CSPO Conversations

Nanotechnology policy discussions will soon enter a third decade. The initial generation focused on setting research priorities, investigating environmental impact, and contemplating societal implications even while improving understanding of the fundamental properties of nanomaterials. As nanotechnology applications increase in number and mature, including biomedical and infrastructural contexts, how should the science policy discussion evolve? This panel will remark on lessons learned, avenues to explore, and possible means forward.

Cultivating public discourse and enlarging policy discussions have been central to our work at ASU’s Consortium for Science, Policy & Outcomes (CSPO). As the next big international conference on climate change begins this fall in Paris, CSPO is pleased to host a dialog on ways to include perspectives that have not traditionally been part of the climate conversation. A diversity of voices is essential for confronting a problem as enormous as global climate change: engaging with differing perspectives helps discover innovative approaches and gains the support of citizens impacted by climate policies—policies that have often been plagued by divisiveness and gridlock. In discussing models for citizen engagement, including the recent World Wide Views deliberations on climate and energy, and by hearing from viewpoints that are frequently missing in climate debates, this CSPO Conversations event will inform and enrich our approach to climate change.

From Botox to bionic limbs, the human body is more “upgradeable” than ever. But how much of it can we alter and still be human? What do we gain or lose in the process? Haunting and humorous, poignant and political, Fixed rethinks “disability” and “normalcy” by exploring technologies that promise to change our bodies and minds forever. Since its release a little over one year ago, Fixed has screened in film festivals around the world and as a keynote at 7 academic and professional conferences. Most recently the United Nations licensed the film for their work on the Convention for the Rights of People with Disabilities.

Climate policy is broken. A huge part of the problem is the way climate change and the policies intended to address it are framed and communicated. Pragmatic and tangible options for tackling climate change are often overlooked in a contentious debate focused on climate change deniers, symbolic actions like opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline, and overheated rhetoric about a coming climate apocalypse. This tired narrative seems to have accomplished little beyond breeding cynicism and apathy across a broad swath of the global public. How do we enlarge and enrich this conversation, and take pragmatic steps toward a positive future? Can we connect climate policy and other environmental concerns to actions that provide near-term benefits for society while enhancing our capacity to deal with climate change in the long run?

Science is a human endeavor, often conducted by teams of researchers. The human interactions between team members can mean some projects flourish or exceed their goals while other studies flounder or crumble. In a world with limited resources to support complex or high-stakes scientific research, understanding effective team structures can inform science policy and research priority decisions. This panel will bring their experience from different scientific research sectors and ideas on how scientists can build productive teams and avoid dysfunctional collaborations.

As technology becomes more complex and pervasive in society, its potential impact on urban environments and citizens’ day-to-day lives grows. Ensuring that the publics have the opportunity to understand, respond to, and influence future directions related to innovation is therefore imperative for upholding a truly democratic society. In an effort to create a more inclusive, sustainable, and integrated public engagement and deliberation experiences, researchers at the Center for Nanotechnology in Society at Arizona State University (CNS-ASU) developed the Futurescape City Tours (FCTs).  Please join us for a photographic and experiential journey through the citizen’s eye and a conversation among participants, designers, facilitators, and scientists of the FCT in Washington DC.

It’s an issue that has been repeated in countless reports and news stories: the United States is facing a looming shortage of scientists, technologists, engineers, and mathematicians—a STEM crisis, that is. It’s time for a reasoned, informed dialogue about STEM literacy in the United States, without the political hysterics and contrived logic. Join CSPO co-director Dan Sarewitz and Robert N. Charette, author of the recent IEEE Spectrum article, “The STEM Crisis Is a Myth,” for an in-depth look at this issue and the potential pitfalls and solutions surrounding it.

President Eisenhower’s address is mainly remembered for his warning of the perils of a “military-industrial complex.” Less widely known, but no less important was his caution, a few sentences later, about “the danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.” This seminar explored the historical context and current relevance of Eisenhower’s worries about a “scientific-technological elite.” CSPO faculty members and authors Dan Sarewitz and G. Pascal Zachary spoke, along with author and journalist Daniel S. Greenberg and journalist and former science analyst for the GAO William Lanouette. The panel was moderated by Steve Lagerfeld, editor of The Wilson Quarterly.