Impacts of National Science Foundation Engineering Research Support on Society (2024)
Chapter: 1 Introduction
1
Introduction
This chapter provides basic information about the motivation of this report and the conduct of the study. It presents the committee’s statement of task along with insights gained from the sponsor. The committee’s approach to fulfilling its task is then detailed, followed by brief descriptions of the conduct of the study and its information-gathering activities, an explanation of where this report fits within National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine scholarship addressing the impacts of engineering research, and the definitions that the committee applied for “engineering” and “impact” in the context of its work. The chapter concludes with a summary of the report’s organization.
MOTIVATIONS FOR THE STUDY
Despite the pervasive influence of engineering on virtually every aspect of daily life, the public often underestimates or overlooks its profound impact. There are numerous reasons for this lack of awareness. Prominently, it is a consequence of the disconnect that exists between the complexities of engineering processes and their visible outcomes. Most people interact with the products of engineering—be it smart phones, bridges, controlled-release fertilizer, or countless others—without fully grasping the sophisticated research, design, and innovation behind them. Moreover, the interdisciplinary nature of engineering complicates public comprehension, as the engineering process may involve the application of knowledge from such diverse fields such as physics, biology, mathematics, and computer science. As a result of these and other factors, a significant portion of the public fails to recognize how engineering contributes to economic growth, societal advancements, and improved quality of life.
Fostering understanding of the impacts of engineering on society is essential for establishing and maintaining public support for the policies needed to ensure that technology continues to benefit humanity. Federal support of engineering research plays a critical role in this process. Government funding provides researchers with the resources they need to pursue ambitious, high-risk, high-return projects that might not otherwise be feasible. This support enables exploration into fundamental scientific questions, the development of groundbreaking technologies, and the translation of research findings into real-world applications. Crucially, federal agencies often prioritize research that has the potential to generate significant societal benefits, such as improving public health, strengthening national security, or promoting general economic growth. By investing in engineering research, governments can stimulate innovation, foster collaboration across disciplines, and cultivate a highly skilled workforce capable of tackling complex problems on a global scale. Ultimately, federal support of engineering research is essential for advancing knowledge, driving economic competitiveness, and enhancing the well-being of individuals globally.
Since its establishment in 1950, the National Science Foundation (NSF) has played a significant role in supporting engineering research and education in the United States. Initially focused on basic scientific research, NSF expanded its mandate to include engineering in the late 1950s, recognizing the discipline’s importance in driving technological innovation and economic growth. Over the years, NSF has funded a wide range of projects across a number of engineering disciplines. Its support has enabled researchers to make significant advances in areas such as infrastructure development, renewable energy, telecommunications, and healthcare technology. Through grants, fellowships, and research centers, the agency has helped cultivate a vibrant engineering research community, fostering collaboration among academia, industry, and government agencies. Today, NSF continues to be a major supporter of engineering research, investing in cutting-edge projects that address pressing societal challenges and push the boundaries of scientific knowledge.
THE COMMITTEE’S STATEMENT OF TASK AND INSIGHTS GAINED FROM THE SPONSOR
Against this backdrop, NSF asked the National Academies to form an expert committee to undertake a study illuminating how the practice of engineering and the work of engineers has affected society and, particularly, the impacts of NSF support of engineering research. An expert committee was formed to respond to that request.
Box 1-1 contains the statement of task for that committee.
Box 1-1
The Committee’s Statement of Task
The National Science Foundation has requested that the National Academies provide it with help in its efforts to bring greater understanding of and attention to engineering’s role in fulfilling NSF’s mission “to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity and welfare; [and] to secure the national defense… .” To achieve this, an ad hoc committee will:
- Identify up to 10 extraordinary engineering impacts made possible by NSF investments in research from 1950 onward. These impacts might include expanded technological and social capabilities, scientific breakthroughs, and improvements in economic opportunity. They could have led to improvements in individual quality of life, national security, population health, manufacturing services, infrastructure resilience, and public policy, among others.
- Organize a virtual public symposium that highlights how NSF investments in engineering education, research, careers, and institutions propels their mission to “advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; and to secure the national defense,” and produce a proceedings that summarizes the event’s presentations.
- Develop clear, compelling narratives for public engagement in these engineering impacts, including specific contributions of NSF in fostering these developments.
- Provide guidance on how to reach and engage diverse audiences with these narratives; promote better understanding of the vital role of engineering in government, business, and society; and engage young people from all segments of society to encourage pursuing a career in engineering.
The resulting consensus report will be designed for a wide readership, will expand on the proceedings, and offer conclusions and recommendations on how to best promote understanding of engineering’s place in society and how NSF contributes to it.
[Emphasis added]
These tasks were further elaborated by Dr. Susan Margulies, NSF’s Assistant Director for Engineering, in her September 2021 charge to the committee (Margulies, 2021). Dr. Margulies noted that NSF’s merit review process relies on two major criteria, both of which address the impact of the proposal. The Intellectual Merit criterion “encompasses the potential to advance knowledge,” while the Broader Impacts criterion1 “encompasses the potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of specific, desired societal outcomes” (NSF, 2023). Margulies said that the stories and people underlying these impacts are compelling and that drawing attention to them is a powerful means of fostering greater understanding of and attention to engineering’s role in fulfilling the agency’s mission. Impact stories, she said, illustrate how fundamental research and innovative education modalities translate into societal benefits; propel prospective visions and new research directions; embolden creativity and risk; and, most importantly, inspire, motivate, and connect. The National Academies study should therefore have as its goals to uncover and illustrate how fundamental engineering research since the origin of NSF has led to positive impacts on American lives, to lend understanding of how the agency’s investment in fundamental engineering research contributed to these impacts, and to develop
___________________
1 The Broader Impacts criterion is discussed in further detail in Chapter 3.
clear, captivating narratives for the public about recent engineering innovations that improve our lives.
THE COMMITTEE’S APPROACH TO FULFILLING ITS TASK
The committee undertook a wide-ranging information gathering effort to inform its responses to the elements of the statement of task. It surveyed the literature on a variety of topics relevant to the issues and questions raised by the tasks, conducted a symposium to gather information and highlight some engineering achievements, circulated questionnaires to members of the National Academy of Engineering and solicited input from NSF staff. The Alan Alda Center for Communicating Science was contracted to develop draft outreach materials intended to engage diverse audiences in engineering through stories of technology innovations and the people responsible for them.
This work is set forth below and in subsequent chapters of the report and its appendices.
WHERE THIS REPORT FITS WITHIN THE SCHOLARSHIP ADDRESSING THE IMPACTS OF ENGINEERING RESEARCH SUPPORT
National Academies committees are often charged with assessing the state of an area of research; conducting a review of a program or agency; developing a research agenda; evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of a governmental initiative; drawing conclusions and recommendations about a scientific, technical, or policy issue of importance; conducting a public event to inform or highlight a subject; or convening a meeting of disparate experts to address or illuminate a possibly contentious topic.
This report, however, is an intentional departure from these more typical efforts in its approach and intent. As noted above, the Committee on Extraordinary Engineering Impacts on Society was tasked with offering advice to the NSF on how the agency might enhance the public’s understanding of the myriad impacts of engineering innovations on their everyday lives and spark interest in the field among the next generation of innovators. The particular focus is the societal impact of NSF’s contributions to engineering research—and, by extension, the education of researchers—and the stories of the people who brought those contributions about. Unlike most of the other works cited, the report was directed to be designed for a wide readership.
There are a number of more archetypal National Academies reports, along with selected work done in a similar vein by others, that address topics under the committee’s consideration. It was neither the committee’s task nor their goal to reproduce these reports. Instead, these publications informed the committee’s thinking. They also serve as independent references providing more in-depth explorations of issues dealt with in this volume.
These include reports that:
- evaluate the impact of federally funded research support and, in particular, the technical, economic, and social impact of federally funded information technology research;
- examine the conduct and results of National Science Foundation program initiatives;
- offer advice on communicating information on science, technology, and the value of supporting research to the general public; and
- raise general public awareness of engineering and the role of engineers.
Table 1-1 lists representative publications. Some of the ones that had the most influence on the committee are summarized in subsequent chapters.
| Title | Reference |
|---|---|
| Impacts of Federal Support of Information Technology Research | |
| Evolving the High Performance Computing and Communications Initiative to Support the Nation’s Information Infrastructure | NRC (1995) |
| Funding a Revolution: Government Support for Computing Research | NRC (2002) |
| Assessing the Impacts of Changes in the Information Technology R&D Ecosystem: Retaining Leadership in an Increasingly Global Environment | NRC (2009) |
| Continuing Innovation in Information Technology | NRC (2012b) |
| Continuing Innovation in Information Technology: Workshop Report | NASEM (2016) |
| Information Technology Innovation Resurgence, Confluence, and Continuing Impact | NASEM (2020b) |
| Impacts of Federal Support of Research – General | |
| The Government Role in Civilian Technology: Building a New Alliance | NAS/NAE/IOM (1992) |
| Mastering a New Role: Shaping Technology Policy for National Economic Performance | NAE (1993) |
| Allocating Federal Funds for Science and Technology | IOM/NAS/NAE/NRC (1995) |
| Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future. | NAS/NAE/IOM (2007) |
| Measuring the Impacts of Federal Investments in Research: A Workshop Summary | NRC (2011b) |
| Capturing Change in Science, Technology, and Innovation: Improving Indicators to Inform Policy | NRC (2014a) |
| Furthering America’s Research Enterprise | NRC (2014b) |
| NSF Engineering-Related Program Evaluations | |
| New Directions for Engineering in the National Science Foundation: A Report to the NSF from the National Academy of Engineering | NAE (1985) |
| The Engineering Research Centers: Leaders in Change | NRC (1987) |
| Enabling American Innovation. Engineering and the National Science Foundation | Belanger (1998) |
| An Assessment of the SBIR Program at the National Science Foundation | NRC (2008) |
| SBIR at the National Science Foundation | NASEM (2015) |
| Title | Reference |
|---|---|
| A New Vision for Center-Based Engineering Research | NASEM (2017a) |
| Review of the SBIR and STTR Programs at the National Science Foundation | NASEM (2023c) |
| Communicating Information on Science, Technology, and the Value of Supporting Research | |
| Communicating National Science Foundation Science and Engineering Information to Data Users: Letter Report | NRC (2011a) |
| Communicating Science and Engineering Data in the Information Age | NRC (2012a) |
| The Science of Science Communications II: Summary of a Colloquium | NAS (2014) |
| Communicating Science Effectively: A Research Agenda | NASEM (2017b) |
| The Science of Science Communications III: Inspiring Novel Collaborations and Building Capacity: Proceedings of a Colloquium | NASEM (2018) |
| Raising Public Awareness of Engineering | |
| Raising Public Awareness of Engineering | NAE (2002) |
| Making the Case for Engineering: Study and Recommendations | NSF (2005) |
| Changing the Conversation. Messages for Improving Public Understanding of Engineering | NAE (2008) |
| Messaging for Engineering: From Research to Action | NAE (2013) |
| Agents of Change: NSF’s Engineering Research Centers | Preston and Lewis (2020) |
Separately, the National Academies have highlighted “engineering achievements that have transformed lives” as part of the “Greatest Engineering Achievements of the 20th Century” initiative (NAE, 2000), later turned into a book (Constable et al., 2003), and NSF itself has produced multiple lists of exceptional inventions, innovations and discoveries that have resulted from their funding efforts (NSF, 2000a,b, 2010, 2022).
An extensive literature on issues related to the societal impact of NSF funding of engineering research and education2 thus exists, which this report supplements from the unique perspective of the people and stories that underlie the achievements that it has brought forth.
HOW THE COMMITTEE DEFINES “ENGINEERING” AND “IMPACT”
Terms like “engineering” and “impact” have been continuously modified, updated, and debated by professionals and scholars alike over time (see for example, Anderson, 2019; Downey, 2015; Lopez-Cruz, 2022; NSPE, 2018; Weinert, 1986). In conducting this study, the committee applied common definitions of these terms to help conceptualize what engineering is, the distinctions between engineering research and the engineering process, and the scope of societal impacts relevant to its statement of task.
“Engineering is the act of creating artifacts, processes, or systems that advance technology and address human needs using principles of the sciences, mathematics, computing, and
___________________
2 The National Academies have also produced a number of reports on engineering education in general (NAE, 2005; NAE, 2012; NAE, 2018; NASEM, 2023a) and specifically for K-12 students (NAE and NRC, 2009; NRC, 2010; NASEM, 2020a); topics outside the scope of this report.
operations” (Anderson, 2019). Engineering encompasses not only the design of systems, structures, and devices but also their construction, implementation, deployment, and function.
Engineering research is a systematic investigation conducted to advance knowledge and develop new technologies within the field of engineering. Applied research, an important component of engineering research, aims to devise broadly applicable approaches for practical problems (as distinct from development, which focuses on a single product). By building on past designs and learning from failures, engineering research generates knowledge and technologies to continuously improve devices and engineering practice in general, and help the field of engineering adapt to new challenges.
The engineering process is a structured approach to designing, developing, and delivering products and services that address specific needs or problems. It involves a series of steps that usually includes problem definition, design, modeling/simulation, prototyping, testing, and implementation, and applies existing knowledge, often based on engineering research, to deploy market-ready solutions. Engineering processes evolve over time as new materials, tools, techniques, and objectives drive innovation.
The engineering impacts on society considered by this committee, as set forth in the Statement of Task (Box 1-1) “include expanded technological and social capabilities, scientific breakthroughs, and improvements in economic opportunity. They could have led to improvements in individual quality of life, national security, population health, manufacturing services, infrastructure resilience, and public policy, among others”. They were chosen not through quantitative metrics but based on foundational references and the considerations detailed in the report. The goal was to identify societal impacts that were clearly linked to NSF support in some form, and that had the potential to be relatable to a wide audience.
REPORT ORGANIZATION AND FRAMEWORK
The remainder of this report is divided into four additional chapters and three supporting appendices. Chapter 2 delves into the origins of NSF’s support for engineering research. It identifies the various divisions, directorates, and other entities that have provided funding over the years and the mechanisms such as Engineering Research Centers that the agency uses to administer and carry out that work. The considerations that informed the committee’s evaluation of engineering impacts on society are addressed in Chapter 3. That chapter presents an overview of the topic before touching on the role of NSF in funding engineering innovation and discussing the agency’s broader impacts proposal review criterion, which requires consideration of societal impacts. Chapter 4 focuses on recognizing engineering impacts on society brought about by NSF investments. It describes NSF’s own initiatives to highlight these impacts and the committee’s information-gathering activities via its symposium, questionnaires, and other inputs. The committee’s framework for identifying exemplary impacts is then explained, and descriptions of those impacts are presented along with the conclusions and recommendations that were drawn from that work. Where appropriate, attribution is provided to other government agencies or private sector funders who also played significant roles in helping bring about the cited impacts. The last chapter of the report, Chapter 5, addresses the final element of the statement of task: offering advice on communicating engineering’s impacts on society to the public. This chapter talks about the considerations that go into communicating impacts and what research tells us
about them and enumerates the many audiences there are for such communication. It sets forth the committee’s approach to developing example outreach materials, presents summaries of those materials, and closes with the committee’s conclusions and recommendations regarding communications issues.
Appendix A reproduces the agenda for the committee’s virtual symposium on extraordinary engineering impacts on society. This symposium, which is summarized in proceedings published in 2023 (NASEM, 2023b), provided valuable information and insights to the committee. Appendix B documents the content and motivations behind the draft example outreach materials presented in Chapter 5, including links to online supporting materials. And Appendix C provides biographic information on the committee members and staff responsible for this report.
REFERENCES
Anderson, J. 2019. President’s perspective: What Is engineering? The Bridge 49(4). https://nae.edu/221278/Presidents-Perspective-What-Is-Engineering (accessed June 4, 2024).
Belanger, D. O. 1998. Enabling American innovation: Engineering and the National Science Foundation. Princeton, NJ: Purdue University Press.
Constable, G., and B. Somerville, eds. 2003. A century of innovation: Twenty engineering achievements that transformed our lives. Washington, DC: Joseph Henry Press. https://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappg18_1/pappg_3.jsp (accessed February 19, 2024).
Downey, G. L. 2015. PDS: Engineering as problem definition and solution. In S. H. Christensen, C. Didier, A. Jamison, M. Meganck, C. Mitcham, & B. Newberry (Eds.), International Perspectives on Engineering Education: Engineering Education and Practice in Context (Vol. 1, pp. 435–455). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16169-3_21
IOM/NAS/NAE/NRC (Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and National Research Council). 1995. Allocating Federal Funds for Science and Technology. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/5040.
Lopez-Cruz, O. 2022. An essential definition of engineering to support engineering research in the twenty-first century. International Journal of Philosophy 10(4):130-137. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijp.20221004.12.
Margulies S. 2021. Engineering impacts. Presentation before the National Academies Committee on Extraordinary Engineering Impacts on Society. Washington, DC. September 27.
NAE (National Academy of Engineering). 1985. New directions for engineering in the National Science Foundation: A report to the National Science Foundation from the National Academy of Engineering. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18892.
NAE. 1993. Mastering a new role: Shaping technology policy for national economic performance. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/2103.
NAE. 2000. Greatest engineering achievements of the 20th century. http://www.greatachievements.org/ (accessed February 19, 2024).
NAE. 2002. Raising public awareness of engineering. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/10573.
NAE. 2005. Educating the engineer of 2020: Adapting engineering education to the new century. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11338.
NAE. 2008. Changing the conversation: Messages for improving public understanding of engineering. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12187.
NAE. 2012. Infusing real world experiences into engineering education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18184.
NAE. 2013. Messaging for engineering: From research to action. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13463.
NAE. 2018. Understanding the educational and career pathways of engineers. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25284.
NAE/NRC (National Academy of Engineering and National Research Council). 2009. Engineering in K–12 education: Understanding the status and improving the prospects. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12635.
NAS (National Academy of Sciences). 2014. The science of science communication II: Summary of a colloquium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18478.
NAS/NAE/IOM (National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering, and Institute of Medicine). 1992. The government role in civilian technology: Building a new alliance. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/1998.
NAS/NAE/IOM. 2007. Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
NASEM (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine). 2015. SBIR at the National Science Foundation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18944.
NASEM. 2016. Continuing innovation in information technology: Workshop report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/23393.
NASEM. 2017a. A new vision for center-based engineering research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24767.
NASEM. 2017b. Communicating science effectively: A research agenda. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/23674.
NASEM. 2018. The science of science communication III: Inspiring novel collaborations and building capacity: Proceedings of a colloquium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/24958.
NASEM. 2020a. Building capacity for teaching engineering in K–12 education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25612.
NASEM. 2020b. Information technology innovation: Resurgence, confluence, and continuing impact. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/25961.
NASEM. 2023a. Connecting efforts to support minorities in engineering education: Proceedings of a workshop. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/27238.
NASEM (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine). 2023. Extraordinary engineering impacts on society: Proceedings of a symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26847.
NASEM. 2023c. Review of the SBIR and STTR programs at the National Science Foundation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/26884.
NRC (National Research Council). 1987. The Engineering Research Centers: Leaders in change. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18889.
NRC. 1995. Evolving the high-performance computing and communications initiative to support the nation’s information infrastructure. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/4948.
NRC. 1999. Funding a revolution: Government support for computing research. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/6323.
NRC. 2008. An assessment of the SBIR program at the National Science Foundation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/11929.
NRC. 2009. Assessing the impacts of changes in the information technology R&D ecosystem: Retaining leadership in an increasingly global environment. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12174.
NRC. 2010. Standards for K–12 engineering education? Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12990.
NRC. 2011a. Communicating National Science Foundation science and engineering information to data users: Letter report. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13120.
NRC. 2011b. Measuring the impacts of federal investments in research: A workshop summary. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13208.
NRC. 2012a. Communicating science and engineering data in the Information Age. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13282.
NRC. 2012b. Continuing innovation in information technology. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/13427.
NRC. 2014a. Capturing change in science, technology, and innovation: Improving indicators to inform policy. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18606.
NRC. 2014b. Furthering America’s research enterprise. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18804.
NSF (National Science Foundation). 2000a. America’s investment in the future. https://www.nsf.gov/about/history/nsf0050/index.jsp (accessed February 19, 2024).
NSF. 2000b. Nifty 50. https://www.nsf.gov/about/history/nifty50/index.jsp (accessed February 19, 2024).
NSF. 2005. Making the case for engineering: Study and recommendations. https://www.nsf.gov/attachments/104206/public/Final_Case.doc (accessed February 19, 2024).
NSF. 2010. NSF sensational 60. https://www.nsf.gov/about/history/sensational60.pdf (accessed February 19, 2024).
NSF. 2022. NSF history wall. https://www.nsf.gov/about/history/historywall/NSF_history-guide_July2022_Update.pdf (accessed February 19, 2024).
NSF. 2023. NSF proposal and award policies and procedure guide. Chapter III: NSF proposal processing and review. https://new.nsf.gov/policies/pappg/23-1/ch-3-proposal-processing-review (accessed February 19, 2024).
NSPE (National Society of Professional Engineers). 2018. Defining the practice of engineering. Alexandria, VA: NSPE.
Preston, L., and C. Lewis. 2020. Agents of change: NSF’s Engineering Research Centers. A history. https://erc-history.erc-assoc.org/ (accessed February 19, 2024).
Weinert, D. 1986. Appendix A: The definition of engineering and of engineers in historical context. In Engineering infrastructure diagramming and modeling. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/587.
