Broader impacts in NSF's Division of Environmental Biology leave hope for improvement

February 25, 2015

Since 1997, researchers applying for grant funds from the National Science Foundation (NSF) have been asked to give an account of the broader societal effects of their proposed research. The Broader Impacts Criterion was intended as a supplement to the traditional "intellectual merit" criterion, with the hope of creating an incentive for principal investigators to consider and enhance the further-reaching benefits of their work.

In an article to be published in the April 2015 issue of BioScience, conservation ecologist Sean M. Watts, of the University of Washington, and his colleagues describe the results of an investigation into the broader impacts activities outlined in proposals made to the NSF's Division of Environmental Biology (where one of the authors is employed). The authors examined a total of 596 proposals and arrived at three major findings: (1) Publicly available abstracts often failed to reflect the broader impacts activities, so "the public at large might easily conclude that the [criterion] is not being implemented." (2) Past reviewers often failed to comment on the broader impacts activities outlined during the review process. (3) Project reports often lacked sufficient detail to measure the principal investigators' performance against the criterion.

One category of proposed broader impacts activities stood out: Watts and his colleagues discovered that efforts to bolster the participation of members of underrepresented groups were comparatively rare. Perhaps even more worrisome, "the [principal investigators] proposed more than twice the number of underrepresented [activities] than they subsequently reported." In contrast, among the other categories, the number of proposals roughly matched the number of reported outcomes. According to the authors, this may "provide further evidence that the underrepresented category, in particular, is more fundamentally challenging than were the teaching, infrastructure, and dissemination categories."

Despite these troubling trends, efforts are under way to improve adherence to and the usefulness of the Broader Impacts Criterion. A 2013 revision of the NSF's Proposal Guide discourages principal investigators from treating broader impacts activities as a rote checklist, in part by requiring that they be assessed for their novelty, impact, and feasibility. The authors see cause for hope in the new Proposal Guide: "If its requirements are well-implemented, they will bring much needed recognition to a generation of scientists who have toiled to engage society despite limited incentive from their peers, sponsoring institutions, or the review process."
BioScience, published monthly by Oxford Journals, is the journal of the American Institute of Biological Sciences (AIBS). BioScience is a forum for integrating the life sciences that publishes commentary and peer-reviewed articles. The journal has been published since 1964. AIBS is a meta-level organization for professional scientific societies and organizations that are involved with biology. It represents nearly 160 member societies and organizations. Follow BioScience on Twitter @BioScienceAIBS.

Oxford Journals is a division of Oxford University Press. Oxford Journals publishes well over 300 academic and research journals covering a broad range of subject areas, two-thirds of which are published in collaboration with learned societies and other international organizations. The division been publishing journals for more than a century, and as part of the world's oldest and largest university press, has more than 500 years of publishing expertise behind it. Follow Oxford Journals on Twitter @OxfordJournals

American Institute of Biological Sciences

Related Hope Articles from Brightsurf:

How anxiety--and hope--can drive new product adoption
When considering new products, anxiety creates approach response (i.e., interest, purchase) rather than avoidance response (i.e., disinterest, failure to purchase) when consumers hope for the goal-congruent outcomes.

New hope for kidney revival for transplant
Cell therapy delivered directly to the kidney can revive a 'marginal' organ, improving function and could offer new hope for providing more kidneys for transplant.

Hookworm trial offers new hope to MS patients
Parasitic worms could offer a new treatment hope for patients suffering from the autoimmune disease multiple sclerosis, according to experts from the University of Nottingham.

Preclinical study offers hope for Hirschsprung's
Children's Hospital Los Angeles surgeon Tracy Grikscheit, MD, grows functional nervous system tissue from stem cells.

In victory over polio, hope for the battle against COVID-19
Medicine's great triumph over polio holds out hope we can do the same for COVID-19, two researchers say.

Novel compound sparks new malaria treatment hope
A novel class of antimalarial compounds that can effectively kill malaria parasites has been developed by Australian and US researchers.

Hope for a new permanent magnet that's cheap and sustainable
Scientists have made a breakthrough in the search for a new, sustainable permanent magnet.

Molecule offers hope for halting Parkinson's
A promising molecule has offered hope for a new treatment that could stop or slow Parkinson's, something no treatment can currently do.

New hope for treating childhood brain cancer
Recent research has shown that a drug known as MI-2 can kill cells that cause a fatal brain cancer.

'Cellular dust' provides new hope for regenerative medicine
While stem cells have the most therapeutic potential, the benefits of regenerative medicine may best be mobilised using extracellular vesicles (EVs), also known in the past as 'cellular dust'.

Read More: Hope News and Hope Current Events is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to