 
|
SYMPOSIA
 |
•••As of February 1, 2002
|
|
|
|
| Science, Engineering, and Public Policy |
Animal Parts for Humans? Xenotransplantation Science, Ethics, Policy and Publics
Sunday, February 17, 2002 3:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. |
|
| Edna F. Einsiedel, University of Calgary |
| Xenotransplantation, the transfer of cells, tissues or organs from animals to humans, has been promoted as a solution to the world-wide shortage of organs for human transplants. In the U.S., 68,000 are waiting for organs and about 50,000 in Europe. This medical procedure is also potentially helpful for patients with such illnesses as diabetes and Parkinson's disease. The problem of rejection was a major challenge that has been largely overcome by genetically engineering the donor animal, typically pigs, with the insertion of a human gene to block the human body's immune response. This is typically coupled with the use of immunosuppression drugs. While the science has proceeded rapidly, the social challenges around this technology are considerable: there are possible risks of disease transfer from animals to humans, potentially affecting the larger population; questions of informed consent then become much more complex. There are also cultural issues around the body and cross-species transfers. What role should publics play on this question? While clinical trials are proceeding in the U.S., the Council of Europe has called for a moratorium on this procedure and Canada has implemented a public consultation process before committing to a decision. The panel explores the different dimensions of this technology, its promises and associated ethical and policy challenges. |
| 1 | The Promises of Xeno: The Current State of the Science | David Cooper (Speaker), Harvard Medical School |
| 2 | A Precautionary Principle for Xeno | Fritz H. Bach (Speaker), Harvard University |
| 3 | Xenotransplants in France and in Europe | Suzanne de Cheveigné (Speaker), Laboratoire Communications et Politique, France |
| 4 | Shifting Boundaries: The Tensions between Religious and Secular Bioethics in the Case of Xenotransplants | Agnes Allansdottir (Speaker), University of Siena |
| 5 | Citizen Verdicts on Zeno in Canada | Edna F. Einsiedel (Speaker), University of Calgary |
| 6 | Xeno: Transplantation and Transformation | Susanne Lundin (Speaker), Lund University |
|
The Future of Personal Use Vehicles in China
Friday, February 15, 2002 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon |
|
| Michael Greene, National Research Council |
| At present China is barely motorized in proportion to its population and GDP. But the government's Tenth Five Year Plan, announced in March 2001, names the auto industry as a "Pillar Industry" for Chinese development. It urges development of a Chinese family car and encourages the sale of personal vehicles. Without guidelines on selection of technology and urgent action to control pollution and congestion in the cities, a rapid increase in the number of motor vehicles may cause severe environmental, social, and economic problems. The U.S. National Research Council (NRC) and the Chinese Academy of Engineering (CAE) have jointly established a binational committee to prepare recommendations toward avoiding a crisis. This symposium addresses the current status of personal vehicles and infrastructure in China; Chinese auto industry issues; social implications of alternative development pathways; technology opportunities, including alternate fuel sources; and policy options. |
| 1 | Status of Motorization in China | Guo Konghui (Speaker), Jilin University |
| 2 | Societal Impacts of Rapid Motorization | Ralph Gakenheimer (Speaker), Massachusetts Institute of Technology |
| 3 | Rapid Motorization in China and Its Impact on the Enviroment | Michael Walsh (Speaker), Consultant |
| 4 | History and Structure of the Chinese Auto Industry | Li Gang (Speaker), Chinese Academy of Engineering |
| 5 | Technological Options for China in the Short and Long Term | Dale Compton (Speaker), Purdue University |
| 6 | Rapid Motorization in Shanghai | Dan Sperling (Speaker), University of California-Davis |
|
Restructuring Electricity Deregulation: Consumers, Suppliers, and Utilities
Sunday, February 17, 2002 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon |
|
| Jose B. Cruz Jr., Ohio State University |
| Deregulation of the electric energy supply has been intended to benefit consumers and to stimulate more efficient production of electricity at lower cost through competition. California, the first state to implement deregulation of the electric supply has resulted in near bankruptcies of the major utilities, and consumer demand has not been met. Why is deregulation a seeming failure there? What are the causes of the failure? As more states begin deregulation, what mid-course corrections or restructuring of the deregulation itself are needed to prevent future disasters? What can deregulation do to relate present excess demand (short term) to creation of new electricity generation (long term)? Can consolidation of small consumers into blocks of big buyers help in making deregulation work? How can consumers self-curtail peak demands? What are the engineering and technological aspects of deregulation? What are the economic, policy, and legal aspects of deregulation? The symposium is presents the diverse views of suppliers, system operators, consumers, federal and state regulators, research institutes, and academia, to shed light on further restructuring of deregulation. |
| 1 | Lessons Learned the Hard Way from Restructuring the Electric Industry | Kenneth J. Rose (Speaker), The National Regulatory Research Institute |
| 2 | Relating Technology, Policy, Economics, and Finance | Marija D. Ilic (Speaker), Massachusetts Institute of Technology |
| 3 | Interconnections, System Operations, and Control Under Restricted Electricity Enterprise | Massoud Amin (Speaker), Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) |
|
Can Science Better Serve Society’s Needs and Remain Creative?
Friday, February 15, 2002 2:30 p.m. - 5:30 p.m. |
|
| Lewis M. Branscomb, Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government |
| Why does America not take full advantage of the creative power of American science to solve its problems? What would the basic research scene look like if government supported more long-term basic research to fill the gaps of ignorance, to better understand the nature of our problems, to create new technological opportunities from which to choose? The war on cancer is being fought with major investments in basic biomedical science at NIH. But what of the quest for new sources of energy and technologies for reducing energy demand? What of global environmental change and sustainable use of land and sea resources? Sometimes referred to as Jeffersonian Science (or use-inspired basic research in Pasteur’s Quadrant) this science policy paradigm asserts that the best strategy for solving real problems of society should begin with a strategic investment in basic science, careful constructed by the research community to enable society to make more rapid progress in the future. This will require, not only research strategies created by the best scientific minds, but also political support by constituencies devoted to progress on society’s problems and the ability of government science agencies and committees of Congress to create these research strategies and provide them with stable, long-term support. This symposium, building on a national conference at AAAS in November 2000, and a report issued in May 2001, examines the desirability and feasibility of such a science policy strategy, looking at efforts made in several fields and considering the practical requirements for its implementation. |
| 1 | Jeffersonian Science: Basic Research in Service to Society | Lewis M. Branscomb (Speaker), Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government |
| 2 | A Science-Based Strategy for Understanding and Preserving Marine Resources | Jane Lubchenco (Speaker), Oregon State University |
| 3 | Lessons from a Successful Jeffersonian Strategy: The NCI Strategy | Richard D. Klausner (Speaker), Case Institute of Health, Science and Technology |
| 4 | Relating Basic Research to National Goals: A Historical Review | Gerald Holton (Speaker), Harvard University |
| 5 | CO/W HOLTON | Gerhard Sonnert (Speaker), Harvard University |
| 6 | Could Jeffersonian Science Attract More Young Women into Science Careers? | Jane Fountain (Speaker), Harvard University |
| 7 | How Social Science Research Can Address the Problems of Society | Brian J.L. Berry (Speaker), University of Texas-Dallas |
|
Ballistic Missile Defense: Freedom from Intimidation or Shield of Dreams?
Monday, February 18, 2002 9:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m. |
|
| Stephen I. Schwartz, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists |
| The Bush administration--by declaring the 1972 Antiballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty a "relic" of the Cold War and by insisting that the United States must have the means to defend itself against ballistic missile attack--has signaled its intention to accelerate work on ballistic missile defenses. The administration hopes to deploy a limited capability system for the United States as soon as possible, but ultimately envisions a multi-layered system of land, sea, air, and space-based components to protect U.S. and allied territory that would be much larger, more technologically complex, and more expensive than the program supported by the Clinton administration. The diplomatic, military, and economic implications of this endeavor are far-reaching and thus far have received relatively little attention in the mainstream media. The general public, as well, has yet to fully engage in a debate about the ramifications of the administration's plans. This symposium is intended to stimulate interest in and discussion of a critical policy issue that is certain to be the focus of national and international debate for many years. |
| 1 | U.S. Missile Defense Programs Since 1955 and the ABM Treaty | Stephen I. Schwartz (Speaker), Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists |
| 2 | Defining the Threat and Evaluating Response Options | Joseph Cirincione (Speaker), Carnegie Endowment for International Peace |
| 3 | CO/W CIRINCIONE | Philip Coyle (Speaker), Center for Defense Information |
| 4 | What Technologies Are Required and Will They Be Ready? | Keith Englander (Speaker), U.S. Missle Defense Agency |
| 5 | CO/W Englander | Lisbeth Gronlund (Speaker), Union of Concerned Scientists |
| 6 | Russia, China, and Others: Likely Responses | Leon Sigal (Speaker), Social Sciences Research Council |
|
Recent Innovations in the Science of Underground Development
Monday, February 18, 2002 3:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. |
|
| Andrew F. McKown, Haley & Aldrich, Inc.; Daniel L. Chess, International Business Machines Corporation |
| Tunneling and underground construction has been ongoing for thousands of years. In the last quarter century, however, significant advances have been made in creating underground space for various uses. This symposium will discuss why we go into the underground and how we develop space in the underground. Presentations focus on: Innovative uses of underground space; soft ground tunnels for transportation, water, and wastewater conveyance; large diameter rock tunnels for rail traffic through the Alps; trenchless technology for solving underground utility installation problems in urban areas; and the effects of underground construction on nearby buildings. Case histories are included with each presentation, including underground construction projects in Boston associated with the Central Artery/Tunnel project. |
| 1 | Innovative Uses of Underground Space | Gary S. Brierley (Speaker), Brierley & Associates |
| 2 | Soft Ground Tunnels for Transportation, Water and Wastewater Conveyance | Vojtech Gall (Speaker), Gall Consultants, LLC |
| 3 | New Transalpine Transportation Tunnels | Herbert Einstein (Speaker), Massachusetts Institute of Technology |
| 4 | Trenchless Technology to Solve Underground Utility Problems in Urban Areas | Daniel J. Dobbels (Speaker), Haley & Aldrich Incorporated |
| 5 | The Effects of Underground Construction on Nearby Buildings | Lewis Edgers (Speaker), Tufts University |
|
Revisiting Nuclear Power for the Energy Crisis
Sunday, February 17, 2002 3:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. |
|
| Virginia G. Carson, Chapman University; W. Carl Gottschall, Consultant |
| With the current energy crisis sweeping California and threatening to spread to other states, it is appropriate to revisit the use of nuclear energy for power. This symposium addresses the history of nuclear energy, public policy about the storage of nuclear waste, and future research that will be needed to give short term and long term possibilities for the use of nuclear energy as a power source. The history of nuclear power, while positive in many countries, includes some widely publicized accidents. The panel begins with an examination of the historical evolution of the use of nuclear energy. This will include the accidents at Three Mile Island and Chernobyl and the lessons learned from them. Currently nuclear power is being used successfully in this country as well as other nations; however, many Americans find nuclear power unacceptable. Concerns about the safe storage of nuclear waste will then be addressed as well as future possibilities for the use of nuclear energy as a power source and an overview of current research. Research concerned with developing advanced reactors. In the longer term, research on fusion reactors and the prospects for fusion systems offers some interesting alternatives. This long term research effort will be described as a conclusion to the symposium. |
| 1 | The Historic Record of Nuclear Power | W. Carl Gottschall (Speaker), Consultant |
| 2 | Nuclear-Energy Renaissance in the United States: What Would Be Required? | John P. Holdren (Speaker), Harvard University |
| 3 | Measuring and Achieving Goals for Advanced Nuclear Energy Systems | Per Peterson (Speaker), University of California-Berkeley |
| 4 | Generation IV Reactors: Plans and Prospects | Madeline Feltus (Speaker), Department of Energy |
| 5 | Recent Progress in Fusion Research and Future Prospects | Miklos Porkolab (Speaker), Massachusetts Institute of Technology |
| 6 | Solution of the Problem of Anomalous Transport in Magnetic Confinement | Norman Rostoker (Speaker), University of California-Irvine |
| 7 | High-Efficiency Direct Energy Conversion for Charged Fusion Products | Hendrik J. Monkhorst (Speaker), University of Florida |
|
Bridging the Gap from Scientific Discovery to Economic Growth
Saturday, February 16, 2002 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon |
|
| Lewis M. Branscomb, Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government |
| Extracting economic value from the annual U.S. R&D investment of over 00 billion depends critically upon the most fascinating and least understood part of our economic system: how new industries are created out of scientific discoveries and engineering inventions. The Bush Administration came into office proposing to terminate the Advanced Technology Program at NIST, which is the clearest example of such a federal effort. Is it possible to design such a program in a manner it not only serves the public interest, but does so in a manner that garners broad based political support? Both the S&T enterprise and the nation’s businesses and capital markets are reasonably well understood. . Each has its own institutions, its own sources of talent, and its own domain of public policy. Linking them is what Congressman Vern Ehlers and others have referred to as a Valley of Death -- a chaotic process, unstructured, creative, full of promise and risk, of potential billionaires and bankruptcies. Because of the geographical and sectoral skew in seed venture capital and Angel investments, and because of the states’ interest in economic development based on high tech innovation, some believe that ATP should be more closely linked to state and regional economic strategies. Others see ATP as a very high tech R&D program whose technical goals should not be sacrificed to state and regional politics. How could ATP be improved and the concerns of the skeptics ameliorated? |
| 1 | No Title Available | Lewis M. Branscomb (Moderator), Harvard University John F. Kennedy School of Government |
| 2 | Financial Resources for Converting Inventions to Innovations: Public and Private | Philip Auerswald (Speaker), Harvard University |
| 3 | The Role of Seed Venture Capital in High Tech Innovation | Paul Gompers (Speaker), Harvard Business School |
| 4 | Investing Your Own Money: Angel Investors and Networks | Hans Severeins (Speaker), Band of Angels |
| 5 | Exploring Academic Research Through Investments in High Tech Innovation | Joshua Lerner (Speaker), Harvard University Business School |
| 6 | No Title Available | Arden Bement (Speaker), NIST Director Designate |
|
Human Population and Freshwater Resources: Science, Policy and Public Outreach
Saturday, February 16, 2002 3:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. |
|
| Vicky Markham, Center for Environment and Population; Karin Krchnak, National Wildlife Federation; Nancy Thorne, Population Resource Center |
| In this session, leading US scientists will present their work and perspectives on the relationship between human population factors (such as rates of growth, density, urbanization, movement, and resource consumption) and freshwater resources and ecosystems, water quality and quantity, and related land use. Examples from the around the world and the US (South Florida ecosystem/Everglades, Chesapeake Bay) will be presented. The participants will present their latest work, and discuss how to integrate their findings and analysis into policy, media, advocacy, and public outreach efforts. They will also discuss gaps in the our knowledge on the topic, and recommend a research agenda and policy options. This session is based on a scientific experts' meeting on the topic held at Yale University in March 2001. |
| 1 | No Title Available | Don Hinrichsen (Moderator), |
| 2 | International Population--Water Science and Policy Issues | Sandra Postel (Speaker), Global Water Policy Project |
| 3 | State of the World Population Report on Environment and Development/Special Focus on Water | Stan Bernstein (Speaker), UNFPA-UN Population Fund |
| 4 | The South Florida Ecosystem/Everglades Case Study | Bonnie Kranzer (Speaker), South Florida Water Management District |
| 5 | The Chesapeake Bay Case Study | Margaret A. Palmer (Speaker), University of Maryland |
|
Arms Control in a Transformed World
Monday, February 18, 2002 3:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. |
|
| John P. Holdren, Harvard University; Jo L. Husbands, National Academy of Science, National Research Council |
| Prior to September 11th, the role of the international arms control regime as a continuing mainstay of global security was threatened from a number of directions. By the end of the Clinton Administration, initiatives to continue reducing nuclear weapons beyond the agreed levels of START II or to change the operational postures of remaining nuclear forces to reduce the risks posed to stability had stalled, in part because of increased U.S. interest in ballistic missile defenses, which also strained relations with China and Europe. Many cooperative threat reduction programs to address risks posed by Russian stocks of warheads and fissile materials had slowed in an atmosphere of mutual suspicion. India and Pakistan continued toward development of nuclear forces, with all the risks that implied for South Asia. Iraq had rejected the UN inspections that constrained its ambitions for weapons of mass destruction (WMD). The U.S. Senate refused to ratify the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty. The new administration rejected the efforts to negotiate a protocol to the Biological Weapons Convention that would add capabilities to verify compliance. With the attacks of September 11th, terrorists crossed the long-anticipated threshold of a willingness and ability to inflict mass casualties and raised the specter of vastly greater destruction with terrorist use of WMD. This poses a challenge and an opportunity. Can WMD be kept out of the hands of terrorists? How can the partnerships of the coalition against terrorism be translated into broader, more permanent forms of cooperation and merged with a suitably modified form of the pre-existing arms regime to meet the full range of dangers from WMD? |
| 1 | No Title Available | John P. Holdren (Moderator), Harvard University |
| 2 | The U.S.-Russian Strategic Relationship | William F. Burns (Speaker), Major General, USA (retired) |
| 3 | No Title Available | Jo L. Husbands (Moderator), National Academy of Science, National Research Council |
| 4 | Chemical Weapons | Leslie-Anne Levy (Speaker), The Henry L. Stimson Center |
| 5 | Biological Weapons | Matthew Meselson (Speaker), Harvard University |
| 6 | Cooperative Threat Reduction | Rose Gottemoeller (Speaker), Carnegie Endowment for International Peace |
| 7 | The Nuclear Nonproliferation Regime | Thomas Graham (Speaker), Lawyer's Alliance for World Security |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
