How Do You Rate Scientific and Technical Programs for Funding Priorities, Blue Ribbon Panels for Effectiveness?
- PDF / 121,672 Bytes
- 2 Pages / 604.8 x 806.4 pts Page_size
- 64 Downloads / 182 Views
Acid rain Agriculture, food, & nutrition Atmospheric C0 2 increase Atmospheric ozone depletion Augmented science programs at universities Biological initiatives (new) Conventional weapons Energy alternatives
_I __J _K _L _M _N _ 0 P _Q
Energy conservation Health care & medicine Instrumented space exploration Manned space flight program Nuclear weapons Semiconductor development Solid State sciences Space Station Space sciences
R S T U V W X Y
Strategie defense initiative Superconducting super collider Superconductors Synchrotron light sources (new) Technology transfer programs Toxic waste Transportation alternatives Other (speeify)
2. Is the current and near future federal funding of science and technology essentially constrained by a "zero sum" algorithm, i.e., that significant new programs cannot reeeive large increments on top of existing funding? (circle one) Yes No Don't Know 3a. Which of the programs listed in question 1 might command large funding increases without affecting the funding of other science and technology efforts? (Circle as many as needed) A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y 3b. Which of the programs you circled in 3a should reeeive significantly increased funding? (Circle subset of3a) A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y 4. Which of the programs listed in question 1 should reeeive significant funding increases at the expense of other efforts in science and technology? (Circle as many as needed) A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y 5. A future survey will deal with the support of various energy programs in the United States whose program research and supporting technology could take several directions. From your technical perspective, please prioritize the following energy areas according to their relative importance, and therefore funding, over the next ten years. (Use a scale of 1 to 10; 1 = most important, 10 = least important.) Coal utilization Conservation Geothermal Hydroelectric
MRS BULLETIN/SEPTEMBER 1988
Natural gas exploration and recovery Nuclear power—fission Nuclear power—fusion
Oil exploration and recovery Oil shale Solar—all forms
39
"Blue Ribbon" Panels 6. The appointment of blueribbonscientific/technical committees primarily proceeds through bodies such as the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering, the Energy Research Advisory Board, etc. Is this the most appropriate process? (circle one) Yes No Don't Know 7. If not, briefly list up to three defects or drawbacks you have identified in this method.
8. Whether you answered "Yes" or "No" to question 6, can you suggest acceptable alternative procedures for forming such committees? Briefly list up to two.
9. By and large, have the reports of blueribbonpanels resulted in effective implementation of recommendations? (circle one) Yes No Don't Know 10. If not, give some examples of how they may have missed the mark.
Please complete the following Information about yourself: MRS Member E-MRS Member
Yes Yes
No No
U.S. Citizen Live in United States
Yes Yes
No No
Please type
Data Loading...
