transportation research board special report 313 david huft aashto research advisory committee july...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Framing Surface Transportation Research
for the Nation’s Future
Transportation Research BoardSpecial Report 313
David HuftAASHTO Research Advisory Committee
July 28, 2015
2
New National Research Framework More Productive Federal Research
Enterprise
Recommendations
Pressure on research budgets Increased international competition Greater expectations of productivity Push for greater accountability and
enhanced performance
Motivation
3
Can lessons learned from transportation research in other countries and non-transportation sectors domestically improve surface transportation research in the United States?
If so, how?
The Task
4
No reorganization of federal agencies No changes to budgetary processes Preserve what works Engage the stakeholders
Study Constraints
5
Sue McNeil, U of Delaware (chair) William L. Ball, Merriweather Advisors, LLC Irwin Feller, Pennsylvania State University (emeritus) Robert E. Gallamore, Gallamore Group, LLC Genevieve Giuliano, UCLA David L. Huft, SDDOT Dennis C. Judycki, FHWA (retired) Tschangho John Kim, U of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Laurie G. McGinnis, U of Minnesota Peter F. Sweatman, U of Michigan Nigel H. M. Wilson, MIT Jill Wilson, TRB (Study Director)
Study Committee
6
Committee’s Approach
Other countries (EU, France, The Netherlands, United Kingdom, Japan, and South Korea)
Developed framework concept Identified desirable attributes of a research framework Conducted high level appraisal of the current U.S.
research enterprise Recommended next steps
Documented transportation research frameworks in:
Domestic non-transportation sectors (Agriculture, Astronomy, Construction, Energy, Health, and Science)
7
…the social, political and organizationalstructures in which research is conducted and the processes by which it is accomplished
Evaluation
Societal Goals
Agenda Setting
Funding
Research
Dissemination Implementation
What do we meanby a “research framework”?
8
Engages stakeholders
Supports collaboration
Blends top-down and bottom-up approaches
Generates a comprehensive agenda and balanced portfolio
Engages researchers
Promotes quality research
Builds on related work
Embraces implementation strategies
Supports implementation
Develops human capital
Communicates new knowledge
Demonstrates return on investment
Framework Attributes
9
Innovation process complex, “messy” Strengths
◦ Robust portfolio of applied research◦ Education of future transportation professionals
Weaknesses◦ Weak linkage between research and national goals◦ Focus on problem solving at the expense of basic
and advanced research◦ Fragmented◦ Limited effort to quantify impact and return on
investment
US Surface Transportation Research
10
Raise awareness of Surface Transportation Research◦ OSTP and USDOT work to elevate visibility of
transportation research on national science and technology agenda
◦ Promote transportation research successes◦ Seek to quantify research impacts and returns
A More Productive Federal Research Enterprise
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965
1966
1967
1968
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
0.00%
0.02%
0.04%
0.06%
0.08%
Federal Transportation R&D as % of GDP
11
A More Productive Federal Research Enterprise
Strengthen USDOT research culture and capacity◦ Engage more fully with federal research community◦ Consider creating Chief Scientist position within Office of
the Secretary◦ Continue to promote knowledge transfer and disseminate
research results
Create environment for “quantum leaps” in transportation performance◦ Pursue broad and robust program of basic and advanced
research◦ Encompass the many relevant disciplines
12
Why?
Develop a cohesive structure for transportation research
Create mechanism to
◦ identify research goals
◦ fund and conduct research
◦ measure research performance and outcomes
How?
Convene a National Summit
Who?
AASHTO Standing Committee on Research
◦ Technically respected
◦ Nationwide state DOT constituency
◦ Directly responsible for delivering transportation services
◦ Key research sponsors and users
A NewNational Research Framework
13
Identify high level research challenges to support societal goals
Involve public, private, and academic stakeholders, including non-traditional
Explore areas of common interest & synergy Recommend who should lead the
framework initiative after the summit Recommend funding mechanism
How a Summit Might Work
14
Steps Leading to aNew National Research Framework
Leadership and Oversight
National Summit
Strategies for Addressing Transportation Research
Challenges
Research
Outcomes
Convener and OrganizingCommittee
OrganizingEntity
15
Status & Next StepsTRB Ad Hoc Study
National Summit $750K from SCOR 14-16 member
committee Timetable TBD All transportation
modes (not just surface transportation)
Envisioned Work Plan
Recap SR313, begin planning for Summit
Determine Summit format and invitees
Hold Summit, debrief, begin deliberations
Reach consensus, complete report
16
SR 313, Framing Surface Transportation Research for the Nation’s Future, available at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/sr/sr313.pdf
Points of contact:◦ Steve Godwin, TRB staff, [email protected] ◦ Sue McNeil, chair, [email protected]◦ Dave Huft, committee member,
Committee’s Report
17
What benefits can you envision from creating a new national research framework?
What concerns do you have?
What advice would you offer to SCOR and TRB regarding the proposed National Summit?
Discussion