AGI's Framework on Addressing Equity in the Geoscience Societies and the Challenge of Defining Success

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Keane ◽  
Susan Sullivan ◽  
Leila Gonzales
Keyword(s):  
Earth Science ◽  
Action Plan ◽  
Critical Component ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Professional Societies ◽  
The Us ◽  
Intimate Knowledge ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The U.S ◽  
Federal Data

<p>The American Geosciences Institute in cooperation with its member societies has developed the Framework for Addressing Racial and Ethnic Equity in Geosciences Professional Societies.  The geoscience societies are a pivotal area to influence the culture of the geosciences, and in response to the events of June 2020, many societies determined they needed to directly act on the issue of equity in the geosciences. Being birthed from a federation of US-centric organizations, the Framework has clear US-aligned approaches and boundaries.  However, the baseline proposed actions are fundamentally universal and meet the goal of the authoring committee to provide a framework from which we hope geoscience organizations of all types would use it to craft their own specific action plan and policies.   A critical component of this framework for the committee was to ensure definable actions were included.   Some of these suggested actions and their intended extensions will be discussed.  Additionally, ongoing conversations among the societies, with the US National Academy of Sciences Board on Earth Science and Resources, and other science organizations have begun to examine what the path forward looks like.   One area that AGI particularly is concerned about is the process of measuring progress.   Understanding and recognizing the impacts of efforts like this is critical to ensure agile responses for success.   But with AGI's intimate knowledge of much of the U.S. federal data, some of the ambiguities and definitional challenges within the US system complicates the ability to directly measure progress and for which further discussion of what success looks like is critically needed.  </p>

A NEW INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM: THE GEODYNAMICS PROJECT

Geophysics ◽  
1974 ◽  
Vol 39 (3) ◽  
pp. 357-357
Keyword(s):  
Earth Science ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Crust And Upper Mantle ◽  
Near Surface ◽  
International Program ◽  
Deep Crust ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Many ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The U.S

The cooperation of members of the SEG could be of value to those involved with one program of the U.S. portion of the International Geodynamics Project—the endeavor to map the layers of the deep crust and upper mantle in areas of geologic interest. The Geodynamics Project, designed to exploit the many opportunities for new insights resulting from recent advances in earth science, is an international program of research on the dynamics and dynamic history of the earth with emphasis on phenomena that affect surface or near‐surface processes and structures. There are 49 countries participating, each with its own program. The development of the U.S. program is in the hands of the U.S. Geodynamics Committee, which was established in the National Academy of Sciences under the Geophysics Research Board with the support of the National Science Foundation. A report with full details of the organization, research objectives, and participants has been published and is available from the National Academy of Sciences.

scholarly journals US Federal Data Policy: An Update on The Federal Data Strategy and The Evidence Act

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy O’Hara
Keyword(s):  
Action Plan ◽  
Population Data ◽  
Federal Agencies ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Data Governance ◽  
The Us ◽  
Data Policy ◽  
The Government ◽  
Data Linkages ◽  
Federal Data

IntroductionThe US federal data landscape is evolving through the implementation of the Foundations for Evidence-Based Policymaking Act of 2018 and the 2020 Action Plan of the Federal Data Strategy (FDS). The Act and Plan seek better data governance; making data accessible and useful for the American public, businesses, and researchers; and improving how the government uses data to make decisions and for program oversight. Objectives and ApproachThis paper provides a brief overview of the Evidence Act, describing what has already been implemented and what is forthcoming and how it involves population data linkages. We will also describe the FDS, using the Five Safes framework to categorize its priorities for federal agencies. ResultsWe explain how the Evidence Act established new roles for Chief Data, Evaluation, and Statistical Officials. We describe efforts to set learning agendas and data inventories in agencies. We point to some successes, such as new repositories for tools and metadata, and progress on forming an advisory committee to explore how the US could build a National Secure Data Service. We tie the FDS action plan to these Evidence Act efforts, showing how agencies and communities of practice are expected to develop over time. We focus on the ten actions that involve shared solutions across government that focus on ethics, privacy, tools and standards. Conclusion / ImplicationsThis paper shares updates on US federal data policy that started with the 2016 Commission for Evidence-based Policymaking, up through the current administration’s efforts to leverage data as a strategic asset. We highlight accomplishments, opportunities, and challenges for federal policy, noting how political will and funding ultimately affect progress.

Climate Geoengineering and the Role of Public Deliberation: A Comment on the us National Academy of Sciences’ Recommendations on Public Participation

Climate Law ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 5 (2-4) ◽  
pp. 252-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
William C. G. Burns ◽  
Jane A. Flegal
Keyword(s):  
Public Participation ◽  
Public Deliberation ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
World Community ◽  
Design Considerations ◽  
The Us ◽  
The World ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Important Design

The feckless response of the world community to the mounting threat of climate change has led to a growing interest in climate geoengineering research. In early 2015, the us National Academy of Sciences released two major reports on the topic. While it is notable that both reports recommended some form of public participation to inform research, this article argues that the vagueness of these recommendations could mean that their implementation might not comport with optimal approaches for public deliberation. We outline some options for public deliberation on climate geoengineering and important design considerations.

ASM and Biological Arms Control

1995 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 262-262
Author(s):  
Kenneth I. Berns
Keyword(s):  
Code Of Ethics ◽  
Biological Weapons ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Government ◽  
Defense Research ◽  
American Society ◽  
American Society For Microbiology ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The U.S

Members of the American Society for Microbiology (ASM) have a considerable history of bringing scientific and technical knowledge to the issue of biological weapons control and being available to serve in advisory roles to the government. ASM's involvement with the biological weapons issue began in the 1940s, when microbiologists served as advisors to the government's Biological Defense Research Program and participated in the Biological Warfare Committee of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences. In 1970, a controversy resulting from the ASM's involvement with this issue abated when the ASM Council approved a statement concerning non-secrecy and free movement in research. Simultaneously, the society affirmed support for President Richard M. Nixon's action to end the U.S.'s offensive biological weapons program. The society's code of ethics, published in 1985, contains two relevant sections that seek to discourage ASM members from participating in biological weapons development.

scholarly journals LNTgate

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 239784731769499 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward J Calabrese
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Biological Effects ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cancer Risk Assessment ◽  
Response Model ◽  
Historical Evidence ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Linear Dose ◽  
The Us ◽  
Academy Of Sciences

This commentary summarizes a spate of recent papers that provide historical evidence that the 1956 recommendation of the US National Academy of Sciences Biological Effects of Atomic Radiation I Genetics Panel to switch from a threshold to a linear dose–response model for risk assessment was an ideologically motivated decision based on deliberate falsification and fabrication of the research record. The recommendation by the Genetics Panel had far-reaching influence, affecting cancer risk assessment, risk communication strategies, community public health, and numerous medical practices in the United States and worldwide. This commentary argues that the toxicology, risk assessment, and regulatory communities examine this issue, addressing how these new historical evaluations affect the history and educational practices of these fields as well as carcinogen regulation.

Material and Financial Hardship and Income-Based Poverty Measures in the USA

2004 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 21-38 ◽  
Author(s):  
KATHLEEN S. SHORT
Keyword(s):  
Longitudinal Survey ◽  
Program Participation ◽  
National Academy Of Sciences ◽  
Poverty Measure ◽  
Single Indicator ◽  
Poverty Measures ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Academy Of Sciences ◽  
The Relationship

Individuals and families may encounter difficulty making ends meet on many dimensions and there are a large number of measures designed to identify this group. In general, there is agreement that all of the approaches capture different pieces of the puzzle, while no single indicator can yield a complete picture. In an attempt to understand this multidimensional aspect of poverty, several measures are examined in this article: the official US poverty measure, a relative poverty measure, an experimental measure following recommendations of the US National Academy of Sciences, an index of material hardship, a measure of household debt, and responses to a question about inability to meet expenses. This study uses the 1996 panel of the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP). The SIPP is a longitudinal survey that allows us to examine all of these various indicators for the same people over the period from 1996 to 1998. The study uses regression analysis to assess the relationship between and among the various indicators of economic hardship.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document