Growing Pains: Evolution of OTA’s Process of Technology Assessment

  • Peter D. Blair
Part of the Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy book series (STIPOL)


For any given OTA assessment a great deal of effort went into defining the detailed scope of the work. Since the agency often received more requests than it could accommodate, for prospective topics requested by a congressional committee, the OTA stafi’often consulted with other committees of jurisdiction and interest to be as broadly responsive as possible and to help establish priorities fairly. Formal proposals for assessments were considered by TAB and, if approved, an assessment commenced with funds drawn from OTA’s annual appropriation. Key elements of each OTA assessment included a comprehensive advisory panel of technical experts and relevant stakeholders; a core OTA project team including an experienced project director; contractors selected to support major analytical tasks; in-house research efforts by the project team; workshops convened with additional experts and stakeholders to obtain the most current and accurate information possible; extensive external peer review of draft reports; and dissemination of reports through congressional hearings, briefings, and public release.


Technology Assessment Mass Transit Congressional Hearing Congressional Committee Additional Expert 
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.
    Emilio Q. Daddario, “Technology Assessment—A Legislative View,” The George Washington Law Review, Vol. 36, No. 5, July, 1968, pp.1044–1059, andGoogle Scholar
  2. Bruce L.R. Smith and Jeffrey K. Stine, “Technical Advice for Congress: Past Trends and Present Obstacles” in Morgan and Peha (eds), Chapter 2, 2003, pp. 23–52.Google Scholar
  3. 2.
    Office of Technology Assessment, Energy, the Economy, and Mass Transit, NTIS order #PB-250624, October, 1975 (subsequent volumes issued in 1976).Google Scholar
  4. 3.
    Office of Technology Assessment, Nuclear Proliferation and Safeguards, NTIS order #PB-275843, 1977Google Scholar
  5. 4.
    Office of Technology Assessment, Application of Solar Technology to Today’s Energy Needs, NTIS order #PB-283770, 1978.Google Scholar
  6. 5.
    Office of Technology Assessment, OTA Legacy, CD-ROM Collection (Vols 1–5), GPO Stock No. 052–003-01457–2, Washington, DC: U.S. Govt. Printing Office, 1996 (available also in full text online at Scholar
  7. 6.
    Discussed in more detail in Office of Technology Assessment. “What OTA Is, What OTA Does, How OTA Works,” 1975 (issued annually with each new U.S. Congress from 1974–1995) and inGoogle Scholar
  8. Peter D. Blair, “Scientific Advice for Policy in the United States: Lessons from the National Academies and the former Congressional Office of Technology Assessment,” in Justus Lentsch and Peter Weingart (eds), Between Science and Politics — Quality Control in the Advisory Process, London: Cambridge University Press, 2011, pp. 297–333.Google Scholar
  9. 8.
    Roger C. Herdman and James E. Jensen, “The OTA Story: The Agency Perspective,” Technological Forecasting & Social Change, Vol. 54, Nos. 2–3, 1997 pp. 131–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Office of Technology Assessment, Changing by Degrees: Steps to Reduce Greenhouse Gases, OTA-O-482, NTIS order #PB91–163428, 1991.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Office of Technology Assessment, Preparing for an Uncertain Climate, Vols. I and II, OTA-O-567, GPO stock #052–003-01356–8 (NTIS order #PB94–13464o) and OTA-O-568, GPO stock #052–003-01357–6 (NTIS order #PB94–134657), 1993.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Peter D. Blair 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter D. Blair

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations