Today it is becoming increasingly more difficult for anyone or even any organization to keep pace with the frontiers of science and technology. Consequently it is becoming even more challenging for Congress to receive useful, relevant, informed, independent, authoritative and timely advice on the science and technology policy dimensions of the issues it faces, but the need is becoming a more frequent plea from the science and technology policy community. Effective science and technology policy advice in the unique policy making environment of the Congress today is perhaps especially complex and the necessary advice is generally not the same as that produced by most other organizations. Creating OTA-like features in existing organizations that would replicate the OTA study process and operate under direct congressional oversight is likely problematic, albeit still possible, in existing congressional organizations such as GAO or CRS, but OTA-like features may also be possible in external organizations such as the NRC, or in reinstating and updating an OTA to current circumstances.


Technology Assessment Technology Policy Timely Advice National Innovation System External Organization 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    “Letter from James Madison to W. T. Barry, August 4, 1822” in Gaillard Hunt (ed.), The Writings of James Madison, 9 vols. New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1900–1910, Vol. 9, pp. 103–109.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    See Charles F. Manski, Public Policy in an Uncertain World. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2013,Google Scholar
  3. M. Granger Morgan, Max Henrion, Mitchell Small. Uncertainty: A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis. London: Cambridge University Press, 1990, orCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Duncan Jr. MacRae and Dale Whittington, Expert Advice for Policy Choice. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press, 1997.Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    See, for example, Sheila Jasanoff, The Fifth Branch. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990., Chapters 10–11.Google Scholar
  6. 5.
    L. R. Bruce Smith, The Advisers: Scientists in the Policy Process. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution, 1992, p. 202.Google Scholar
  7. 6.
    See, as a sequential sampling related to science and technology advice, beginning perhaps with seminal Vannevar Bush report, Science, The Endless Frontier, A Report to the President on a Program for Postwar Scientific Research. Washington, DC: Office of Scientific Research and Development, July 5, 1945) and his subsequent reflection in Vannevar Bush, Science is Not Enough. New York: William Morrow & Co., Inc., 1965 and, going forward,Google Scholar
  8. Spencer Klaw, The New Brahmins: Scientifc Life in America. New York: William Morrow & Co., Inc., 1968,Google Scholar
  9. Paul J. Piccard (ed.) Science and Policy Issues: Lectures in Government and Science. Itasca, IL: EE. Peacock Publishers, Inc., 1969,Google Scholar
  10. Joseph Ben-David, The Scientist’s Role in Society. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1971, Smith (1992), Jasanof (1990),Google Scholar
  11. David M Hart, Forged Consensus: Science, Technology, and Economic Policy in the United States, 1921–1953. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1998, andGoogle Scholar
  12. David C. Mowery and Nathan Rosenberg. “U.S. National Innovation System” in Richard R. Nelson (ed.), National Innovation Systems: A Comparative Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993, and Sigma Xi,Google Scholar
  13. The Scientific Research Society. Vannevar Bush II: Science for the 21st Century, Forum Proceedings, March 2–3, 1995. Research Triangle Park, NC: Sigma Xi, 1995.Google Scholar
  14. 7.
    Such as Granger M. Morgan and John M. Peha (eds) Science and Technology Advice for Congress, Washington, DC: RFF Press, 2003 andGoogle Scholar
  15. Justus Lentsch and Peter Weingart (eds) Between Science and Politics—Quality Control in the Advisory Process, London: Cambridge University Press, 2011.Google Scholar
  16. 8.
    Charles E. Lindblom, The Policy Making Process. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc., 1968, pp. 77–78.Google Scholar
  17. 9.
    Carroll W. Pursell, Jr., “Science and Government Agencies,” in David D. Van Tassel and Michael G. Hall (eds), Science and Society in the United States. Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press, 1966, p. 249.Google Scholar
  18. 10.
    Thomas Jefferson, “Letter to Samuel Kercheval,” July 12, 1816, in Paul L. Ford (ed.), The Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Vol. 10, New York: G.P. Putnam, 1904, p. 4243.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Peter D. Blair 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter D. Blair

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations