Sack Lunch Seminar (SLS)

The National Science Foundation asked the National Research Council to provide a report on the Decadal Survey of Ocean Sciences. The committee was tasked to review the current state of knowledge and highlight past accomplishments, provide a concise set of compelling, high-level scientific questions for the next decade, assess the current NSF ocean infrastructure portfolio, analyze the alignment between the current portfolio of NSF ocean science investments and science priorities assuming no budget growth, and identify opportunities for NSF to complement other federal agencies to avoid duplication, encourage collaboration and shared asset use, and maximize the value of NSF ocean science investments. The committee held 2-3 day meetings on seven occasions to hear community input from major infrastructure stakeholders, held a public townhall meeting at the Ocean Sciences conference, and solicited comments on an online townhall website that 400 people responded to.

The report concludes that there is a bright future for ocean sciences with exciting new opportunities, but emphasizes that the NSF must retain budgetary flexibility for innovative science and technology. Current fiscal circumstances take us through narrow straits, and the NSF needs to make course corrections to balance science and infrastructure portfolios. Based on the relevance to eight decadal priorities (from top to bottom of the ocean: sea level change, coastal and estuarine ocean, ocean and climate variability, biodiversity in marine ecosystems, marine food webs, evolution of ocean basins, characterization of geohazards, and the subseafloor environment), the report recommends that the NSF’s investments must be rebalanced to reduce infrastructure costs to maintain core science at >50% of the OCE budget. Having fallen below this threshold recently and slated to fall even more so in NSF budget projections, the committee recommends an immediate 10% cut to major infrastructure, and a further 10-20% cut over the next five years. The committee notes that these cuts will be painful, but says that it would be far worse to avoid this difficult task. Excellent core science and relevant infrastructure are both essential, but the two portfolios urgently need to be rebalanced. The committee notes that the five years of belt-tightening and adjusting will allow the community the next five years to fulfill the vision.