Since its establishment, researchers have been slow to embrace the 'broader impacts' aspect of US National Science Foundation grant applications, write Britt Holbrook and Robert Frodeman, two philosophers from the University of North Texas. "This resistance stems in part from the definition of the sort of research NSF is supposed to fund — basic research. … [Vannevar Bush] defined basic research as research done without regard for its practical consequences," they say at Science Progress, a progressive science policy publication. However, Holbrook and Frodeman add that broader impact statements are not going away and researchers "should look for ways to own" them as they are "approaching parity with the Intellectual Merit criterion."
Mar 03, 2012