Broader Impacts 2.0: Seeing—and Seizing—the Opportunity

Since its implementation in 1997, the National Science Foundation's (NSF) Merit Review Broader Impacts Criterion has often been viewed by scientists and engineers as a distraction. The real work of science was captured by outlining a project's intellectual merit; broader impacts meant an additional burden in the lives of increasingly harried researchers. Over the years, some members of the scientific community have even argued for its elimination from the merit review process. Nonetheless, the Broader Impacts Criterion has survived. Congress included a requirement for the NSF to attend to the broader impact of its sponsored research in the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010, and with the December 2011 revision of the Merit Review Criteria by the National Science Board (NSB) and the subsequent release of the NSF's new Proposal and Award Policies and Procedures Guide in October 2012, the status of the Broader Impacts Criterion within the Merit Review process has increased significantly. The NSF's revisions more explicitly integrate the Broader Impacts and Intellectual Merit Criteria, require a separate Broader Impacts section in grant proposals, and mandate a detailed account and assessment of a project's broader impacts in grantee reports. More important, the revisions raise the bar on how broader impacts are evaluated by applying the same five review elements now used to assess intellectual merit. Rather than going away—as some scientists had hoped it would—a new, more prominent Broader Impacts Criterion is emerging. Say goodbye to Criterion 2, and say hello to Broader Impacts 2.0.