surveillance capitalism”. Surveillance capitalism poses a threat to privacy rights because the methods by which users’ online data is collected are overly intrusive due to the nature of how the data is stored on these apps. Additionally, the data collected by private companies can be sold, distributed, and used against the user’s legal interests and liberties. However, both International Law and the United States Constitutional Law recognize the right to privacy. This raises the question: How do we protect privacy rights when much of our personal data is now stored digitally and on technological applications that society is becoming reliant on for everyday tasks? Privacy laws have not yet adapted to address this modern day challenge. This article discusses the legal understanding of privacy rights, the threat modern-day surveillance capitalism poses to those rights, and possible solutions for updating outdated privacy laws.
{"title":"Pirates of Privacy: How Companies Profit Off Your Personal Data by Using Capital Surveillance Methods in Criminal Prosecution","authors":"Shayna Koczur","doi":"10.38126/jspg210106","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.38126/jspg210106","url":null,"abstract":"Surveillance involves monitoring an individual as a method of obtaining information for future use, and is defined as continuous observation of a place, person, group, or ongoing activity in order to gather information. Governments are normally restricted by judicial safeguards such as warrants and common law when it comes to surveillance methods of obtaining an individual’s private data. However, private companies are not. When users agree to terms and conditions on technology apps they often are not aware that they are consenting to being monitored and their information could easily be sold, even to the government. This process of capturing and commodifying personal data for profit-making is commonly referred to as “surveillance capitalism”. Surveillance capitalism poses a threat to privacy rights because the methods by which users’ online data is collected are overly intrusive due to the nature of how the data is stored on these apps. Additionally, the data collected by private companies can be sold, distributed, and used against the user’s legal interests and liberties. However, both International Law and the United States Constitutional Law recognize the right to privacy. This raises the question: How do we protect privacy rights when much of our personal data is now stored digitally and on technological applications that society is becoming reliant on for everyday tasks? Privacy laws have not yet adapted to address this modern day challenge. This article discusses the legal understanding of privacy rights, the threat modern-day surveillance capitalism poses to those rights, and possible solutions for updating outdated privacy laws.","PeriodicalId":222224,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Science Policy & Governance","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130215241","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
F. Doole, Shelley Littin, Samuel Myers, Gowri Somasekhar, J. Steyaert, K. Lansey
Experiential Learning is a useful tool to prepare negotiators and politicians in the art of diplomacy and can have a unique value in Science Policy and Diplomacy training. This workshop review summarizes two EL activities undertaken in a University of Arizona SPD course. The first was a semester-long project in conjunction with graduate and undergraduate students from a UA climate change adaptation course and the United States Department of State’s Diplomacy Lab. For this project, students researched issues and potential policies to address climate change effects on water, energy, and food resources in the Lower Mekong river basin. The second activity was the Mercury Game, a negotiation simulation that challenged students to represent interests of various countries to tackle an international environmental issue. Student survey results and other feedback demonstrate that EL is a valuable tool for SPD education and preparation for practice. Insights into how faculty, staff and students can facilitate EL in coursework are also discussed. This paper is authored by the student participants and documents their outcomes and perceptions after completing these activities.
{"title":"Experiential Learning for Training Future Science Policy and Diplomacy Experts","authors":"F. Doole, Shelley Littin, Samuel Myers, Gowri Somasekhar, J. Steyaert, K. Lansey","doi":"10.38126/jspg210103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.38126/jspg210103","url":null,"abstract":"Experiential Learning is a useful tool to prepare negotiators and politicians in the art of diplomacy and can have a unique value in Science Policy and Diplomacy training. This workshop review summarizes two EL activities undertaken in a University of Arizona SPD course. The first was a semester-long project in conjunction with graduate and undergraduate students from a UA climate change adaptation course and the United States Department of State’s Diplomacy Lab. For this project, students researched issues and potential policies to address climate change effects on water, energy, and food resources in the Lower Mekong river basin. The second activity was the Mercury Game, a negotiation simulation that challenged students to represent interests of various countries to tackle an international environmental issue. Student survey results and other feedback demonstrate that EL is a valuable tool for SPD education and preparation for practice. Insights into how faculty, staff and students can facilitate EL in coursework are also discussed. This paper is authored by the student participants and documents their outcomes and perceptions after completing these activities.","PeriodicalId":222224,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Science Policy & Governance","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129565294","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The climate for information security has drastically shifted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In the past, information security focused on the purview of the office space and the physical infrastructure, with increased specializations in digital architecture such as the Internet of Things, cloud services, and Software-as-a-Service (SaaS). Remote work was often discouraged due to ineffective mitigation strategies, especially when personal devices were involved. Remote work has become commonplace, and information security specialists must adapt to the changing environment. Effective information security policy management for a modern age will include effective mobile and remote usage provisions that maintain the same or similar workflow as on-site activities. Virtualization offers enhanced security for remote work while maintaining set routines.
{"title":"The Effect of COVID-19 on Remote Work Policies","authors":"Peter-John Damon","doi":"10.38126/jspg210101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.38126/jspg210101","url":null,"abstract":"The climate for information security has drastically shifted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. In the past, information security focused on the purview of the office space and the physical infrastructure, with increased specializations in digital architecture such as the Internet of Things, cloud services, and Software-as-a-Service (SaaS). Remote work was often discouraged due to ineffective mitigation strategies, especially when personal devices were involved. Remote work has become commonplace, and information security specialists must adapt to the changing environment. Effective information security policy management for a modern age will include effective mobile and remote usage provisions that maintain the same or similar workflow as on-site activities. Virtualization offers enhanced security for remote work while maintaining set routines.","PeriodicalId":222224,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Science Policy & Governance","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114159118","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Over the last decade, autonomous weapon systems (AWS), also known as ‘killer robots’, have been the subject of widespread debate. These systems impose various ethical, legal, and societal concerns with arguments both in favor and opposed to the weaponry. Consequently, an international policy debate arose out of an urge to ban these systems. AWS are widely discussed at the Human Rights Council debate, the United Nations General Assembly First Committee on Disarmament and International Security, and at gatherings of the Convention of Conventional Weapons (CCW), in particular the Expert Meetings on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (LAWS). Early skepticism towards the use of AWS brought a potential ban to the forefront of policy making decisions with the support of a campaign to 'Stop Killer Robots' launched by the Human Rights Watch (HRW) in 2013. The movement is supported by Amnesty International, Pax Christi International, and the International Peace Bureau, among others. This campaign has catalyzed an international regulation process on the level of the United Nations (UN). Both a new protocol to the Convention on Conventional Weapons or a new international treaty have been considered. However, a lack of consensus stalls the process, and as such, leaves AWS in a regulatory gray zone.
{"title":"To ban or not to ban. Analyzing the banning process of autonomous weapon systems","authors":"Celien De Stercke","doi":"10.38126/jspg210102","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.38126/jspg210102","url":null,"abstract":"Over the last decade, autonomous weapon systems (AWS), also known as ‘killer robots’, have been the subject of widespread debate. These systems impose various ethical, legal, and societal concerns with arguments both in favor and opposed to the weaponry. Consequently, an international policy debate arose out of an urge to ban these systems. AWS are widely discussed at the Human Rights Council debate, the United Nations General Assembly First Committee on Disarmament and International Security, and at gatherings of the Convention of Conventional Weapons (CCW), in particular the Expert Meetings on Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems (LAWS). Early skepticism towards the use of AWS brought a potential ban to the forefront of policy making decisions with the support of a campaign to 'Stop Killer Robots' launched by the Human Rights Watch (HRW) in 2013. The movement is supported by Amnesty International, Pax Christi International, and the International Peace Bureau, among others. This campaign has catalyzed an international regulation process on the level of the United Nations (UN). Both a new protocol to the Convention on Conventional Weapons or a new international treaty have been considered. However, a lack of consensus stalls the process, and as such, leaves AWS in a regulatory gray zone.","PeriodicalId":222224,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Science Policy & Governance","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132649943","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A baseline of scientific literacy among the general population is crucial for laypersons to be able to understand and evaluate data-driven recommendations for addressing public health and environmental crises. While updated formal education standards can help improve knowledge gaps for upcoming generations, they do not reach beyond K-12 students. Informal science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) public learning spaces, including museums, can potentially have broader impacts; however, the benefits are limited by accessibility. Notably, there is a lack of policy regarding sociocultural barriers that may exclude underrepresented communities from science museums. The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission (PHMC) has demonstrated a willingness to support museum research and resource development throughout Pennsylvania (PA). However, resource availability alone does not guarantee the capability to meet the needs of disadvantaged groups in STEM learning spaces. Thus, there is a need for policy to establish standards to make science museums both more accessible and culturally aware to effectively serve their purposes of public learning and engagement. We recommend that the PHMC requires museums to form diversity and inclusion committees to collect and implement community input about museum content and establishes a requirement for exhibit information to be available in multiple languages to increase visitor diversity and improve public learning outcomes.
{"title":"Improving STEM Museum Accessibility in Pennsylvania for Diverse Communities","authors":"Amanda Weiss, Sophia Villiere","doi":"10.38126/jspg210109","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.38126/jspg210109","url":null,"abstract":"A baseline of scientific literacy among the general population is crucial for laypersons to be able to understand and evaluate data-driven recommendations for addressing public health and environmental crises. While updated formal education standards can help improve knowledge gaps for upcoming generations, they do not reach beyond K-12 students. Informal science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) public learning spaces, including museums, can potentially have broader impacts; however, the benefits are limited by accessibility. Notably, there is a lack of policy regarding sociocultural barriers that may exclude underrepresented communities from science museums. The Pennsylvania Historical and Museum Commission (PHMC) has demonstrated a willingness to support museum research and resource development throughout Pennsylvania (PA). However, resource availability alone does not guarantee the capability to meet the needs of disadvantaged groups in STEM learning spaces. Thus, there is a need for policy to establish standards to make science museums both more accessible and culturally aware to effectively serve their purposes of public learning and engagement. We recommend that the PHMC requires museums to form diversity and inclusion committees to collect and implement community input about museum content and establishes a requirement for exhibit information to be available in multiple languages to increase visitor diversity and improve public learning outcomes.","PeriodicalId":222224,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Science Policy & Governance","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121631936","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The use of natural gas in heating and cooking negatively impacts environmental and human health. As government investments in clean energy production continue to increase, replacing natural gas appliances with electric alternatives is imperative to both reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect public health. As a large US city with robust emissions reduction goals, Philadelphia, PA must significantly reduce natural gas use in buildings. However, many states, including PA, have advanced legislation that preemptively restricts municipalities from banning natural gas use. Using Philadelphia as a case study, we propose policy options, including electric appliance rebates, electrification incentives, and building efficiency standards, that US municipalities can pursue to circumvent state preemption laws in electrifying new construction, significantly reducing natural gas demand, and advancing their net-zero emissions goals.
{"title":"Overcoming State-Level Preemption to Electrify New Buildings: a Philadelphia Case Study","authors":"Maura Gibbs, Zakaria Hsain, Erin K. Reagan, Shannon Wolfman, Anne-Marie Zaccarin","doi":"10.38126/jspg210104","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.38126/jspg210104","url":null,"abstract":"The use of natural gas in heating and cooking negatively impacts environmental and human health. As government investments in clean energy production continue to increase, replacing natural gas appliances with electric alternatives is imperative to both reduce greenhouse gas emissions and protect public health. As a large US city with robust emissions reduction goals, Philadelphia, PA must significantly reduce natural gas use in buildings. However, many states, including PA, have advanced legislation that preemptively restricts municipalities from banning natural gas use. Using Philadelphia as a case study, we propose policy options, including electric appliance rebates, electrification incentives, and building efficiency standards, that US municipalities can pursue to circumvent state preemption laws in electrifying new construction, significantly reducing natural gas demand, and advancing their net-zero emissions goals.","PeriodicalId":222224,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Science Policy & Governance","volume":"257 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115794493","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Lauren Hutnik, Ashley Zimmermann, Lauren Naliboff, K. Brandi
The Hyde Amendment (Hyde) hinders abortion access to people who can become pregnant (we will refer to this cohort henceforth as “women” and recognize that not all people who can become pregnant identify as such) whose health insurance is funded by the federal government. In the forty-five years since its inception, the Hyde Amendment has disproportionately affected marginalized women. The conservative movement has augmented disparities in healthcare by passing incremental laws to restrict abortion access, including but not limited to, gestational age and specific procedure limitations, waiting periods, parental consent, and Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP) laws. With Roe V. Wade overturned with the Dobbs V. Jackson ruling (Dobbs), access to abortion is more restricted than it has been in the past 50 years. Eight states have completely banned abortion and many other states offer very limited exceptions to the ban. Now, more than ever, it is essential that funding is not a barrier to care in the states that continue to protect abortion rights. Our first recommendation calls for states to be held accountable to the minimal federal requirements set forth by Hyde and create a confidential forum for women to report informal barriers to care. Furthermore, we endorse the passing of the Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance Act (EACH Act), which would permanently end the renewal of Hyde. Our final recommendation calls on the government to create legislation that permanently institutes national mandatory guidelines for emergency obstetric care. These steps could counteract the increasingly restrictive encroachment on abortion rights.
{"title":"Hyde and Seek: Searching for Solutions to The Hyde Amendment’s Financial Barriers to Abortion","authors":"Lauren Hutnik, Ashley Zimmermann, Lauren Naliboff, K. Brandi","doi":"10.38126/jspg210105","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.38126/jspg210105","url":null,"abstract":"The Hyde Amendment (Hyde) hinders abortion access to people who can become pregnant (we will refer to this cohort henceforth as “women” and recognize that not all people who can become pregnant identify as such) whose health insurance is funded by the federal government. In the forty-five years since its inception, the Hyde Amendment has disproportionately affected marginalized women. The conservative movement has augmented disparities in healthcare by passing incremental laws to restrict abortion access, including but not limited to, gestational age and specific procedure limitations, waiting periods, parental consent, and Targeted Regulation of Abortion Providers (TRAP) laws. With Roe V. Wade overturned with the Dobbs V. Jackson ruling (Dobbs), access to abortion is more restricted than it has been in the past 50 years. Eight states have completely banned abortion and many other states offer very limited exceptions to the ban. Now, more than ever, it is essential that funding is not a barrier to care in the states that continue to protect abortion rights. Our first recommendation calls for states to be held accountable to the minimal federal requirements set forth by Hyde and create a confidential forum for women to report informal barriers to care. Furthermore, we endorse the passing of the Equal Access to Abortion Coverage in Health Insurance Act (EACH Act), which would permanently end the renewal of Hyde. Our final recommendation calls on the government to create legislation that permanently institutes national mandatory guidelines for emergency obstetric care. These steps could counteract the increasingly restrictive encroachment on abortion rights.","PeriodicalId":222224,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Science Policy & Governance","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132647846","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The acceleration of COVID-19 testing platforms and vaccine development has demonstrated the possibility of expediting research for similar biomedical breakthroughs. However, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) lacks a framework to regularly sustain this type of research. A new federal agency, the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H), offers a unique opportunity to capitalize on the lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic and drive federal investment into high-risk, high-reward biomedical research. ARPA-H will mirror the flat bureaucratic structure of the successful Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) through the employment of independent project managers. ARPA-H is also unique in how it centers equity in the agency's core mission. These unique traits could enable the agency to fill the gaps in current biomedical research under the NIH. Nonetheless, ARPA-H’s implementation is not without challenges: its incorporation within the NIH has raised concerns regarding its ability to specialize in high-risk research and the diversion of funding away from the rest of the NIH. These worries can be mitigated through the separation of ARPA-H and the NIH. Successful implementation of the ARPA-H framework would supplement current NIH work, diversify the US federal research strategy, accelerate promising breakthroughs, promote equity in health, and transform the nature of biomedical research in the US.
{"title":"ARPA-H: Risky or Revolutionary? The Challenges and Opportunities of Biden’s New Biomedical Research Agency","authors":"Soumya Somani","doi":"10.38126/jspg210107","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.38126/jspg210107","url":null,"abstract":"The acceleration of COVID-19 testing platforms and vaccine development has demonstrated the possibility of expediting research for similar biomedical breakthroughs. However, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) lacks a framework to regularly sustain this type of research. A new federal agency, the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health (ARPA-H), offers a unique opportunity to capitalize on the lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic and drive federal investment into high-risk, high-reward biomedical research. ARPA-H will mirror the flat bureaucratic structure of the successful Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) through the employment of independent project managers. ARPA-H is also unique in how it centers equity in the agency's core mission. These unique traits could enable the agency to fill the gaps in current biomedical research under the NIH. Nonetheless, ARPA-H’s implementation is not without challenges: its incorporation within the NIH has raised concerns regarding its ability to specialize in high-risk research and the diversion of funding away from the rest of the NIH. These worries can be mitigated through the separation of ARPA-H and the NIH. Successful implementation of the ARPA-H framework would supplement current NIH work, diversify the US federal research strategy, accelerate promising breakthroughs, promote equity in health, and transform the nature of biomedical research in the US.","PeriodicalId":222224,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Science Policy & Governance","volume":"63 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"121282656","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：