CSPO Conversations

Climate change is among the world’s most important problems, and solutions based on greenhouse gas emission cuts or adapting to a new climate remain elusive. One set of proposals receiving increasing attention among scientists and policymakers is “solar geoengineering” (also known as solar radiation modification), which would reflect a small portion of incoming sunlight to reduce climate change. Evidence indicates that this could be effective, inexpensive, and technologically feasible, but it also poses environmental risks and social challenges. Governance will thus be crucial.

In this CSPO Conversation, Jesse Reynolds will draw on his just-released book, The Governance of Solar Geoengineering: Managing Climate Change in the Anthropocene (Cambridge University Press), to show how solar geoengineering is, could, and should be governed. He will focus on the most common concern: solar geoengineering could undermine already insufficient efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Can policies be crafted in which solar geoengineering could actually increase emissions cuts?

Social science research—spanning disciplines as diverse as economics, anthropology, political science, and psychology—illuminates the inner workings of human behavior and society. How can this research be effectively applied to discover solutions to some of society’s most complex and formidable problems? And what role can universities play in transforming the social sciences into drivers of societal improvement?

These questions are at the heart of “Retrofitting Social Science for the Practical & Moral,” Kenneth Prewitt’s feature article in the latest edition of Issues in Science and Technology. Prewitt, a professor at Columbia University and former director of the US Census Bureau, will discuss his article at the launch event for the Fall 2019 Issues on November 20 in Washington, DC. He’ll be joined by Mary Ellen O’Connell (National Academies), Jed Herrmann (Results for America), and Toby Smith (Association for American Universities) in a wide-ranging exploration of how this research can better serve society.

The scientific uncertainties and contested values surrounding geoengineering research, particularly for a class of methods called solar radiation management (SRM), make it a prime issue for which public deliberation can provide valuable input. With SRM research advancing to the field-research phase, the Consortium for Science, Policy & Outcomes (CSPO), with funding support from the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation, designed a set of public deliberations to explore questions of trust, transparency, consent, safety, collaboration, and other issues of importance related to SRM research.

CSPO convened groups of diverse citizens in two day-long forums to discuss SRM research in September 2018. The research team is now hosting a results launch event to share the deliberation results with SRM experts and stakeholders. Following a presentation of the high-level findings, a panel of experts will offer their reactions to the results report. All event participants will then have the opportunity to receive a copy of the final results report and ask additional questions.

Current headlines tell us there is a “war on science,” focused particularly keeping scientists of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) closely in check by those who want to contain federal environmental policies.  But the history of science in the EPA tells a more complicated story of how science, in becoming central to the identity of federal bureaucracies, has long been evolving under a variety of pressures to maintain its status as a constitutive element of the agency’s legitimacy.

In this CSPO Conversations breakfast seminar, David Demortain (INRA) will discuss his forthcoming book, The Science of Bureaucracy. Risk Decision-Making and the US Environmental Protection Agency, and how the EPA has shaped the science of risk-based decision-making since its inception.

Why do plans for keeping global temperatures below 1.5°C depend on the deployment of this hypothetical carbon removal and storage technology? Large-scale carbon capture has become an implicit, but critical, component of many climate proposals. No less an authority than the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change relies on unproven, uncertain carbon dioxide removal technologies to meet its ambitious targets.

Join Northeastern University professor Matthew Nisbet and the Institute for Carbon Removal Law & Policy for a discussion on a report in preparation, The Carbon Removal Debate: Asking Critical Questions about Climate Change Futures. The report works towards a common climate justice framework that can inform how various stakeholders think about, talk about, and act on this potentially transformative—but as yet still unproven—technology.

This workshop will first highlight the issue of social media and AI cases that have attempted to manipulate people and describe various influence campaigns through broadcast or microtargeting strategies. Workshop participants will then consider how governments and organizations are responding to the misuse of online platforms, and evaluate various ways in which AI-based social media might be regulated internationally. The responsibility of social media platform providers will also be brought into the discussion, as algorithms can detect bot-generated and dispersed information. Finally, strategies for preventing and counter-attacking disinformation campaigns will be considered in cases and contexts where such messaging becomes a destabilizing force in communications. Emerging areas of research, such as neuromorphic computing, will be discussed in the context of cyberwarfare and espionage.

Launch event for the Winter 2019 Issues in Science and Technology.

Systemic weaknesses within the US system of higher education and workforce training in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) have been well documented for decades. From overspecialization and elitism to sexual harassment and skewed incentives, these problems continue to sap the vitality and social value of the STEM enterprise—threatening the United States’ global leadership in STEM education.

How can these challenges be addressed? In a series of clear-eyed essays in the Winter 2019 Issues in Science and Technology, Lida Beninson, Frazier Benya, Tom Rudin, and Layne Scherer present compelling pathways toward sustainable, systemic, inclusive, institutional change.

What are the implications of this history for ongoing efforts to deal with Alzheimer’s disease?  What does it say about investments in the study of health services, and innovations in health care delivery? As Congress provides new money to fund research, what lessons can help guide the next generation of public investments?

To celebrate the publication of the Fall 2018 Issues in Science and Technology, ASU professor Robert Cook-Deegan, author of “Progress Against Alzheimer’s Disease?” and an OTA alum,will talk with Zaven Khachaturian, editor-in-chief of Alzheimer’s & Dementia and former director of the Office of Alzheimer Research at the National Institutes of Health. Join us for a fascinating look at the current state of and future opportunities for Alzheimer’s treatment and care.