The MIT Science Policy Review publishes authoritative written content in five core focus areas: Artificial Intelligence, Climate Change, Healthcare, Science Enterprise, and Space & Security. The Review is not a traditional academic journal, and all articles are by invitation only through an application process. Teams are assembled in October and November and invited to submit an article under a specific topic or theme. Article solicitations will be posted in October, but if you are interested in proposing an article or expressing your interest in writing a piece, please submit to this form. We welcome ideas from individuals and teams.

In general, we publish 3 formats of articles: Reviews, Perspectives, and Interviews. Consistent with our core vision, all of our articles are written to be accessible to a broad audience—both in scope and through organic, jargon-free language—while maintaining sufficient technical depth. Articles should present an unbiased discussion of policy options, focusing on aspects that underscore decision-making rather than advocating for specific solutions. For examples of each article format, please refer to earlier published volumes of the Review.

Review Article Topic Solicitations

  • Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)
  • Decarbonizing aviation
  • A Manhattan Project for climate change
  • Sea level rise
  • Grid-scale energy storage
  • Research in Antarctica
  • Heating / cooling infrastructure
  • HIV vaccines
  • Psychedelics for healthcare
  • When should school start?
  • Biomanufacturing in the U.S.
  • How does the IRA affect drug development?
  • Personalized / precision medicine
  • FDA requirements for animal testing
  • Rare diseases / orphan diseases
  • Pharmacy benefit managers / drug supply chain
  • Energy demands for cryptocurrency
  • Deep-fakes and image manipulation
  • Ownership for AI-generated art
  • Algorithmic trading
  • Algorithmic bias
  • Automation in manufacturing
  • Targeted advertisements
  • Leaky pipeline in academia
  • New and emerging open access bills
  • Improving the peer review process
  • Tenure in the life sciences
  • Crafting policy around disruptive / emerging technology
  • Science as a global enterprise in a multipolar world
  • Cyber-attacks on the grid
  • Private vs public vs private-public space enterprise
  • Critical natural resources
  • Maintaining critical infrastructure
  • De-identification of public sector data
  • Low Earth orbit satellites

Interview Article Topic Solicitations

  • Science of science
  • Small modular reactors
  • Pharmaceutical contamination in rivers
  • Low Earth orbit satellites and broadband delivery
  • Scientists as political advisors
  • Staying up to date in the age of climate change
  • Creating a national space agency from scratch
  • Policy responses to algorithmic bias concerns
  • Childhood exposure to science through museums


Review Articles are typically 6 – 8 pages and highlight the intersection of science, technology, and policy. As such, they include a discussion of requisite scientific fundamentals to understand the scope of policy options and review existing policies to contextualize potential solutions. All Review Articles are peer-reviewed by subject-matter experts in relevant topical areas.


Perspective Articles are similar to Review Articles, but present a narrower review on a more focused science policy topic and are typically 3 – 5 pages in length. During article solicitations, some authors may be identified to write Perspective Articles while other authors may be invited directly by the Editor-in-Chief. All Perspective Articles are peer-reviewed by subject-matter experts in relevant topical areas.


Interview articles reflect transcripts of conversations with leaders in areas that intersect science, technology, and policy. These highlight the perspective of prominent scholars, industry experts, and policymakers in our core topic areas. Questions are judiciously prepared in advance and the final transcripts are edited to ensure that the language and presentation remain accessible to a broad, non- technical audience. The interviewee must approve of the final draft prior to publication.