Glenn E. Futrell Distinguished University Professor North Carolina State University, North Carolina
Abstract Description: Advances in science have improved environmental protection since the Environmental Protection Agency’s founding in 1970. However, many legacy challenges remain, and new challenges have emerged, for which there is a continued need for relevant science to inform decisions. The objective of this paper is to describe the development and translation of science, and role of science to inform decisions, at EPA and to identify, contextualize, and evaluate associated strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT). Examples of key strengths are that EPA employs world class scientists, is conducting world-class research that is relevant to informing decisions, and has a track record of providing scientific input to Agency decisions. Furthermore, EPA science supports external partners, including states, Tribes, local governments, and communities. Additional strengths are related to close attention to information quality requirements, as exemplified by the role of independent external scientific expert peer review, and a culture of scientific integrity. Examples of weaknesses include lack of adequate resources to fully meet the growing scientific information needs of internal and external partners, lack of capacity to be able to more rapidly accommodate partner needs that emerge outside of the existing research planning cycle, and challenges with regard to facilities, space, equipment, computing, and others. Opportunities include: continued commitment to developing and translating science to inform decisions according to established and accepted scientific processes; development of methods, tools, and techniques to conduct hazard identification, exposure, and dose response assessment, as well as identify and deliver effective interventions, more quickly and at lower cost; development of systems-based science to provide a more comprehensive foundation for well-informed and robust decisions; raising awareness to key stakeholders of the importance of science to inform decisions; and improving public awareness of the importance of science via initiatives that include participatory science and community-based participatory research, and others. Examples of threats include: potential budget cuts; attacks on science by regulated parties or their representatives that aim, without scientific merit, to sow doubt in science that informs decisions; potential lack of leadership support for the role of science to inform decisions at EPA, and the appropriate approach to develop and interpret science according to principles of scientific integrity; interference in well-established institutions of science such as advisory committees and external peer review; potential termination or reassignment of specific programs; personnel decisions; and others. The SWOT analysis will be contextualized for both short- and long-term time horizons.
