This week I’ve seen a couple of reports about a call for a Department of Innovation by University of California, Davis sociologist Fred Block.  In a Washington briefing earlier this week, he released a white paper (which is mysteriously not available online, but probably informed by this report issued during the summer) which described several recommendations for the Obama Administration on innovation.  Among the recommendations is a call for a cabinet-level Department of Innovation.  This is yet another example of the science and technology policy communities’ nearly pathological obsession with the U.S. cabinet.  I’m ready to group that particular fascination with the perpetuation of the linear model and the overemphasis on the budget as some of the biggest self-defeating aphorisms in public policy.

My main objection with this call for a Department of Innovation (the only recommendation in the report I have concerns about) comes from the intended purposes of the department.  From the CNET piece (which has an interesting description of some federally supported venture capital groups):

The new department, Block said, would not run innovation programs itself but instead oversee interdepartmental collaboration and the use of best practices, among other things.

Of the fifteen current Cabinet departments, I’m aware of none of them that are strictly charged with coordination and encouraging best practices.  Those functions certainly take place in parts of Cabinet departments, but independent bodies that are solely focused on those functions, especially interdepartmental activity, are usually councils or similar kinds of committees that are an independent agency or part of the Executive Office of the President.  What Block describes would be better off in the Office of Science and Technology Policy, or possibly within whatever office is constructed to support the Chief Technology Officer President-elect Obama wants in his administration.

Scientists and technologists that inject themselves into policy debates ought to have a better sense of the mechanics of politics and policy than what Block demonstrates.  But I’m continually disappointed by the reach for a simple fix that is usually neither simple nor formulated in a way that corresponds with the policy environment where the fix would operate.  Block’s understanding is far too typical, and probably contributes to the relative inattention our communities receive.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, December 3rd, 2008 at 8:09 pm and is filed under Author: Bruggeman, D., Science + Politics, Science Policy: General, Technology Policy. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.