1. Transportation Research Board Special Report 313 David Huft AASHTO Research Advisory Committee July 28, 2015 1

2.  New National Research Framework  More Productive Federal Research Enterprise 2  Pressure on research budgets  Increased international competition  Greater expectations of productivity  Push for greater accountability and enhanced performance

3.  Can lessons learned from transportation research in other countries and non- transportation sectors domestically improve surface transportation research in the United States?  If so, how? 3

4.  No reorganization of federal agencies  No changes to budgetary processes  Preserve what works  Engage the stakeholders 4

5.  Sue McNeil, U of Delaware (chair)  William L. Ball, Merriweather Advisors, LLC  Irwin Feller, Pennsylvania State University (emeritus)  Robert E. Gallamore, Gallamore Group, LLC  Genevieve Giuliano, UCLA  David L. Huft, SDDOT  Dennis C. Judycki, FHWA (retired)  Tschangho John Kim, U of Illinois Urbana-Champaign  Laurie G. McGinnis, U of Minnesota  Peter F. Sweatman, U of Michigan  Nigel H. M. Wilson, MIT  Jill Wilson, TRB (Study Director) 5

6.  Other countries (EU, France, The Netherlands, United Kingdom, Japan, and South Korea)  Developed framework concept  Identified desirable attributes of a research framework  Conducted high level appraisal of the current U.S. research enterprise  Recommended next steps 6  Documented transportation research frameworks in:  Domestic non-transportation sectors (Agriculture, Astronomy, Construction, Energy, Health, and Science)

7. …the social, political and organizational structures in which research is conducted and the processes by which it is accomplished 7

8.  Engages stakeholders  Supports collaboration  Blends top-down and bottom-up approaches  Generates a comprehensive agenda and balanced portfolio  Engages researchers  Promotes quality research  Builds on related work  Embraces implementation strategies  Supports implementation  Develops human capital  Communicates new knowledge  Demonstrates return on investment 8

9.  Innovation process complex, “messy”  Strengths ◦ Robust portfolio of applied research ◦ Education of future transportation professionals  Weaknesses ◦ Weak linkage between research and national goals ◦ Focus on problem solving at the expense of basic and advanced research ◦ Fragmented ◦ Limited effort to quantify impact and return on investment 9

10.  Raise awareness of Surface Transportation Research ◦ OSTP and USDOT work to elevate visibility of transportation research on national science and technology agenda ◦ Promote transportation research successes ◦ Seek to quantify research impacts and returns 10

11.  Strengthen USDOT research culture and capacity ◦ Engage more fully with federal research community ◦ Consider creating Chief Scientist position within Office of the Secretary ◦ Continue to promote knowledge transfer and disseminate research results 11  Create environment for “quantum leaps” in transportation performance ◦ Pursue broad and robust program of basic and advanced research ◦ Encompass the many relevant disciplines

12. Why?  Develop a cohesive structure for transportation research  Create mechanism to ◦ identify research goals ◦ fund and conduct research ◦ measure research performance and outcomes How?  Convene a National Summit Who?  AASHTO Standing Committee on Research ◦ Technically respected ◦ Nationwide state DOT constituency ◦ Directly responsible for delivering transportation services ◦ Key research sponsors and users 12

13.  Identify high level research challenges to support societal goals  Involve public, private, and academic stakeholders, including non-traditional  Explore areas of common interest & synergy  Recommend who should lead the framework initiative after the summit  Recommend funding mechanism 13

14. Leadership and Oversight Leadership and Oversight National Summit Strategies for Addressing Transportation Research Challenges Research Outcomes Convener and Organizing Committee Organizing Entity 14

15. TRB Ad Hoc Study  National Summit  $750K from SCOR  14-16 member committee  Timetable TBD  All transportation modes (not just surface transportation) Envisioned Work Plan  Recap SR313, begin planning for Summit  Determine Summit format and invitees  Hold Summit, debrief, begin deliberations  Reach consensus, complete report 15

16.  SR 313, Framing Surface Transportation Research for the Nation’s Future, available at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/sr/sr313.pdf http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/sr/sr313.pdf  Points of contact: ◦ Steve Godwin, TRB staff, sgodwin@nas.edusgodwin@nas.edu ◦ Sue McNeil, chair, smcneil@udel.edusmcneil@udel.edu ◦ Dave Huft, committee member, dave.huft@state.sd.usdave.huft@state.sd.us 16

17.  What benefits can you envision from creating a new national research framework?  What concerns do you have?  What advice would you offer to SCOR and TRB regarding the proposed National Summit? 17