Dear Colleagues,
As many of you may know, there have been recent suggestions by Republican members of the U.S. House and Senate to eliminate NSF funding of the entire slate of Social, Behavioral, and Economic ("SBE") sciences---which includes organizational behavior and related disciplinary research in psychology, sociology, and economics.
This is chilling for our field.
I recently testified before Congress on this topic as the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology held a hearing with the goal to educate members about the value to the US taxpayer of the social and behavioral sciences. This kind of hearing sets a tone and provides Congressional members with talking points for later discussions of financial appropriations.
(In case anyone is interested, you can see a webcast of the hearing below. The transcript and written statements will be posted there in about two weeks:
http://science.house.gov/hearing/subcommittee-research-and-science-education-hearing-social-bahavioral-and-economic-science
My written and oral statements are online at:
http://apps.olin.wustl.edu/faculty/elfenbeinh/)
The reason for this note is that, after the hearing, I was asked two more questions by the committee chair with a request for responses to be submitted in writing for the record. In preparing my responses, I have two requests for colleagues. The deadline is July 5th, and realistically it would be possible to incorporate anything received by the end of the week.
A. Any suggestions that you might have for me in answering these questions.
B. Brief notes from anyone interested, which I can append to my written responses (no more than a paragraph, please). This is a chance for your input to go into the Congressional record.
Okay, so here are their questions, and these are BIG questions:
1. NSF is essentially the only federal agency that historically does not receive earmarks. It prides itself on the merit-review process which, while not perfect, is currently the best we have. Given its imperfections and the reality that some less than stellar grants are funded in ALL scientific disciplines, how would you recommend that it be improved?
2. In your testimony, you state that "Agencies like the NSF are in the best position to prioritize federal funding for SBE research..." Besides highlighting "transformative" research, how else can NSF prioritize research? Are there other elements that you would suggest focusing on to guide prioritization?
Big picture thoughts and tactical details are equally welcome.
Sincerely,
Hillary Anger Elfenbein