Skip to main content

Currently Skimming:

6 What Actions Should America Take in Science and Engineering Research to Remain Prosperous in the 21st Century?
Pages 136-161

The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.


From page 136...
... These factors are the seeds of innovation for the applied research and development on which our national prosperity depends. The Committee on Prospering in the Global Economy of the 21st Century has identified a series of actions that will help restore the national investment in research in mathematics, the physical sciences, and engineering.
From page 137...
... Corporate R&D has thus become the linchpin of the US R&D enterprise, but it cannot replace federal investment in R&D, because corporations fund relatively little basic research -- for several reasons: basic research typically offers greater benefits to society than to its sponsor; it is almost by definition risky and shareholder pressure for short-term results discourages long-term, speculative investment by industry. Although federal funding of R&D as a whole has increased in dollar terms, its share of the gross domestic product (GDP)
From page 138...
... Total R&D spending (government and industry) has remained remarkably consis tent as a percentage of the gross domestic product, indicating that R&D spending has kept pace with the relatively rapid growth of the US economy.
From page 139...
... Trends in federal research funding show the life sciences increasing rapidly in the late 1990s; funding for research in mathematics, computer sciences, the physical sciences, and engineering remained relatively steady. SOURCE: American Association for the Advancement of Science.
From page 140...
... As the US Senate Committee on Armed Services has noted, "investment in basic research has remained stagnant and is too focused on near-term demands."7 A 2005 National Research Council panel's assessment is similar: "In real terms the resources provided for Department of Defense basic research have declined substantially over the past decade."8 Reductions in funding for basic research at DOD -- in the "6.1 programs" -- have a particularly large influence outside the department. For example, DOD funds 40% of the engineering research performed at universities, including more than half of all research in electrical and mechanical engineering, and 17% of basic research in mathematics and computer science.9 The importance of DOD basic research is illustrated by its products -- in defense areas these include night vision; stealth technology; near-realtime delivery of battlefield information; navigation, communication, and weather satellites; and precision munitions.
From page 141...
... A balanced research portfolio in all fields of science and engineering research is critical to US prosperity. As indicated in the National Academies report Science, Technology, and the Federal Government: National Goals for a New Era, the United States needs to be among the world leaders in all fields of research so that it can • Bring the best available knowledge to bear on problems related to national objectives even if that knowledge appears unexpectedly in a field not traditionally linked to that objective.
From page 142...
... Change, The Phase III Report, 2001 Defense of Defense Quadrennial Defense Allocate at least 3% of the Review Report, 2001 total DOD budget for defense science and technology President's Council of Assessing the US R&D Target the physical sciences Advisors on Science and Investment, January 2003 and engineering to bring Technology (PCAST) them "collectively to parity with the life sciences over the next 4 budget cycles" Coalition of 15 industry Tapping America's Poten- Increase R&D spending, associations, including US tial: The Education for particularly for basic Chamber of Commerce, Innovation Initiative, 2005 research in the physical National Association of sciences and engineering, at Manufacturers, and Business NSF, NIST, DOD, and DOE Roundtable by at least 7% annually 167 Members of Congress Letter to Rep.
From page 143...
... About 50,000 people hold postdoctoral appointments in the United States.13 Those early-career researchers are particularly important because they often are the forefront innovators. A report in the journal Science states 12NAS/NAE/IOM.
From page 144...
... The problem is particularly acute in the biomedical sciences. In 1980, investigators under the age of 40 received more than half of the competitive research awards; by 2003, fewer than 17% of those awards went to researchers under 40.18 Both the percentage and the number of awards made to new investigators -- regardless of age -- have declined for several years; new investigators received fewer than 4% of NIH research awards in 2002.19 One conclusion is that academic biomedical researchers are spending long periods at the beginning of their careers unable to set their own research directions or establish their independence.
From page 145...
... ACTION B-3: ADVANCED RESEARCH INSTRUMENTATION AND FACILITIES The federal government should establish a National Coordination Office for Advanced Research Instrumentation and Facilities to manage a fund of $500 million per year over the next 5 years -- ideally through reallocation of existing funds, but if necessary via new funds -- for construction and maintenance of research facilities, including the instrumentation, supplies, and other physical resources researchers need. Universities and the government's national laboratories would compete annually for the funds.
From page 146...
... A recent National Academies committee25 found that there is a critical gap in federal programs for ARIF. Although federal research agencies research do have instrumentation programs, few allow proposals for instrumentation when the capital cost is greater than $2 million.
From page 147...
... reports that over the last decade funding for the US academic research instrumentation and facilities has not kept pace with funding in the rest of the world.26 Nations that are relative newcomers to science and technology research -- South Korea, China, and some European nations, for example -- are investing heavily in instrumentation and facilities that serve as a major attraction to scientists from throughout the world. NSB recommends increasing the share of the NSF budget devoted to such tools from the current 22 to 27%.
From page 148...
... Therefore, in terms of the management of this fund, this committee believes that the best model is that of a national coordination office such as the National Coordination Office for Networking and Information Technology Research and Development (NCO/NITRD) .36 The National Coor 34Report of the National Science Foundation Advisory Panel on Cyberinfrastructure.
From page 149...
... Again, the funding remains within each agency but supports a coordinated research effort. Federal managers will probably be in the best position to determine the management of the proposed National Coordination Office for research infrastructure, but one model might be a design analogous to the management of the major research instrumentation (MRI)
From page 150...
... • Industry, university, and federal laboratories are under pressure to produce short-term results -- especially DOD, which once was the nation's largest source of basic-research funding. • Increased public scrutiny of government R&D spending makes it harder to justify non-peer-reviewed awards, and peer reviewers tend to place confidence in older, established researchers.
From page 151...
... Like a program manager, a chess player starts out with many different pieces (independent research groups) in different geographic locations (squares on the board)
From page 152...
... The degree to which such a program will be successful depends heavily on the quality and coverage of the program staff. ACTION B-5: USE DARPA AS A MODEL FOR ENERGY RESEARCH The federal government should create a DARPA-like organization within the Department of Energy called the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E)
From page 153...
... Others are more supportive of DOE research as it exists and are con cerned that funding ARPA-E will take money away from traditional sci ence programs funded by DOE's Office of Science in high-energy phys ics, fusion energy research, material sciences, and so forth that are of high quality and despite receiving limited funds produce Nobel-prize quality fundamental research and commercial spinoffs. Some believe that DOE's model is more productive than DARPA's in terms of research quality per federal dollar invested.
From page 154...
... The nature of energy research makes it particularly relevant to producing many spinoff benefits to the broad fields of engineering, the physical sciences, and mathematics, fields identified in this review as warranting special attention. Existing programs with similar goals should be examined to ensure that the nation is optimizing its investments in this area.
From page 155...
... Energy is the power necessary to produce goods and services and transport them to their destinations. These three components are used to compute a country's gross domestic product (GDP)
From page 156...
... At the end of the Cold War, the nation's defense needs shifted and urgent new agendas became clear -- development of clean sources of energy, new forms of transportation, the provision of homeland security, technology to speed environmental remediation, and technology for commercial application. Numerous proposals over recent years have laid the foundation for more extensive redeployment of national laboratory talent toward basic and applied research in areas of national priority.46 45Secretary of Energy's Advisory Board, Task Force on the Future of Science Programs at the Department of Energy.
From page 157...
... • Create a stream of human capital to bring innovative approaches to areas of national strategic importance. Federal Energy Research and Development for the Challenges of the Twenty-first Century.
From page 158...
... While existing Presidential awards address lifetime achievements or promising young scholars, the proposed awards would identify and recognize individuals who develop unique scientific and engineering innovations in the national interest at the time they occur. A number of organizations currently offer prizes and awards to stimulate research, but an expanded system of recognition could push new scientific and engineering advances that are in the national interest.
From page 159...
... SOURCE: Chapter VI, Developing Better Energy Technologies for the Future. In National Commission on Energy Policy.
From page 160...
... The National Academy of Engineering has concluded that prizes encourage nontraditional participants, stimulate development of potentially useful but under funded technology, encourage new uses for existing technology, and foster the diffusion of technology.49 For those reasons, the committee proposes that the new Presidential Innovation Award be managed in a way similar to that of the Presidential Early Career Awards for Scientists and Engineers. OSTP already identifies the nation's science and technology priorities each year as part of the budget memorandum it develops jointly with the Office of Management and Budget.
From page 161...
... Instead, the United States needs to be among the world leaders in all important fields of science and engineering. But, new investigators find it increasingly difficult to secure funding to pursue innovative lines of research.


This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More information on Chapter Skim is available.