Page 33 - Acoustics Today Spring 2011

the party or position that they might be arguing for or against. Staffers tended to appreciate these lobbyists, who appeared to operate from the assumption that their position would “win” if all sides had the most complete information possible.
When I first began as a Fellow, preparing for meetings with lobbyists, for discussions with other Congressional offices and committees, and for internal briefings seemed an impossible task. The issue area I covered, education, includ- ed everything from early childhood development to graduate research and education policy. What was more, understand- ing a given proposal required some knowledge of a complex web of federal, state, and local laws and regulations. And I had it easy; Fellows and staffers who worked in the House rather than the Senate typically covered many issues. How on earth did they manage? Fortunately, Congressional staffers can call on a considerable resource, the Congressional Research Service. The Congressional Research Service con- sists of a team of researchers from a variety of academic and professional fields with great depth in a given issue or sub- issue. In addition, outside experts are typically quite willing, and often even flattered, to receive a call or email from a Congressional office seeking advice or input on an issue. As I learned, the job of a staffer is not to analyze a problem and develop a new solution. Typically, many technical solutions to a given problem being considered by Congress already exist. The difficulties lie in identifying the trade-offs involved in these solutions, and in developing the political support necessary to nudge policy in a certain direction. In this way, the job of a staffer is quite different from the job of a research scientist. I rarely if ever made direct use of my scientific back- ground (my research was interdisciplinary, involving physics, applied math, and biomedical engineering), but I could speak from experience about how science and higher education policies impact research and education in universities. I also found that being able to translate the language of scientists made it much easier to communicate with constituents and advocates on science education issues. Most importantly, the analytical perspective that I brought fit very well with the approach of Senator Bingaman and his staff.
Science diplomacy
The Congressional Fellowship lasts for only one year, with no renewal, while Fellows in the three executive branch areas can renew for a second year. Fellows can re-apply in another fellowship area (as long as a Fellow serves no more than three years in total). Last spring I went through the application process again, and this year I am a Science & Technology Policy Fellow in the State Department, working in the Office of Public Diplomacy and Public Affairs, within the Bureau of African Affairs.
As one might expect, the pace at the State Department is rapid and event-driven. The organization of the State Department is complex. Roughly speaking, it is organized into a matrix of bureaus. On one axis are the “regional bureaus” that cover large regions of the world, such as the Western Hemisphere, East Asia, and Sub-Saharan Africa. On the other axis are the functional bureaus, for example, the
Bureau of Economic, Energy, and Business Affairs; the
Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor; and the
Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and
Scientific Affairs. Secretary Clinton has ordered a re-organi-
zation of the State Department under the Quadrennial
22
Affairs), and has functional responsibility. The mission of our office is to inform and engage the American public on U.S. policy in Sub-Saharan Africa (which is referred to as “public affairs”), and to inform and engage publics in Sub-Saharan Africa on issues that are important to the U.S. government (“public diplomacy”).
Our office sought a Science & Technology Policy Fellow because of the great interest throughout the State Department in science diplomacy. This interest comes directly from the top, so to speak. On several occasions, both President Obama and Secretary Clinton have described how science plays a key role in the administration’s diplomacy and development strategy. The President’s 2009 Cairo speech21 is perhaps the best known example. “Science diplomacy” often refers to three main ideas. The first is diplomacy for science (you may be noticing a pattern here), the bi-lateral or multi- lateral agreements needed to conduct an international scien- tific project. The second, science for diplomacy, is perhaps more interesting from the policy perspective. Science for diplomacy refers to using science as a basis for engagement, especially with countries in which bilateral relations with the U.S. are challenging. Perhaps the most well-known example of science diplomacy comes from the Cold War, when inter- action between U.S. and Soviet scientists was one of the only channels of communication in an otherwise hostile relation- ship.
Our office is most interested in the third aspect of sci- ence diplomacy, which is science outreach directly to foreign publics. Even in countries that view America with a high degree of distrust, science is one area in which the U.S. is almost universally admired. In Sub-Saharan Africa, where the U.S. enjoys relatively good relations, many of our Embassies and Consulates use science outreach as a key tool in public diplomacy. Because of the obvious connection that science and technology have to other important policy issues such as health, education, and economic development, sci- ence outreach can be a good mechanism for engaging with a variety of sectors within a country. Science outreach is also an excellent way to connect with young people in Africa, which is the top priority for our office. Given recent events in North Africa, governments on the rest of continent have a clear incentive to listen to and learn from their young people, rather than continue to ignore the needs and opinions of the next generation.
Initially, my job in the office was to cover anything and everything science-related. However, the leadership in our office has commented to me that perhaps my most valuable contribution is my ability to offer an analytical and data-driv- en perspective. I am fortunate to work in an office that has a real desire to bring data into conversations that have nothing to do with science outreach. I am also lucky to work with
Diplomacy and Development Review.
My office is in a regional bureau (the Bureau of African
Science Policy Matters 29