-PDF Download- Putting Science And Engineering At The Heart Of Government Policy EBOOK

Putting science and engineering at the heart of government policy

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2009-07-23

Total Pages: 308

ISBN-13: 9780215540218

A report that considers the broad issue of why science and engineering are important and why they should be at the heart of Government policy. It also considers three more specific issues: the debate on strategic priorities; the principles that inform science funding decisions; and, the scrutiny of science and engineering across Government.

Putting science and engineering at the heart of government policy

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2009-07-23

Total Pages: 88

ISBN-13: 9780215540348

DOWNLOAD EBOOK →

This report considers a broad issue-why science and engineering are important and why they should be at the heart of Government policy-and three more specific issues-the debate on strategic priorities, the principles that inform science funding decisions and the scrutiny of science and engineering across Government. It revisits recommendations made in "Engineering: turning ideas into reality" (4th report session 2008-09, HC 50-I, ISBN 9780215529268). The Committee reiterates its call for the Government to move the Government Chief Scientific Adviser and his Government Office for Science into the heart of Government, the Cabinet Office. It also urges the Government to safeguard the independence of all Science Advisory Committees and make a number of recommendations on how this might be achieved. For example, transparency could be improved and setting up a press office in GO-Science would give SACs an independent voice. The principles that govern UK science funding decisions are discussed, and the report advocates a principle that can accommodate regional science policy, the full range of research funding streams, mission driven research, and the rationalisation of detailed and strategic funding decisions. Finally, the report welcomes changes to the Government's internal science scrutiny programme, and the House of Commons' decision to reinstate the Science and Technology Committee.

Putting Science and Engineering at the Heart of Government Policy

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Select Committee on Science and Technology

Publisher:

Published: 2009-10-26

Total Pages: 27

ISBN-13: 9780215541437

DOWNLOAD EBOOK →

Government response to HC 168-I (ISBN 9780215540348)

Engineering in government

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Science and Technology Committee

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2012-04-30

Total Pages: 60

ISBN-13: 9780215044105

DOWNLOAD EBOOK →

In March 2009, the predecessor Science and Technology Committee published the findings of its wide-ranging inquiry into engineering, "Engineering: turning ideas into reality" (HCP 50-I, session 2008-09, ISBN 9780215529268). The Committee examined four case studies: (i) nuclear engineering; (ii) plastic electronics engineering; (iii) geo-engineering; and (iv) engineering in Government. Through the case study on engineering in Government, the Committee made a number of recommendations to improve the Government's use of engineering advice and expertise in policy processes, which were supplemented further by the 2009 report "Putting Science and Engineering at the Heart of Government Policy" (HCP 168-I, session 2008-09, ISBN 9780215540348). In this report, the Committee states that Government and the engineering community have made progress in integrating engineering expertise and concerns into the formulation of policy. The formation of the Engineering the Future alliance as a coordinated voice for the professional engineering community and the ongoing efforts of the Government Chief Scientific Adviser in raising the profile of engineering advice are commended. The Government needs to ensure that engineering continues to have a high profile in policy, and particularly in policy development.

The Work of the Committee In 2008-09

Author:

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2009

Total Pages: 108

ISBN-13: 9780215542533

DOWNLOAD EBOOK →

work of the Committee In 2008-09 : First report of session 2009-10, report, together with formal minutes, and written Evidence

The Geek Manifesto: Why Science Matters to Government (mini ebook)

Author: Mark Henderson

Publisher: Random House

Published: 2012-05-04

Total Pages: 29

ISBN-13: 1448152577

DOWNLOAD EBOOK →

This mini ebook features a sample chapter from Mark Henderson’s brilliant new book THE GEEK MANIFESTO: why science matters. The geeks are coming. And our world needs them. We live in a country where: -A writer can be forced into court for telling the scientific truth. -The media would rather sell papers by scaremongering about the MMR vaccine or GM crops than reporting the facts. -A government advisor was sacked for a decision based on science rather than public opinion. -Only one of our 650 MPs has ever worked as a research scientist. It is time to entrench scientific thinking more deeply into politics and society. To fight for policy based on evidence. The full book is available from 12th May 2012.

Educating Tomorrow's Engineers

Author: Great Britain: Parliament: House of Commons: Science and Technology Committee

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2013-02-08

Total Pages: 142

ISBN-13: 9780215053411

DOWNLOAD EBOOK →

In the UK we teach young people to become computer users and consumers rather than programmers and software engineers. This is creating a chronic skills gap in ICT. We need around 82,000 engineers and technicians just to deal with retirements up to 2016 and 830,000 SET professionals by 2020. On the plus side, the Government's proposal to include computer science as a fourth science option to count towards the EBac is welcomed. The Committee also welcomes the EBac's focus on attainment of mathematics and science GCSEs but is concerned that subjects such as Design and Technology (D&T) might be marginalised. A Technical Baccalaureate (TechBac) is being designed but if it is to be a success, schools should be incentivised to focus on the TechBac by making it equivalent to the EBac. Reforms to vocational education following the Wolf Review meant that Level 2 of the Engineering Diploma, a qualification highly regarded, would count as equivalent to one GCSE despite requiring curriculum time and effort equivalent to several GCSEs. The Engineering Diploma, however, is currently being redesigned as four separate qualifications. The Committee also expressed concerns over the Department for Education's (DfE) lack of clarity on its research budget, and use of evidence in decision-making. The DfE needs to place greater focus on gathering evidence before changes to qualifications are made, and must leave sufficient time for evidence to be gathered on the effectiveness of policies before introducing further change. The possibility of gathering evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) should be seriously considered

The Government's Review of the Principles Applying to the Treatment of Independent Scientific Advice Provided to Government

Author:

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2009

Total Pages: 48

ISBN-13: 9780215542816

DOWNLOAD EBOOK →

The Government decided to consider and issue, by the end of December 2009, a set of principles applying to the treatment of independent scientific advice provided to Government. This followed the Home Secretary's dismissal of Professor David Nutt as chairman of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs.

HC 703 - Government Horizon Scanning

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Select Committee on Science and Technology

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2014-05-04

Total Pages: 52

ISBN-13: 0215071840

DOWNLOAD EBOOK →

The Government launched its new horizon scanning programme last July, stating that 'in a tight economic climate, it is more important than ever to have the best possible understanding of the world around us, and how that world is changing'. However, as it stands, the new programme is little more than an echo chamber for Government views. The new bodies that have been created consist entirely of Civil Servants, effectively excluding the vast pool of expertise that exists outside of government. The new programme does not even have a dedicated web presence to keep interested parties informed. The programme's failings are partially attributed to a lack of ministerial oversight. The Government also needs to recognise the potential role to be played in the new programme by the Government Office for Science (GO-Science), specifically the Foresight Unit. The relative lack of impact that the Foresight Unit has historically had on policy is largely a result of its non-central location in government. GO-Science is located in the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS). In contrast, the new horizon scanning programme is located in the Cabinet Office. In choosing to situate the new horizon scanning programme in the Cabinet Office, the Government has recognised the importance of location and has thereby acknowledged the strength of this argument. GO-Science should be relocated from BIS to the Cabinet Office, where it can play a more central role in the new programme and more effectively fulfill its role of ensuring that the best scientific evidence is utilised across government

DIUS's Departmental Report 2008

Author: Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons. Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee

Publisher: The Stationery Office

Published: 2009

Total Pages: 82

ISBN-13: 9780215525826

DOWNLOAD EBOOK →

In its report examining the work and performance of the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS), set up 18 months ago, the Innovation, Universities, Science and Skills Committee finds that the department has not yet found its feet and it is too early to say if it will achieve the Prime Minister's ambitious targets. The DIUS annual report is 'impenetrable' and 'peppered with jargon', and the Committee fears that the jargon may be a substitute for having a clear idea about where DIUS is going and how it will achieve the Prime Minister's goals to make Britain one of the best places in the world for science, research and innovation. Examples of innovation in DIUS's own operations were disappointing, and the Committee also has doubts about the way DIUS presents figures and calls for the statistics in future annual reports to be reviewed independently. The Committee also expresses concern about the approach of the Government's new Chief Scientific Adviser to his role as a champion of evidence-based science, and draws attention to Professor Beddington's evidence on homeopathy in which he did not take the opportunity to restate the importance of scientific process and to emphasise the need for balance of scientific evidence. The customary, strong public voice from the Government Chief Scientific Adviser advocating policy based on evidence-based science must not become muted. The Committee also recommends that DIUS: develops a consistent method for ensuring policy is soundly based on evidence; faces up to and addresses the criticisms it received in the Capability Review; shows clearly how £1.5 billion in efficiency savings it has promised will be generated.