So. Human capital.
A good science fiction writer is someone who can ask a significant "What If." What if we develop a technology that's mind-shatteringly dangerous, but also economically crucial? What if people live to be 180 years old...but only a few of them, and only because of family genetics? What if old age is actually a crucial stage in human evolution? In other words, What if the conditions of the world become different - how would we respond?
To ask that question, and then answer it in a way that's both believable and interesting, you have to be both a good writer and a good...futurist? Epistemologist? Intellectual? Scientist? Sophist? Someone who likes to play with ideas, and understands that play involves rules - in this case, the rules of logic and probability. Finding someone who is both isn't easy.
could make significant advances and carry on important experiments without billion-dollar outlays. It was easier to bridge CP Snow's "two cultures" - the sciences and the humanities. Finally, a writer could make a living (albeit not a tremendous one) on short-story sales alone - which made the pulp magazines superb incubators for story-telling talent. Those magazines also had writer/editors like John W. Campbell, who understood what the genre needed to flower.
A lot of those conditions have vanished or mutated. There aren't a lot of successful lone wolf engineers these days; team play is the norm in the sciences, and the mindset required for working on a subset of a subproject dictated by the long-range budget of a multinational corporation doesn't necessarily lend itself to serious lucid dreaming. You can't support yourself by writing short stories anymore (to say the least). While the Internet has opened up lines of communication where there weren't any before, it's also taken space that used to belong to the old-fashioned bull session; sitting in a room swapping ideas with other science junkies face to face has a productive aspect that a chatroom can't match. Finally, the fan society that has shaped and supported science fiction for so long has changed. It's less about science and more about SFX. "Media" cons that focus on comics, cosplay and video games are big money-making enterprises; gatherings that focus more on actual science are smaller and harder to find.
Given all this, it might be a little unfair to expect Syfy to recreate the socio-economic conditions of mid-century America. But there are things the executives *could* do, if they were motivated. Wouldn't take much time or money, either.
2. Develop relationships with F/SF editors and magazines. They may not know much about TV production, but they know story. F/SF story. It's their job. Talk to the people at Tor.com, Fantasy & Science Fiction, Asimov's. Get to know them.
3. Spend some time with scientists. They're nice people. Trust me. You missed your shot with Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Bill Nye (they don't need you anymore) but how about Andre Geim, the guy who first synthesized graphene in the lab? He's a Nobel winner, and he's got a sick sense of humor. (Levitating frog, anyone?) Why is it that WWE is still on Syfy, but TED isn't?
It ain't rocket science.