The Federal Investment in Highway Research, 2006-2009 Strengths and Weaknesses - Special Report 295 (2008) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
6 Summary Findings and Recommendations
6 Summary Findings and Recommendations
Pages 131-141
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 131... ...
SUMMARY FINDINGS Principles for Research This report has analyzed the conformance of highway research funded through the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) to the principles for research articulated by Congress in the preamble to the research title (Title V)
|
From page 132... ...
In principle, the federal role of coordinating across research programs, leading in advanced research, filling gaps not covered by state or private programs, and facilitating technology transfer provides coherence across this decentralized enterprise, avoids duplication, and facilitates innovation. The considerable expansion of funding for University Transportation Centers (UTCs)
|
From page 133... ...
Justification for Federal Investment The RD&T programs of FHWA, RITA, and SHRP 2 are easily justified by the criteria of national significance, suboptimal private investment, and the importance of encouraging more efficient use of federal aid. The education component of the UTC Program is justified by the national significance of having a skilled transportation workforce available in a national labor market.
|
From page 134... ...
Fostering innovations requires more than simply convincing states and local governments about the merits of new ideas. It must encompass deliberate programs of technology transfer, which include development of manuals, guidebooks, and specifications, where appropriate, and may include pilot projects to prove that new concepts work in the field.
|
From page 135... ...
SHRP 2 is a good model of stakeholder involvement in research. Including the pre–SAFETEA-LU planning phases, the program has allowed stakeholders to set program goals, develop a research agenda, select projects, merit review proposals, and peer review projects and their products.
|
From page 136... ...
Each program is required to undergo peer review, but the results of that review are not made public. Individually earmarked universities and research institutes outside of the UTC Program have no real accountability for the funds they receive.
|
From page 137... ...
(The $1 million in annual funding restored in the Technical Corrections legislation is far short of the $9 million to $10 million FHWA previously had available for policy research.) No funding is available to meet some elements of the SAFETEA-LU principles for RD&T, including performance review and evaluation involving external experts and stakeholders.
|
From page 138... ...
The Exploratory Advanced Research Program begun under SAFETEA-LU should be continued. To permit UTCs to devote more of their efforts to advanced research, the matching requirement for UTC research should be reduced to a 20 percent university match.
|
From page 139... ...
Finally, in accordance with the principle of federal support for research and technology transfer by the states, the SP&R Program should be reauthorized. Funding FHWA should be provided the resources it needs to deliver on the commitments made in its Corporate Master Plan to involve stakeholders more substantively in its RD&T program, specifically in agenda setting, merit review, and peer review.
|
From page 140... ...
States and MPOs rely heavily on the National Household Transportation Survey; that survey was dropped by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) , whose funding was also sharply reduced in SAFETEA-LU.
|
From page 141... ...
Publicly funded highway research programs have developed innovations that have resulted in longer-lived assets at lower costs, reduced environmental impacts, saved lives, and improved economic efficiency. Additional innovation will be needed to improve safety, reduce congestion, address environmental and energy concerns, and provide the quality highway system the nation's citizens expect.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.