The Superconducting Supercollider and US Science Policy

Abstract

Reasons for the Superconducting Supercollider’s (SSC’s) termination include significant changes in the attitude of the government towards large scientific projects originating with management reforms introduced decades earlier. In the 1980s, the government insisted on inclusion of elements of these reforms in the SSC’s management contract, including increased demands for accountability, additional liability for contractors, and sanctions for infractions. The SSC’s planners could not have opted out of the reforms, which were by then becoming part of all large publicly funded projects. Once these reforms were in place, management mistakes in the SSC’s planning and construction became highly visible, leading to termination of the machine. This episode contains two key lessons about science policy. One is that the momentum of the government’s management reforms was unstoppable, and its impact on large scientific facilities and projects could not be reversed. The other is that specific measures such as cost and schedule-tracking systems to provide measures of program performance and impact were also inevitable; large scientific projects needed new parameters of accountability and transparency in what can be called the Principle of Assurance.