1
Introduction and Background
The U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) is a federal government program mandated by Congress in 1990 to coordinate and integrate research and investments to “assist the Nation and the world to understand, assess, predict, and respond to human-induced and natural processes of global change.”1
As detailed in the 2017 report Accomplishments of the U.S. Global Change Research Program (NASEM, 2017), two primary value-added activities of the USGCRP are (1) strategic planning and coordination of global change research activities across the many federal agencies engaged in global change research and (2) high-level synthesis of global change research results and sharing them with decision makers and the American public. These two activities have contributed to a variety of advancements in scientific capabilities, understanding, and applications. Examples highlighted in the 2017 report of scientific accomplishments enabled by the USGCRP collaborations included developing global Earth observing systems; improving Earth system modeling capabilities and understanding of carbon cycle processes; and increasing understanding of the multidimensional interactions between society, social dynamics, and global change, although progress in this area was noted to be uneven.
Decadal Strategic Planning
The Global Change Research Act (GCRA, 1990) requires development by USGCRP of a decadal strategic plan, as well as triennial updates to this plan. The purpose of the strategic plan is to define “the goals and priorities for federal global change research which most effectively advance scientific understanding of global change and provide usable information on which to base policy decisions relating to global change” (GCRA, 1990, Sec. 104 (b) 1). USGCRP developed the most recent DSP “for longer-term visioning for the Program and encouraging convergence among the agencies” (Appendix B).
Draft Decadal Strategic Plan, 2022-2031
In May 2022, the USGCRP released for public comment a draft decadal strategic plan for 2022-2031. This draft DSP was developed by a subgroup of the Subcommittee on Global Change Research (the SGCR, effectively the USGCRP “Board of Directors”). Critical inputs to the process included Dr. Jane Lubchenco’s letter to Dr. J. Michael Kuperberg2 (Lubchenco, 2021); comments and discussion with USGCRP interagency groups and at agency listening sessions, where many participants were from non-member agencies; the report of the Academies’ Committee to Advise the USGCRP, Global Change Research Needs and
___________________
1 In this report, the Committee understands and uses the term “global change” in the context of USGCRP’s work to address global environmental changes, rather than non-Earth system drivers of global change, such as globalization. Consistent with the definition in the Global Change Research Act, the Committee uses “global change” to encompass climate change and other changes in the global environment, “that may alter the capacity of the Earth to sustain life” (GCRA, 1990).
2 Dr. Lubchenco is the Deputy Director for Climate and Environment, Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) in the Executive Office of the President. Dr. Kuperberg is the Executive Director of the USGCRP.
Opportunities for 2022-2031 (NASEM, 2021); and public comments on the prospectus for the DSP.
This draft DSP provides an overview of the USGCRP and its mission, vision, and structure for the coming decade. The core of the DSP is structured around four pillars (USGCRP, 2022):
- Advancing Science. Advance scientific knowledge of interconnected natural and human systems and risks to society from global change.
- Informing Decisions. Provide accessible, usable information to inform decisions on mitigation, adaptation, and resilience.
- Engaging the Nation. Enhance the Nation’s ability to understand and respond to global change by expanding participation in the federal research enterprise.
- Collaborating Internationally. Build global capacity to respond to global change through international cooperation and collaboration.
The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and the USGCRP
The National Academies has been an advisor to USGCRP planning efforts since the Program’s formation (NASEM, 2017, Appendix D). In mid-2011, a new National Academies Committee to Advise the USGCRP (hereafter, the Committee) was formed and charged with providing a centralized source of ongoing whole-program advice to USGCRP (hereafter, the Program). The first major task of the Committee was to review a draft of the USGCRP 2012-2021 DSP. Now, a decade later, the Committee is tasked with reviewing the draft of USGCRP’s 2022-2031 DSP.
STATEMENT OF TASK FOR THE DSP REVIEW
The Statement of Task for the Committee’s review of the draft DSP 2022-2013 contains five questions (Appendix A):
- Is the plan consistent with the direction provided in Section 104 of the Global Change Research Act?
- Are the plan’s goals clear and appropriate? Do they reflect the Nation’s needs for information on climate and global change?
- Does the plan show a clear strategy for coordination and integration that involves multiple disciplines and multiple agencies?
- Does the plan communicate effectively with both the public and the scientific community?
- Are there any factual errors, or major content areas missing from the plan that should be present if the Program is to achieve its overall vision and mission?
These five questions together with the transmittal letter from USGCRP to the Committee (Appendix B) guided the structure of our review.
In considering the charge for this review, the Committee agreed that the scope and content of the draft DSP (question 1) is consistent with the Global Change Research Act and its strategic planning provisions (Section 104), recognizing that many of the directives in Section
104 were specific to the development of the first USGCRP Decadal Strategic Plan (GCRA, 1990). The bulk of this report and the Committee’s recommendations consider and address questions 2-4, including the clarity, appropriateness, and fit of the goals in the DSP relative to the Nation’s needs for understanding and responding to global changes, as well as opportunities for strengthening and expanding coordination and integration of global change research. Finally, the Committee identifies editorial issues to be addressed (noted in the report and the appendix). In response to question 5, no major factual errors in the DSP were found.
BLUEPRINT OF THIS REVIEW
The Committee applauds the work of the USGCRP in developing this draft Decadal Strategic Plan and hopes its recommendations contribute to an even stronger Decadal Strategic Plan for 2022-2031.
This review is built around the draft DSP’s four-pillar framework. The Committee’s report begins by recognizing a set of themes and issues that weave together the four pillars and using these common themes and issues as a basis to make recommendations to strengthen the final DSP. Next, the review focuses on each of the four pillars and offers recommendations to refine and in some cases expand strategic objectives put forth by USGCRP. Finally, throughout this review, the Committee recommends ways the language and tone of the draft DSP can be improved for clarity and to communicate a sense of urgency about the critical need for a comprehensive and robust U.S. Global Change Research Program to “assist the Nation and the world to understand, assess, predict, and respond to human-induced and natural processes of global change” (GCRA, 1990).
In this review, the Committee commends the draft DSP for expanding the audiences for USGCRP’s work by strengthening a commitment to engagement in global change research. Throughout this review, the Committee provides guidance and recommendations for even deeper engagement with and connections between the public, decision makers, and scientific communities. The Committee encourages dialogue between scientists and stakeholders consistent with the best practices of a true partnership to produce the useful and usable data, information, and tools needed to address global change challenges. In both cross-cutting themes and discussions of individual DSP pillars in this review, the Committee identifies content and strategy gaps—primarily missed opportunities for deeper integration across the plan.
This page intentionally left blank.
