In March 2009, the predecessor Science and Technology Committee published the findings of its wide-ranging inquiry into engineering, "Engineering: turning ideas into reality" (HCP 50-I, session 2008-09, ISBN 9780215529268). The Committee examined four case studies: (i) nuclear engineering; (ii) plastic electronics engineering; (iii) geo-engineering; and (iv) engineering in Government. Through the case study on engineering in Government, the Committee made a number of recommendations to improve the Government's use of engineering advice and expertise in policy processes, which were supplemented further by the 2009 report "Putting Science and Engineering at the Heart of Government Policy" (HCP 168-I, session 2008-09, ISBN 9780215540348). In this report, the Committee states that Government and the engineering community have made progress in integrating engineering expertise and concerns into the formulation of policy. The formation of the Engineering the Future alliance as a coordinated voice for the professional engineering community and the ongoing efforts of the Government Chief Scientific Adviser in raising the profile of engineering advice are commended. The Government needs to ensure that engineering continues to have a high profile in policy, and particularly in policy development.

In a world where web services can make real-time data accessible to anyone, how can the government leverage this openness to improve its operations and increase citizen participation and awareness? Through a collection of essays and case studies, leading visionaries and practitioners both inside and outside of government share their ideas on how to achieve and direct this emerging world of online collaboration, transparency, and participation. Contributions and topics include: Beth Simone Noveck, U.S. Deputy Chief Technology Officer for open government, "The Single Point of Failure" Jerry Brito, senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, "All Your Data Are Belong to Us: Liberating Government Data" Aaron Swartz, cofounder of reddit.com, OpenLibrary.org, and BoldProgressives.org, "When Is Transparency Useful?" Ellen S. Miller, executive director of the Sunlight Foundation, "Disrupting Washington's Golden Rule" Carl Malamud, founder of Public.Resource.Org, "By the People" Douglas Schuler, president of the Public Sphere Project, "Online Deliberation and Civic Intelligence" Howard Dierking, program manager on Microsoft's MSDN and TechNet Web platform team, "Engineering Good Government" Matthew Burton, Web entrepreneur and former intelligence analyst at the Defense Intelligence Agency, "A Peace Corps for Programmers" Gary D. Bass and Sean Moulton, OMB Watch, "Bringing the Web 2.0 Revolution to Government" Tim O'Reilly, founder and CEO of O'Reilly Media, "Defining Government 2.0: Lessons Learned from the Success of Computer Platforms" Open Government editors: Daniel Lathrop is a former investigative projects reporter with the Seattle Post Intelligencer who's covered politics in Washington state, Iowa, Florida, and Washington D.C. He's a specialist in campaign finance and "computer-assisted reporting" -- the practice of using data analysis to report the news. Laurel Ruma is the Gov 2.0 Evangelist at O'Reilly Media. She is also co-chair for the Gov 2.0 Expo.

At the request of the Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable (GUIRR), Shirley Ann Jackson, President of Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, presents in this brief paper her views of the challenges of the 21st century for the science and engineering workforce. Dr. Jackson identifies factors that she believes are contributing to a declining science and engineering workforce, describes the risks and consequences of this decline, and proposes specific, short-term tasks for universities, industry, and the federal government to strengthen and revitalize the workforce.

A report that considers the broad issue of why science and engineering are important and why they should be at the heart of Government policy. It also considers three more specific issues: the debate on strategic priorities; the principles that inform science funding decisions; and, the scrutiny of science and engineering across Government.