Assessing the science-society relation: The case of the US National Science Foundation's second merit review criterion

The science-society relation exhibits a tension between scientific autonomy and societal control of the direction and scope of scientific research. With the 1997 formulation of two generic merit review criteria for the assessment of National Science Foundation proposals-one for intellectual merit, and a second for 'broader impacts'-this tension between science and society took on a unique institutional expression that has yet to work itself out into a well-accepted balance of complementary interests. This article examines some of the issues associated especially with the second 'broader impacts' criterion.