Scholars Award: The Lifecycles of the Arecibo Observatory: Understanding the social and political contexts of research facility host sites

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY

Investigators

Abstract

This project proposes to trace the history and reasonings behind the decision-making process for the lifecycle of the Arecibo Observatory (i.e., its funding, building, maintenance, and decommissioning), one of the most historically significant astronomy observatories in the world. In doing so, this study will better understand how decisions to fund scientific research facilities are made and how those decisions impact local communities. In better understanding the history behind these decisions, the project will result in important takeaways for how scientific institutions, like the National Science Foundation, might make more impactful use of funding for future large scientific projects like new telescopes. The project will train a graduate student in qualitative research methods and analysis. It will also translate to policy briefings to be distributed to science funding agencies as well as public-facing publications such as the Conversation. The project’s scope is therefore to better trace the social and political history of the Arecibo Observatory. It focuses on the question: What are the histories of decision-making behind the creation, funding, siting, building, maintenance, and eventual gradual decommission of the Arecibo Observatory? It will answer this question through archival work as well as interviews with people who were involved in the processes of decision-making, such as former Observatory directors, policy-makers, among others. Critically, this research is novel in that it focuses on more than just the moment where we decide to fund a new project. Instead, it proposes to trace the entire lifecycle of a large research facility, including decisions around defunding. This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.