National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: 6 The Path Ahead
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2010. Data on Federal Research and Development Investments: A Pathway to Modernization. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12772.
×

References

Bailar, B. (2004). A quality profile of the federal research and development surveys. In National Research Council, Measuring Research and Development Expenditures in the U.S. Economy: Interim Report (Appendix A, pp. 24-67). L. Brown and T. Plewes, Eds. Panel on Research and Development Statistics at the National Science Foundation, Committee on National Statistics. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Berners-Lee, T., J. Hendler, and O. Lassila (2001). The semantic web: A new form of web content that is meaningful to computers will unleash a revolution of new possibilities. Scientific American, May 17.

Blei, D.M, A.Y. Ng, and M.I. Jordan (2003). Latent dirichlet allocation. Journal of Machine Learning Research 3:993-1022.

Block, F., and M.R. Keller (2008). Where Do Innovations Come From? Transformations in the U.S. National Innovation System 1970-2006. Washington, DC: Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. Available: http://www.itif.org/files/Where_do_innovations_come_from.pdf [accessed November 2009].

Börner, K., C. Chen, and K. Boyack (2003). Visualizing knowledge domains. In B. Cronin (Ed.), Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (vol. 37, pp. 179-255). Medford, NJ: American Society for Information Science and Technology.

Branscomb, L., and P.E. Auerswald (2001). Taking Technical Risks: How Innovators, Executives, and Investors Manage High-Tech Risks. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Branscomb, L., and P.E. Auerswald (2002). Between Invention and Innovation: An Analysis of Funding for Early-Stage Technology Development. NIST CR 02-841, November. Gaithersburg, MD: National Institute for Standards and Technology. Available: http://www.atp.nist.gov/eao/gcr02-841/contents.htm [accessed November 2009].

Broad, W.J. (1997). Study finds public science is pillar of industry. New York Times, May 13.

Bush, V. (1945). Science The Endless Frontier, A Report to the President. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Available: http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/nsf50/vbush1945.htm [accessed November 2009].

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2010. Data on Federal Research and Development Investments: A Pathway to Modernization. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12772.
×

Cheney, D., and J. Park (2005). Task Order 07: Panel Meeting to Provide Guidance on SRS’s Evaluation of Its Science and Engineering Taxonomies. Final Summary Report. Arlington, VA: SRI International.

Congressional Research Service (2000). Challenges in Collecting and Reporting Federal Research and Development Data. M. Davey and R. Rowberg, Eds. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.

Executive Office of the President (2005). FY 2009 Administration Research and Development Priorities. Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies. August 14. Office of Management and Budget and Office of Science and Technology Policy, Washington, DC.

Federal Committee on Statistical Methodology (1980). Report on Statistical Uses of Administrative Records. Working Paper No. 6, December. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.

Fossum, D., L. Painter, V. Williams, A. Yezril, E. Newton, and D. Trinkle (2000). Discovery and Innovation: Federal Research and Development Activities in the Fifty States, District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.

Godin, B. (2005). The Linear Model of Innovation: The Historical Construction of an Analytical Framework. Project on the History and Sociology of S&T Statistics. Working Paper No. 30. Available: http://www.csiic.ca/PDF/Godin_30.pdf [accessed November 2009].

Griffiths, T.L., and M. Steyvers (2004). Finding scientific topics. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 101(Suppl. 1):5228-5235.

Hjørland, B. (2008). Core classification theory: A reply to Szostak. Journal of Documentation, 64(3):333-342.

Klavans, R., and K. Boyack (2009). Toward a consensus map of science. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 60(3):455-476.

Klein, J.T. (1996). Crossing Boundaries: Knowledge, Disciplinarities, and Interdisciplinarities. Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia.

Klein, J.T. (2009). The Taxonomy of Interdisciplinarity. Available: http://www.ndsciencehumanitiespolicy.org/oup2/itoc/KleinTaxonomy.pdf [accessed November 2009].

Lattuca, L. (2001). Creating Interdisciplinarity: Interdisciplinary Research and Teaching Among College and University Faculty. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.

Lenoir, T., and C. Beghtol (2004). Guiding Principles for Classification in Practice. Presentation at panel meeting to provide guidance on SRS’s evaluation of its field of science and engineering taxonomies, National Science Foundation, October 12, Arlington, VA.

Leshner, A. (2004). Science at the leading edge. Science 303(5659):729.

Macro International (2008). Fields of Science and Engineering Taxonomy Study. Calverton, MD: Macro International.

Marburger, J. (2005). Wanted: Better benchmarks. Science 308(5725, May):1087.

Mervis, J. (1997). Databases: RaDiUS draws a bead on U.S. R&D. Science 278(5342):1392.

National Institutes of Health (2009). NIH Roadmap for Medical Research. Available: http://nihroadmap.nih.gov/ [accessed November 2009].

National Research Council (1986a). An Overview: Physics Through the 1990’s. Physics Survey Committee, Board on Physics and Astronomy. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council (1986b). Scientific Interfaces and Technological Applications. Physics Survey Committee, Board on Physics and Astronomy. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council (1990). Interdisciplinary Research: Promoting Collaboration Between the Life Sciences and Medicine and the Physical Sciences and Engineering. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2010. Data on Federal Research and Development Investments: A Pathway to Modernization. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12772.
×

National Research Council (1995). Allocating Federal Funds for Science and Technology. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council (1999). Funding a Revolution: Government Support for Computing Research. Science and Telecommunications Board. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council (2000). Measuring the Science and Engineering Enterprise: Priorities for the Division of Science Resources Studies. Committee to Assess the Portfolio of the Division of Science Resources Studies of NSF. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council (2003). Assessing Research-Doctorate Programs: A Methodology Study. Policy and Global Affairs Division. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Research Council (2005a). Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research. Committee on Facilitating Interdisciplinary Research, Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Research Council (2005b). Measuring Research and Development Expenditures in the U.S. Economy. Panel on Research and Development Statistics at the National Science Foundation, Committee on National Statistics. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Research Council (2006). Taxonomy of Fields and Their Subfields. Research Doctorate Programs, Board on Higher Education and Workforce. Available: http://sites.nationalacademies.org/PGA/Resdoc/PGA_044522 [accessed November 2009].

National Research Council (2007a). The National Science Foundation’s Materials Research Science and Engineering Centers Program: Looking Back, Moving Forward. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Research Council (2007b). Understanding Business Dynamics. Panel on Measuring Business Formation, Dynamics, and Performance, Committee on National Statistics. Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

National Science Board (2001). Federal Research Resources: A Process for Setting Priorities. NSB 01-156. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

National Science Board (2006). Science and Engineering Indicators 2006. (Volume 1, NSB 06-01; Volume 2, NSB 06-02). Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

National Science Foundation (1999). Report on the NSF Agency Workshop on Federal R&D. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

National Science Foundation (2008a). Federal R&D funding down in FY 2007. InfoBrief, Division of Science Resources Statistics, February.

National Science Foundation (2008b). Federal S&E Obligations to Academic Institutions Reach New Highs in FY 2006 but Fail to Keep Up with Inflation. NSF 08-316, Division of Science Resources Statistics, October. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

National Science Foundation (2008c). Science of Science and Innovation Policy, FY 2009 Program Solicitation. NSF 08-586. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation. Available: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2008/nsf08586/nsf08586.htm [accessed November 2009].

National Science Foundation (2009a). FY 2008 data show downward trend in federal R&D funding. Info Brief, Table 1, NSF 09-309, January.

National Science Foundation (2009b). Federal Science and Engineering Support to Universities, Colleges, and Nonprofit Institutions: FY 2006. NSF 09-210, March. Arlington, VA: National Science Foundation.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2010. Data on Federal Research and Development Investments: A Pathway to Modernization. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12772.
×

National Science and Technology Council and Office of Science and Technology Policy (2008). The Science of Science Policy: A Federal Research Roadmap. Report on the Science of Science Policy to the Subcommittee on Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences, Committee on Science. November. Available: http://www.ostp.gov/galleries/NSTC%20Reports/39924_PDF%20Proof.pdf [accessed November 2009].

Office of Science and Technology Policy (2006). The Science of Science Policy: A Federal Research Roadmap. Washington, DC: National Science and Technology Council.

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (2002). Frascati Manual 2002: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys on Research and Development. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Paskin, N. (2009). Digital Object Identifier system. Encyclopedia of Library and Information Sciences. London: Taylor & Francis Group.

Petrie, H.G. (1976). Do you see what I see? The epistemology of interdisciplinary inquiry. Educational Researcher 5(2):9-15.

Porter, A.L., J.D. Roessner, A.S. Cohen, and M. Perreault (2006). Interdisciplinary research: Meaning, metrics, nurture. Research Evaluation 15(3):187-195.

Rhoten, D. (2003). Final Report, National Science Foundation BCS-0129573: A Multi-Method Analysis of the Social and Technical Conditions for Interdisciplinary Collaboration. San Francisco: Hybrid Vigor Institute.

Rossini, F.A., and A.L. Porter (1978). Frameworks for integrating interdisciplinary research. Research Policy 8:70-79.

Ruttan, V. (2006). Is War Necessary for Economic Growth? Military Procurement and Technology Development. New York: Oxford University Press.

Sarewitz, D. (2007). Does science policy matter? Issues in Science and Technology, Summer. Available: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3622/is_200707/ai_n19511079/pg_6/?tag=content;col1 [accessed November 2009].

Shiffrin, R., and K. Börner (2004). Mapping knowledge domains. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science 101(Suppl 1, April).

Smelser, N. (2003). Interdisciplinarity in theory and practice. In C. Camic and H. Joas (Eds.), The Dialogical Turn: New Roles for Sociology in the Postdisciplinary Age. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.

Solow, R. (1987). Growth theory: An exposition, 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press.

Stokes, D.E. (1997). Pasteur’s Quadrant: Basic Science and Technological Innovation. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Touhy. R.V. (1998). How the Department of Defense utilizes federal funds survey data. In National Science Foundation, Report on the NSF Agency Workshop on Federal R&D. Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (1979). Recommendation concerning the international standardization of statistics on science and technology. In Records of the General Conference, 20th Session, Paris, 24 October to 28 November1978, Volume 1 (pp. 27-28). Paris: UNESCO. Available: http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=13135&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html [accessed September 2009].

U.S. Department of Commerce (2008). Innovation Measurement—Tracking the State of Innovation in the American Economy. A report to the Secretary of Commerce by the Advisory Committee on Measuring Innovation in the 21st Century Economy. Available: http://www.kauffman.org/uploadedFiles/innovation_measurement_11808.pdf [accessed November 2009].

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2010. Data on Federal Research and Development Investments: A Pathway to Modernization. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12772.
×

U.S. Government Accountability Office (2005). Improvements Needed to the Federal Procurement Data System—Next Generation. GAO-05-960R, September 27. Available: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05960r.pdf [accessed November 2009].

U.S. Office of Management and Budget (1978). Directive No. 16, Standard Classification of Fields of Science and Engineering. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President.

U.S. Office of Management and Budget (2002). Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by Federal Agencies. Notice: Re-publication. February 22. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President.

U.S. Office of Management and Budget (2006). OMB Guidance on Data Submission under the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act (Transparency Act). M-08-04, November 9. Washington, DC: Executive Office of the President.

U.S. Office of Management and Budget and Office of Science and Technology Policy (2009). Memorandum for the heads of executive departments and agencies. Science and Technology Priorities for the FY 2011 Budget. M-09-27, August 4. Available: http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/memoranda_fy2009/m09-27.pdf [accessed November 2009].

Van Raan, A.F.J. (1996). The interdisciplinary nature of science: Theoretical framework and ibliometric-empirical approach. In P. Weingart and N. Stehr, Eds., Practising Interdisciplinarity (pp. 66-78). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Wagner, C., and L. Leydesforff (2005). Network structure, self-organization and the growth of international collaboration in science. Research Policy, 34(10):1608-1618.

Yasitis, A., S. Zecher, S. Shackleford, and E. Kim (2004). Interdisciplinary Research Funding Patterns: An Analysis of the National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, and the Department of Energy. Policy Analysis Workshop, Georgia Institute of Technology, November 14.

Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2010. Data on Federal Research and Development Investments: A Pathway to Modernization. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12772.
×
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2010. Data on Federal Research and Development Investments: A Pathway to Modernization. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12772.
×
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2010. Data on Federal Research and Development Investments: A Pathway to Modernization. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12772.
×
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2010. Data on Federal Research and Development Investments: A Pathway to Modernization. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12772.
×
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"References." National Research Council. 2010. Data on Federal Research and Development Investments: A Pathway to Modernization. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/12772.
×
Page 76
Next: Appendix A: Acronyms and Abbreviations »
Data on Federal Research and Development Investments: A Pathway to Modernization Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $42.00 Buy Ebook | $33.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

Two surveys of the National Science Foundation's Division of Science Resources Statistics (SRS) provide some of the most significant data available to understand research and development spending and policy in the United States. These are the Survey of Federal Funds for Research and Development and the Survey of Federal Science and Engineering Support to Universities, Colleges, and Nonprofit Institutions. These surveys help reach conclusions about fundamental policy questions, such as whether a given field of research is adequately funded, whether funding is balanced among fields, and whether deficiencies in funding may be contributing to a loss of U.S. scientific or economic competitiveness.

However, the survey data are of insufficient quality and timeliness to support many of the demands put on them. In addition the surveys are increasingly difficult to conduct in times of constrained resources, and their technological, procedural, and conceptual infrastructure has not been modernized for procedure or content.

Data on Federal Research and Development Investments reviews the uses and collection of data on federal funds and federal support for science and technology and recommends future directions for the program based on an assessment of these uses and the adequacy of the surveys. The book also considers the classification structure, or taxonomy, for the fields of science and engineering.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!