IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/pal/stachp/978-1-137-35905-6_5.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Growing Pains: Evolution of OTA’s Process of Technology Assessment

In: Congress’s Own Think Tank: Learning from the Legacy of the Office of Technology Assessment (1972–1995)

Author

Listed:
  • Peter D. Blair

Abstract

For any given OTA assessment a great deal of effort went into defining the detailed scope of the work. Since the agency often received more requests than it could accommodate, for prospective topics requested by a congressional committee, the OTA stafi’often consulted with other committees of jurisdiction and interest to be as broadly responsive as possible and to help establish priorities fairly. Formal proposals for assessments were considered by TAB and, if approved, an assessment commenced with funds drawn from OTA’s annual appropriation. Key elements of each OTA assessment included a comprehensive advisory panel of technical experts and relevant stakeholders; a core OTA project team including an experienced project director; contractors selected to support major analytical tasks; in-house research efforts by the project team; workshops convened with additional experts and stakeholders to obtain the most current and accurate information possible; extensive external peer review of draft reports; and dissemination of reports through congressional hearings, briefings, and public release.

Suggested Citation

  • Peter D. Blair, 2013. "Growing Pains: Evolution of OTA’s Process of Technology Assessment," Science, Technology, and Innovation Policy, in: Congress’s Own Think Tank: Learning from the Legacy of the Office of Technology Assessment (1972–1995), chapter 5, pages 50-57, Palgrave Macmillan.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:stachp:978-1-137-35905-6_5
    DOI: 10.1057/9781137359056_5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:stachp:978-1-137-35905-6_5. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.