Preview Workflow

Viewing: PA 552 / : Science and Technology Policy

Last approved: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 20:59:40 GMT

Last edit: Thu, 29 Nov 2018 20:59:34 GMT

Catalog Pages referencing this course
Change Type
Major
PA (Public Administration)
552
032693
Dual-Level Course
No
Cross-listed Course
No
Science and Technology Policy
Science and Technology Policy
College of Humanities and Social Sciences
Political Science (16PS)
Term Offering
Spring Only
Offered Alternate Even Years
Spring 2019
Previously taught as Special Topics?
Yes
2
 
Course Prefix/NumberSemester/Term OfferedEnrollment
PA 598Spring 20178
PA 598Spring 20143
Course Delivery
Face-to-Face (On Campus)

Grading Method
Letter Grade Only
3
16
Contact Hours
(Per Week)
Component TypeContact Hours
Lecture3
Course Attribute(s)


If your course includes any of the following competencies, check all that apply.
University Competencies

Course Is Repeatable for Credit
No
 
 
Jennifer Kuzma
Professor
Graduate Faculty

Open when course_delivery = campus OR course_delivery = blended OR course_delivery = flip
Enrollment ComponentPer SemesterPer SectionMultiple Sections?Comments
Lecture2222NoN/A
Open when course_delivery = distance OR course_delivery = online OR course_delivery = remote

Prerequisite: Graduate Standing or PBS Status
Is the course required or an elective for a Curriculum?
No
This course explores multiple methodologies and disciplinary perspectives to examine the public policies involving or affected by science and technology (S&T). Course themes include the history and evolution of S&T policy, current national and international S&T policy systems and the interactions and conflicts within and surrounding them, and responsible governance of S&T.

This course has been taught as a special topics course for a number of years. This class connects the public policy aspect of the MPA degree with the STEM focus on campus. 


No

Is this a GEP Course?
GEP Categories

Humanities Open when gep_category = HUM
Each course in the Humanities category of the General Education Program will provide instruction and guidance that help students to:
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Mathematical Sciences Open when gep_category = MATH
Each course in the Mathematial Sciences category of the General Education Program will provide instruction and guidance that help students to:
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Natural Sciences Open when gep_category = NATSCI
Each course in the Natural Sciences category of the General Education Program will provide instruction and guidance that help students to:
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Social Sciences Open when gep_category = SOCSCI
Each course in the Social Sciences category of the General Education Program will provide instruction and guidance that help students to:
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Interdisciplinary Perspectives Open when gep_category = INTERDISC
Each course in the Interdisciplinary Perspectives category of the General Education Program will provide instruction and guidance that help students to:
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Visual & Performing Arts Open when gep_category = VPA
Each course in the Visual and Performing Arts category of the General Education Program will provide instruction and guidance that help students to:
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Health and Exercise Studies Open when gep_category = HES
Each course in the Health and Exercise Studies category of the General Education Program will provide instruction and guidance that help students to:
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
&
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Global Knowledge Open when gep_category = GLOBAL
Each course in the Global Knowledge category of the General Education Program will provide instruction and guidance that help students to achieve objective #1 plus at least one of objectives 2, 3, and 4:
 
 

 
 

 
Please complete at least 1 of the following student objectives.
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

US Diversity Open when gep_category = USDIV
Each course in the US Diversity category of the General Education Program will provide instruction and guidance that help students to achieve at least 2 of the following objectives:
Please complete at least 2 of the following student objectives.
 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

 
 

Requisites and Scheduling
 
a. If seats are restricted, describe the restrictions being applied.
 

 
b. Is this restriction listed in the course catalog description for the course?
 

 
List all course pre-requisites, co-requisites, and restrictive statements (ex: Jr standing; Chemistry majors only). If none, state none.
 

 
List any discipline specific background or skills that a student is expected to have prior to taking this course. If none, state none. (ex: ability to analyze historical text; prepare a lesson plan)
 

Additional Information
Complete the following 3 questions or attach a syllabus that includes this information. If a 400-level or dual level course, a syllabus is required.
 
Title and author of any required text or publications.
 

 
Major topics to be covered and required readings including laboratory and studio topics.
 

 
List any required field trips, out of class activities, and/or guest speakers.
 

This course has been part of Dr. Kuzma's regular teaching schedule since she joined the NC State faculty. It is currently being offered every other year. It has been taught as a special topics course pending the faculty's decision to make the change permanent. As such, no new resources will be needed.

  • To learn about historical approaches to science and technology (S&T) policy, relationships among organizations and stakeholders, and current issues in S&T policy.

  • To develop skills in critiquing literature on S&T in society, identifying problems in S&T policy, and in researching methods for S&T policy questions.

  • To understand and implement steps in qualitative policy analysis as related to S&T.

  • To explore how S&T policy is developed and implemented in domestic and international contexts.

  • To appreciate the diversity of perspectives on S&T policy issues, reflecting various disciplines, cultures, affiliations, and socioeconomic situations.

  • To understand the interplay between politics and S&T and how stakeholders in the U.S. and globally drive S&T and manage or benefit from their effects.


Student Learning Outcomes

By the end of the course, students will be able to:



  • Apply qualitative methods to analyze public policies related to S&T;

  • Create policy briefs and analyses that draw upon policy analysis frameworks;

  • Evaluate and critique arguments within and about S&T policy;

  • Explain the different actors and institutions within S&T policy in the U.S. and internationally;

  • Examine and analyze a diversity of perspectives on S&T policy reflecting various disciplines, cultures, affiliations, and socioeconomic situations; and,

  • Describe historical approaches to S&T policy and the interplay between science, values, and politics.


Evaluation MethodWeighting/Points for EachDetails
Discussion10%Full and small group discussion.
Written Assignment10%Reading reflections.
Short Paper20%Individual policy briefs.
Written Assignment10%Individual critical and constructive reviews.
Project15%Draft group paper.
Project35%Group short paper outline and final draft.
TopicTime Devoted to Each TopicActivity
Introductions Science and Technology Policy – The Landscape and Concepts3 hrRead:

a) Stine, D. (2009) Science and Technology Policymaking: A Primer. Congressional Research Service, Washington, DC.

b) Pielke, R. (2007) The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics. Cambridge Press: Cambridge, UK. Chapters 1 to 4. Pp. 1-53

c) Funtowicz, Silvio and Jerry Ravetz (2008). "Post-Normal Science." In: Encyclopedia of Earth. Eds. Cutler J. Cleveland (Washington, D.C.: Environmental Information Coalition, National Council for Science and the Environment).
http://www.eoearth.org/article/Post-Normal_Science
U.S. Federal Government: S&T Budget, Agencies, & Operation Climates for S&T3 hr1ST REFLECTION/QUESTION SET DUE

Read:
a) AAAS Report XXXVII R&D FY 2013 Budget (2012). Chapters 1-3 Pp. 5-34. http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/rdreport2013/

b) NSF Science and Engineering Indicators 2012. (2012) Chapter 4 “Research and Development: National Trends and International Linkages” pp 4-1 to 4-58. SKIM, looking at tables/figures primarily.
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/seind12/c4/c4i.htm

c) Crow, and Tucker. “The American Research University as America’s de facto Science Policy”, Science and Public Policy 28 (1): 1-9 (1999)
http://www.cspo.org/products/articles/researchuniversity.pdf

d) Press and Washburn. “The Kept University,” AAAS Yearbook (2001). http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/yrbk01.htm
S&T Policy Research and Analysis3 hr2ND REFLECTION/QUESTION SET DUE

Read:
a) Bardach, E. A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The 8-fold path to more effective problem solving pp. xiii-46 (2000).

b) Morgan, and Henrion. Uncertainty : A Guide to Dealing with Uncertainty in Quantitative Risk and Policy Analysis Chapter 3. pp. 16-45 (1990).

c) Varvasovszky, Z. and R. Brugha (2000) How to do a stakeholder analysis . Health Policy and Planning 15: 338-345.
http://heapol.oxfordjournals.org/content/15/3/338.full.pdf

d) Chapter 4 , 111-121 Making Hard Decisions. R.T. Clemen, and T. Reilly. Duxbury Thomson Learning (2001)

Skim below as examples of briefs and analyses—look for your own examples too.
The content of these “readings” will not be specifically discussed (so no need to read in detail) but the type of document and methods will.

f) Policy brief—statement of problem, see AAAS policy briefs http://www.aaas.org/spp/cstc/briefs/accesstodata/index.shtml

g) Policy brief—in between just a problem statement and analysis
http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/106153.pdf

h) Qualitative policy analysis example—
Alic, Morey, Rubin, eds. Pew Center for Global Climate Change. “U.S. Technology and Innovation Policies: Lessons for Climate Change,” 2003.
http://www.c2es.org/publications/us-technology-and-innovation-policies-climate-change
S&T Policy and the Public – Engagement, Participation3 hr3RD REFLECTION/QUESTION SET DUE

Read:
a) Guston, D. “Forget politicizing science. Let’s democratize science!” Issues in Science and Technology Fall 2004, http://www.issues.org/21.1/p_guston.html

b) Jasanoff, S. (2003) Technolgies of Humility: Citizen Participation in Governing Science.Minerva 41: 223-244.
http://sciencepolicy.colorado.edu/students/envs_5100/jasanoff2003.pdf

c) Rowe and Frewer “Public Participation Methods: A Framework for Evaluation,” Science, Technology & Human Values, Vol. 25, No. 1, 3-29 (2000)

d) Daniel Lee Kleinman, Jason A. Delborne and Ashley A. Anderson (2011) Engaging citizens: The high cost of citizen participation in high technology. Public Understanding of Science 20(2) (2011) 221–240

e) NSF Science and Engineering Indicators 2012. (2012) Chapter 3. Science and Engineering Labor Force. Pp 3-1 to 3-65 (skim only, focusing on tables/figures)

f) Handelsman, J. et al. ”More Women in Science” Science 309:1190-1191 (2005)

g) Barres, B. “Does Gender Matter,” Nature 442: 133-136 (2006)

h) Sismondo, Sergio (2010) Feminist Epistemologies of Science. In: An Introduction to Science and Technology Studies. Chap. 7, pp 72- 80, Wiley-Blackwell, Sussex, UK
Technology Policy – Innovation, Productivity, Development, & Social Good3 hr4TH REFLECTION/QUESTION SET DUE

Read:
a) NRC. Rising Above the Gathering Storm, Revisited: Rapidly approaching Category 5: Condensed Version

b) Sarewitz, D. Frontiers of Illusion. “End of the Age of Physics”, “Myth of Infinite Benefit” Chapters 1&2 pp. 1-29. (1996).

c) Sarewitz, D. Frontiers of Illusion. “Science, Technology and the Marketplace,” Chapter 7 pp. 117-140 (1996).

d) Judi Wangalwa Wakhungu, “U.S. Science and Technology Policies from the Vantage Point of the DevelopingWorld,” AAAS Yearbook (2003)

e) Hassan, M. (2008). Worlds Apart Together. Nature, October 30, supp. 6-8.

f) Ahrens, J. (2005). Building Science, Technology, and Innovation Policies. Policy Brief. Sci.Dev.Net. http://www.scidev.net/en/science-and-innovation-policy/policy-briefs/building-science- technology-and-innovation-policie.html

g) Bozeman & Sarewitz (2011). Public Value Mapping (PVM) and Science Policy Evaluation. Minerva 49: 1-23.

Optional
h) OSTP (2008). The Science of Science Policy: A Federal Research Roadmap. November 2008.
Intellectual Property: Polices & Impacts3 hrRead:
a) Hemphill, T. (2008) US Patent Policy: Crafting a 21st Century National Blueprint for Global Competitiveness. Knowledge Technology in Society 21(2): 83-96

b) Fox, J. (2011) America Invents Act Receives Cautious Welcome. Nature Biotechnology 29: 953-954.

c) Clemente Forero-Pineda (2006) The impact of stronger intellectual property rights on science and technology in developing countries. Research Policy 35: 808–82

d) Cimoli et al. (2011). Innovation, technical change and patents in the development process: A long term view. LEM Working Paper Series 2011/06

e) Sampat and Lichtenberg (2011). What are the respective roles of the public and private sectors in pharmaceutical innovation? Health Affairs 30:332-339.
Science and Technology in Regulatory Policy 3 hr5th REFLECTION/QUESTION SET DUE

Read:
a) Pielke, R. (2007) The Honest Broker: Making Sense of Science in Policy and Politics. Cambridge Press: Cambridge, UK. Chapter 5. Pp. 54-75

b) Wiener, J.B. The regulation of technology, and the technology of regulation. Technology in Society 26: 483-500 (2004).

c) Sarewitz, D. Frontiers of Illusion. “Myth of Authoritativeness” Chapter 5 pp. 71-96. (1996).

d) Franklin, Pamela M. (2006) EPA’s Drinking Water Standards and the Shaping of Sound Science In: Guston H. D. & Sarewitz D. (eds.) Shaping Science and Technology Policy: The Next Generation of Research. Chap. 5 pp 102-123. The University of Wisconsin Press, Wisconsin, USA

e) Stirling, A. Risk, precaution and science: towards a more constructive policy debate. EMBO Reports 8(4):309- 315. (2007)

f) United States House of Representatives Committee On Government Reform — Minority Staff Special Investigations Division “Politics And Science In The Bush Administration,” August 2003 read preface, skim rest

g) OMB Watch (2007) Background on rule-making. (5pp)
GEOs in the US – Regulation & Uncertainty3 hr6TH REFLECTION/QUESTION SET DUE

Read:
a) McHughen, A. and Smyth, S. (2007). US regulatory system for genetically modified [genetically modified organism (GMO), rDNA or transgenic] crop cultivars Plant Biotechnology Journal 5: (11pp.)

b) Myhr, A. I. (2010). The Challenge of Scientific Uncertainty and Disunity in Risk Assessment and Management of GM Crops. Environmental Values 19: 7–31. (24pp)

c) Wield, D. et al. (2010) Issues in the Political Economy of Agricultural Biotechnology Journal of Agrarian Change, Vol. 10 No. 3, 342–366. (25 pp)

d) H. Charles J. Godfray, et al. (2010) Food Security: The Challenge of Feeding 9 Billion People. Science 327, 812-818 (6pp)

e) Potrykus, I. (2010) Regulation must be revolutionized. NATURE
Ecology and Biodiversity – Valuation and Connections to Human Well-being, International Agreements/Treaties and Policy Options3 hrGROUP OUTLINE PAPER DUE

Read:
a) Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems & Human Well-being: A Framework for Assessment. Chapter 6, Concepts of Ecosystem Value and Valuation Approaches. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC (2003).

b) Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems & Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis World Resources Institute, Washington, DC (2005) pp 1-16 only (16-85 optional)

c) Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. Ecosystems & Human Well-being: Volume 3, Policy Responses. Summary: Response Options and Strategies. World Resources Institute, Washington, DC (2005) i-21

d) Costanza, R. The value of ecosystem services: putting the issues in perspective Ecological Economics 25: 67–72 (1998).
National Security and S&T 3 hr7th REFLECTION/QUESTION SET DUE
PEER REVIEWS OF OUTLINE PAPERS DUE

Read:
a) Alibek, K. “Biological Weapons: Past, Present, and Future” Chapter 15 In Firepower in the Lab, Laynew, Beugelsdijk, and Patel Editors. Joseph Henry Press (2001). Pp177-185.

b) NRC. Biotechnology Research in an Age of Terrorism. Pp. 1-44 and 79-106.

c) Ruttan, V. Is War Necessary for Economic Growth?: Military Procurement and Technology Development. Chapter 1 pp 3-20 & Chapter 8 159-190.

d) Sarewitz, D. Frontiers of Illusion. ”Science as a Surrogate for Social Good,” “Toward a New Mythology,” Chapters 8&9, pp. 141-195. (1996).

e) Dusek, Val (2006) Technological Determinism In: Philosophy of Technology – An Introduction. Chap. 6 pp 84 – 104.Blackwell Publishing, Oxford, UK
Student Presentations from Group Policy Analysis Paper3 hrDRAFTS OF FINAL PAPERS DUE
Student Presentations from Group Policy Analysis Paper
Course Review and Synthesis
mlnosbis 10/25/2018:
1) Effective date should be Spring 2019 or later.
2) Are readings available on Moodle?

cohen (10/26/2018); I'd like to take this course! On the syllabus I did not see the policy on late assignments. (See the Graduate Course Syllabus Checklist at https://grad.ncsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/grad-syllabus-checklist.pdf.)

ABGS Reviewer Comments 11/5/2018:
-No concerns.
bmcdona (Tue, 30 Oct 2018 01:35:28 GMT): Response to reviewer comments: 1) The effective date has been adjusted to Spring 2019 2) Under the "readings" section, it states that Moodle will be used to post course readings. 3) A new subsection under "policies" was added to reflect the course policy on late assignments.
Key: 25663