"Grand Challenges"

View previous topic View next topic Go down

"Grand Challenges"

Post by Miles1 on Sat May 19, 2012 4:32 am

White House's Tom Kalil on "Grand Challenges"

BB pal Tom Kalil of the White House's Office of Science and Technology Policy gave a presentation today about Grand Challenges, "ambitious yet achievable goals that capture the public’s imagination and that require innovation and breakthroughs in science and technology to achieve," like NASA's Green Flight Challenge and the Gates Foundation's Grand Challenges in Global Health. I think Tom's speech, delivered to the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, does a terrific job showing why the grand challenge approach is a powerful way to tackle some pretty daunting problems. He also puts grand challenges in the context of President Obama's Strategy for American Innovation. (By the way, it must be nice to be authorized to use the Presidential PowerPoint template.) From Tom's speech:

As President Kennedy observed, “By defining our goal more clearly, by making it seem more manageable and less remote, we can help all peoples to see it, to draw hope from it, and to move irresistibly towards it.”

Although there is no universally accepted definition of what constitutes a Grand Challenge, I want to focus on Grand Challenges that have the following attributes.

First, they can have a major impact in domains such as health, energy, sustainability, education, economic opportunity, national security, or human exploration.

Second, they are ambitious but achievable. Proposing to end scarcity in five years is certainly ambitious, but it is not achievable. As Arthur Sulzberger put it, “I believe in an open mind, but not so open that your brains fall out.”

Third, Grand Challenges are compelling and intrinsically motivating. They should capture the public’s imagination. Many people should be willing to devote a good chunk of their career to the pursuit of one of these goals.

Fourth, Grand Challenges have a “Goldilocks” level of specificity and focus. “Improving the human condition” is not a Grand Challenge because it does not provide enough guidance for what to do next. One of the virtues of a goal like “landing a man on the moon and returning him safely to the earth” is that it is clear whether it has been achieved. Grand Challenges should have measurable targets for success and timing of completion. On the other hand, a Grand Challenge that is too narrowly defined may assume a particular technical solution and reduce the opportunity for new approaches.

Finally, Grand Challenges can help drive and harness innovation and advances in science and technology. I certainly do not want to argue that technology is going to solve all of our problems. But it can be a powerful tool, particularly when combined with social, financial, policy, institutional, and business model innovations. The identification and pursuit of Grand Challenges has a number of benefits.

Grand Challenges can catalyze innovations that foster economic growth and job creation, spur the formation of multidisciplinary teams of researchers, encourage multi-sector collaborations, bring new expertise to bear on important problems, strengthen the “social contract” between science and society, and inspire the next generation of scientists, engineers, and entrepreneurs to work on hard and important problems.

Also, as various technologies such as bio, info, and nanotechnology become more and more powerful – the question “what should we do” is arguably as or more important than “what can we do.” This is not primarily a technical question, it is a question that relies on imagination, creativity, values, and our individual and shared views on how we define progress.

PDF: "The Grand Challenges of the 21st Century" by Tom Kalil (Whitehouse.gov)
PDF: Slides from the presentation (ITIF.org)

_________________
QVIDQVID LATINE DICTVM SIT, ALTVR PROFONDVS
avatar
Miles1

Posts : 1080
Join date : 2012-01-28
Age : 38
Location : Cork, IE

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: "Grand Challenges"

Post by Marconius on Mon May 21, 2012 9:27 pm

Ok, so this an advertisement for our own government's venture capital strategy.

Something's wrong here. We have a leader saying that a current challenger to his position is somehow not good for the country 'cause he was a venture capitalist........yet we have this.........yep, something's wrong.

Am I the only one who sees this??? Why do you guys seem to have so much faith in government and its ability to do anything??? How many times do you have to see government fall on its face??? How many power grabs do you need to see???

Eh, nevermind. It's safer to turn your life over to someone else. Carry on, nothing new to see here.

_________________
"If guns are supposed to kill people, then all of mine are defective..."
-The Honorable Ted Nugent

"We have four boxes used to guarantee our liberty: The soap box, the ballot box, the jury box and the cartridge box". -- Ambrose Bierce (1887)

"All right, they're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, and they're behind us. They can't get away this time!" -Gen. L. "Chesty" Puller, CO, 1 MARDIV, in Korea surrounded by 22 enemy divisions

Had the Japanese got as far as India, Gandhi's theories of "passive resistance" would have floated down the Ganges River with his bayoneted, beheaded carcass. -- Mike Vanderboegh.
avatar
Marconius

Posts : 1800
Join date : 2012-01-31
Age : 47
Location : Opelousas Louisiana

View user profile

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum