Impacts for whom? Assessing inequalities in NSF-funded broader impacts using the Inclusion-Immediacy Criterion

Author:

Woodson Thomas1ORCID,Boutilier Sophia2

Affiliation:

1. Department of Technology and Society, Stony Brook University, 1412 Computer Science, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA

2. Department of Sociology, N404 Social and Behavioral Sciences Building, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 11794, USA

Abstract

Abstract Broader impacts (BI) policies generate debate on the purpose of science, measuring the impact of research, and is an important topic for the science policy community. However, BI policies often fail to determine if R&D funding helps marginalized communities. This paper introduces a new framework, the Inclusion-Immediacy Criterion, that assesses who benefits from research impacts as divided into three groups: (1) advantaged groups; (2) the general population; and (3) marginalized groups. The study analyzes National Science Foundation (NSF) project outcome reports and finds that advantaged groups are the most likely to benefit from NSF-funded research. The study also shows that certain areas of NSF research, such as Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences, more efficiently generate impacts for marginalized groups compared to other directorates. This paper further argues that persistent inequalities in BIs limit the potential of R&D to increase prosperity and well-being, two of NSF’s mandated goals.

Funder

Directorate for Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences

Publisher

Oxford University Press (OUP)

Subject

Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law,Public Administration,Geography, Planning and Development

Reference49 articles.

1. The Role of Governance in Mobile Phones for Inclusive Human Development in Sub-Saharan Africa;Asongu;Technovation,2016

2. Public Value Science;Bozeman;Issues in Science and Technology,2020

3. Broad Impacts and Narrow Perspectives: Passing the Buck on Science and Social Impacts;Bozeman;Social Epistemology,2009

4. Implementation of the National Science Foundation’s “Broader Impacts”: Efficiency Considerations and Alternative Approaches;Burggren;Social Epistemology,2009

5. Science: The Endless Frontier;Bush;Washington: National Science Foundation–EUA,1945

Cited by 10 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3