LEFT BEHIND IN ENGINEERING? The "Economic Competitiveness" Frame is a Major Tool Used to Sell Investment in Science; Duke University Students Question How Bad the Problem Really Is
Matthew C. Nisbet, Ph.D. is Associate Professor of Communication Studies, Public Policy, and Urban Affairs at Northeastern University. Nisbet studies the role of communication and advocacy in policymaking and public affairs, focusing on debates over over climate change, energy, and sustainability. Among awards and recognition, Nisbet has been a Visiting Shorenstein Fellow on Press, Politics, and Public Policy at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government, a Health Policy Investigator at the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, and a Google Science Communication Fellow. In 2011, the editors at the journal Nature recommended Nisbet's research as “essential reading for anyone with a passing interest in the climate change debate,” and the New Republic highlighted his work as a “fascinating dissection of the shortcomings of climate activism."
The "Economic Competitiveness" frame is one of the dominate ways that proponents of science try to rally public support for investment. Historically, first in the context of the Cold War, and now in the context of globalization, American science has warned that the U.S. is falling behind other nations in science education, PhDs, engineers, science spending etc. The strategy is a classic example of the construction of a social problem, interpreting real-world statistics or events in ways that raises alarm, mobilizes concern, and sponsors action. (See this recent Time magazine cover story as an example or last week's answers to Ask a Science blogger.)
Now, NPR runs a story this morning on Duke University engineering students who decided to double-check government statistics on just how bad the problem might be. Does China, for example, really produce eight times as many engineers as the U.S.? And even if they did, given the population size of China and the level of training available there, in comparative perspective, is this something to be worried about? The link to the Real Audio is not live yet, but it is definitely worth checking out later today.
We're more dependent on them than we realize.
- Scientists says our survival depends on biodiversity.
- A natural climate strategy we often forget.
- Seeing our place among the Earth's living creatures.
There's a high social cost that comes with lighting up.
While short-term results are positive, there is mounting evidence against staying in ketosis for too long.
- Recent studies showed volunteers lost equal or more weight on high-carb, calorie-restricted diets than low-carb, calorie restricted diets.
- There might be positive benefits to short-term usage of a ketogenic diet.
- One dietician warns that the ketogenic diet could put diabetics at risk for diabetic ketoacidosis.
SMARTER FASTER trademarks owned by The Big Think, Inc. All rights reserved.