The National Academies Press

Currently Skimming:

1 Introduction and Overview
Pages 1-6

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 1... ... 1 Introduction and Overview In an increasingly interconnected world, science and technology research often transects international boundaries and involves researchers from multi‐ ple nations. This model provides both new opportunities and new challenges. As science and technology capabilities grow around the world, U.S.‐based or‐ ganizations are finding that international collaborations and partnerships pro‐ vide unique opportunities to enhance research and training. At the same time, enhancing international collaboration requires recognition of differences in culture, legitimate national security needs, and critical needs in education and training (NRC, 2011) . To examine international research collaborations in a systematic way, the Government‐University‐Industry Research Roundtable (GUIRR) Read the entire page →
From page 2... ... The National Research Council formed a Planning Committee to organize an initial workshop titled "Examining Core Elements of International Research Collaboration" and held on July 26-27, 2010 in Washington, DC. The goal of this first workshop was to enhance international understanding and diminish barriers to research collaborations. Read the entire page →
From page 3... ... Introduction and Overview 3 search collaborations. It will also aid the I‐Group in setting its future goals, pri‐ orities, and activities. 1.1 FRAMING THE ISSUES1 In her opening remarks Barbara Mittleman, Vice President for Immunolo‐ gy at Nodality Inc., noted the importance of culture in working through the mechanics of international research agreements and the lack of suitable tools for thinking about culture. As a result, the process becomes very impression‐ istic. One of the goals of the workshop, she said, was to discuss the many cul‐ tural issues that need to be considered and addressed in developing interna‐ tional research agreements. National Academy of Engineering President C. D. Mote, Jr. commented on the number and different types of organizations or groups that each person belongs to and the distinct culture2 that characterizes each of those groups. Culture, he said, reflects the attitudes, values, goals, and practices of any or‐ ganization or group. Referring to Thinking, Fast and Slow (Kahneman, 2010) , Mote described two ways of thinking: slow thinking, which is rational and cog‐ nitive, and fast thinking, which is reactive and instinctive. Most people think fast and cannot act rationally, and as a result, organizations and groups of peo‐ ple, such as countries, cannot act entirely rationally. More importantly, fast, reactive thinking is "very much controlled by the culture you come from." To illustrate one impact of culture, Mote noted the key finding of a Nation‐ al Research Council study that he chaired on the science and technology strate‐ gies employed by six countries (NRC, 2010) Read the entire page →
From page 4... ... 4 Culture Matters: International Research Collaboration in a Changing World Culture comes into play in international research agreements because each country involved in a negotiation has its own culture that determines the rules for creating an agreement and how an agreement is carried out in prac‐ tice. These cultural differences can be as complex as the legal framework under which agreements are formulated or as simple as the meanings attributed to a particular word. For example, in some contexts an American will take "yes" to mean "I agree," while someone from Japan in the same context might take it to mean "I understand," two entirely different meanings. The essential ingredient for a successful international research agreement is trust, Mote stated. "Trust is the most important issue because things will never go exactly as they are written down and you have to trust the other per‐ son that you're going to work together to make this partnership work," he ex‐ plained. "No agreement should be signed or even contemplated until you have a level of trust, because it will be a bad experience otherwise." Trust, he added, is rooted in culture, yet it is almost unheard of in the United States to consider culture when it comes to developing international research agreements. 1.2 GLOBAL TRENDS 2030: ALTERNATIVE WORLDS Presenter: Mathew Burrows, Counselor with the National Intelligence Council in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence To provide additional context for the workshop, Mathew Burrows, dis‐ cussed the highlights of the most recent Global Trends 2030 report issued in December 2012 (NIC, 2012) . This publicly available report, issued every four years by the U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence, is intended to stimulate thinking about the rapid and vast geopolitical changes characterizing the world today and possible global trajectories over the next 15 years. Like the previous Global Trends reports, the report does not seek to predict the future, explained Burrows, but instead provides a framework for thinking about possi‐ ble futures and their implications. He noted that this report is used by the "thinking slow" part of government. The main thesis in the Global Trends 2030 report is that we are at a critical junction in human history that could lead to widely contrasting futures, and as a result, the future is not set in stone but is malleable. The report identified four megatrends that are already ongoing and will influence the future under any imagined scenario, and six game‐changers, which are important trends that currently have no clear outcome. The most important megatrend, said Bur‐ rows, is individual empowerment arising from the fact that the majority of people in the world are joining the middle class, that the gender gap for educa‐ tion and health is shrinking, and that the widespread use of new communica‐ tions and manufacturing technologies is continuing unabated. While this mega‐ Read the entire page →
From page 5... ... Introduction and Overview 5 trend is overwhelmingly positive, it does have a less appealing side, since indi‐ vidual empowerment is also empowering crime and harm by individuals and small groups at a level that was once reserved for nations. The second megatrend is the diffusion of power that results from changing global demographics and the rise of the non‐state state. This megatrend will result in power shifting to networks and coalitions in a multi‐polar world. The third megatrend, demography, refers to the aging of the world's population. The fourth megatrend involves the nexus between food, water and energy and the demand for scarce resources as the world's population continues to in‐ crease, even without considering the impacts of global climate change. Of the six potential game‐changers, Burrows noted the potential im‐ portance of a gap in governance capabilities. It is unclear, he said, if govern‐ ments and institutions -- both domestically and internationally -- will be able to adapt fast enough to harness change instead of being overwhelmed by it. He also highlighted the potential impact of new technologies on the world's ability to boost economic productivity and solve the problems caused by a growing world population, rapid urbanization, and climate change. While the outlook for technology's impact is largely positive, there are potential negative impacts that arise as technology reduces the need for human employees in various in‐ dustries. "I think more importantly the message here is that technology is just not going to be the savior for all these problems that we talked about without governments stepping in and helping the process," said Burrows. In his final comments, Burrows briefly discussed four potential "alternative world" scenarios. In the most plausible worst‐case scenario, the risks of inter‐ state conflicts increase as the world's economy stalls, triggered by the United States and Europe turning inward and losing interest in sustaining their global leadership. In this bleak future, which Burrows considers unlikely, all players on the world stage do poorly. At the opposite end of the spectrum, the most plau‐ sible best‐case scenario occurs as high‐level cooperation between the United States, Europe, and China actually increases and a technological revolution helps both emerging and developed economies to benefit substantially. Anoth‐ er alternative world, the genie‐out‐of‐the‐bottle scenario, is a world of ex‐ tremes, with inequalities dominating within many countries, while in the non‐ state alternative world, non‐state actors -- nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) , multinational businesses, academic institutions, and wealthy individu‐ als -- as well as sub‐national units such as megacities flourish and take the lead in confronting global challenges. The result is an uneven, patchwork world in which some global problems get solved when networks manage to coalesce and some cooperation occurs across state and non‐state divides. Security threats pose an increasing challenge as access to lethal and disruptive technol‐ ogies expands, enabling individuals and small groups to perpetuate violence Read the entire page →
From page 6... ... 6 Culture Matters: International Research Collaboration in a Changing World and disruption on a large scale. This world is more stable and socially cohesive than in the "genie‐out‐of‐the‐bottle world" (NIC, 2012) . In the open discussion that followed his presentation, Burrows noted that when the Global Trends 2030 report was presented in countries around the world, one common comment was that while the liberal, fair order that the United States established after the Second World War has largely benefitted the world, the United States does not always seem interested in other coun‐ tries rising as fast as might be possible. Having said that, he added that there is a real growing interest in democracy, even in China. "It may be a different kind of democracy than we would have, but certainly those kinds of values are wide‐ ly shared. There is no alternative order out there," said Burrows. In response to a question about the importance of the United States remaining engaged with the rest of the world, Burrows said that this was a point that everybody outside of the United States talked about, with the Chinese being one of the most em‐ phatic about it. "You can look at this as a transition period," said Burrows, one in which economic power is changing but in which only the United States has the ability to manage this transition in terms of getting coalitions together to deal with the world's major problems. REFERENCES Daniel Kahneman. 2010. Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. NIC (National Intelligence Council) Read the entire page →

From page 1...

... 1 Introduction and Overview In an increasingly interconnected world, science and technology research often transects international boundaries and involves researchers from multi‐ ple nations. This model provides both new opportunities and new challenges. As science and technology capabilities grow around the world, U.S.‐based or‐ ganizations are finding that international collaborations and partnerships pro‐ vide unique opportunities to enhance research and training. At the same time, enhancing international collaboration requires recognition of differences in culture, legitimate national security needs, and critical needs in education and training (NRC, 2011) . To examine international research collaborations in a systematic way, the Government‐University‐Industry Research Roundtable (GUIRR)

Read the entire page →

From page 2...

... The National Research Council formed a Planning Committee to organize an initial workshop titled "Examining Core Elements of International Research Collaboration" and held on July 26-27, 2010 in Washington, DC. The goal of this first workshop was to enhance international understanding and diminish barriers to research collaborations.

Read the entire page →

From page 3...

... Introduction and Overview 3 search collaborations. It will also aid the I‐Group in setting its future goals, pri‐ orities, and activities. 1.1 FRAMING THE ISSUES1 In her opening remarks Barbara Mittleman, Vice President for Immunolo‐ gy at Nodality Inc., noted the importance of culture in working through the mechanics of international research agreements and the lack of suitable tools for thinking about culture. As a result, the process becomes very impression‐ istic. One of the goals of the workshop, she said, was to discuss the many cul‐ tural issues that need to be considered and addressed in developing interna‐ tional research agreements. National Academy of Engineering President C. D. Mote, Jr. commented on the number and different types of organizations or groups that each person belongs to and the distinct culture2 that characterizes each of those groups. Culture, he said, reflects the attitudes, values, goals, and practices of any or‐ ganization or group. Referring to Thinking, Fast and Slow (Kahneman, 2010) , Mote described two ways of thinking: slow thinking, which is rational and cog‐ nitive, and fast thinking, which is reactive and instinctive. Most people think fast and cannot act rationally, and as a result, organizations and groups of peo‐ ple, such as countries, cannot act entirely rationally. More importantly, fast, reactive thinking is "very much controlled by the culture you come from." To illustrate one impact of culture, Mote noted the key finding of a Nation‐ al Research Council study that he chaired on the science and technology strate‐ gies employed by six countries (NRC, 2010)

Read the entire page →

From page 4...

... 4 Culture Matters: International Research Collaboration in a Changing World Culture comes into play in international research agreements because each country involved in a negotiation has its own culture that determines the rules for creating an agreement and how an agreement is carried out in prac‐ tice. These cultural differences can be as complex as the legal framework under which agreements are formulated or as simple as the meanings attributed to a particular word. For example, in some contexts an American will take "yes" to mean "I agree," while someone from Japan in the same context might take it to mean "I understand," two entirely different meanings. The essential ingredient for a successful international research agreement is trust, Mote stated. "Trust is the most important issue because things will never go exactly as they are written down and you have to trust the other per‐ son that you're going to work together to make this partnership work," he ex‐ plained. "No agreement should be signed or even contemplated until you have a level of trust, because it will be a bad experience otherwise." Trust, he added, is rooted in culture, yet it is almost unheard of in the United States to consider culture when it comes to developing international research agreements. 1.2 GLOBAL TRENDS 2030: ALTERNATIVE WORLDS Presenter: Mathew Burrows, Counselor with the National Intelligence Council in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence To provide additional context for the workshop, Mathew Burrows, dis‐ cussed the highlights of the most recent Global Trends 2030 report issued in December 2012 (NIC, 2012) . This publicly available report, issued every four years by the U.S. Office of the Director of National Intelligence, is intended to stimulate thinking about the rapid and vast geopolitical changes characterizing the world today and possible global trajectories over the next 15 years. Like the previous Global Trends reports, the report does not seek to predict the future, explained Burrows, but instead provides a framework for thinking about possi‐ ble futures and their implications. He noted that this report is used by the "thinking slow" part of government. The main thesis in the Global Trends 2030 report is that we are at a critical junction in human history that could lead to widely contrasting futures, and as a result, the future is not set in stone but is malleable. The report identified four megatrends that are already ongoing and will influence the future under any imagined scenario, and six game‐changers, which are important trends that currently have no clear outcome. The most important megatrend, said Bur‐ rows, is individual empowerment arising from the fact that the majority of people in the world are joining the middle class, that the gender gap for educa‐ tion and health is shrinking, and that the widespread use of new communica‐ tions and manufacturing technologies is continuing unabated. While this mega‐

Read the entire page →

From page 5...

... Introduction and Overview 5 trend is overwhelmingly positive, it does have a less appealing side, since indi‐ vidual empowerment is also empowering crime and harm by individuals and small groups at a level that was once reserved for nations. The second megatrend is the diffusion of power that results from changing global demographics and the rise of the non‐state state. This megatrend will result in power shifting to networks and coalitions in a multi‐polar world. The third megatrend, demography, refers to the aging of the world's population. The fourth megatrend involves the nexus between food, water and energy and the demand for scarce resources as the world's population continues to in‐ crease, even without considering the impacts of global climate change. Of the six potential game‐changers, Burrows noted the potential im‐ portance of a gap in governance capabilities. It is unclear, he said, if govern‐ ments and institutions -- both domestically and internationally -- will be able to adapt fast enough to harness change instead of being overwhelmed by it. He also highlighted the potential impact of new technologies on the world's ability to boost economic productivity and solve the problems caused by a growing world population, rapid urbanization, and climate change. While the outlook for technology's impact is largely positive, there are potential negative impacts that arise as technology reduces the need for human employees in various in‐ dustries. "I think more importantly the message here is that technology is just not going to be the savior for all these problems that we talked about without governments stepping in and helping the process," said Burrows. In his final comments, Burrows briefly discussed four potential "alternative world" scenarios. In the most plausible worst‐case scenario, the risks of inter‐ state conflicts increase as the world's economy stalls, triggered by the United States and Europe turning inward and losing interest in sustaining their global leadership. In this bleak future, which Burrows considers unlikely, all players on the world stage do poorly. At the opposite end of the spectrum, the most plau‐ sible best‐case scenario occurs as high‐level cooperation between the United States, Europe, and China actually increases and a technological revolution helps both emerging and developed economies to benefit substantially. Anoth‐ er alternative world, the genie‐out‐of‐the‐bottle scenario, is a world of ex‐ tremes, with inequalities dominating within many countries, while in the non‐ state alternative world, non‐state actors -- nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) , multinational businesses, academic institutions, and wealthy individu‐ als -- as well as sub‐national units such as megacities flourish and take the lead in confronting global challenges. The result is an uneven, patchwork world in which some global problems get solved when networks manage to coalesce and some cooperation occurs across state and non‐state divides. Security threats pose an increasing challenge as access to lethal and disruptive technol‐ ogies expands, enabling individuals and small groups to perpetuate violence

Read the entire page →

From page 6...

... 6 Culture Matters: International Research Collaboration in a Changing World and disruption on a large scale. This world is more stable and socially cohesive than in the "genie‐out‐of‐the‐bottle world" (NIC, 2012) . In the open discussion that followed his presentation, Burrows noted that when the Global Trends 2030 report was presented in countries around the world, one common comment was that while the liberal, fair order that the United States established after the Second World War has largely benefitted the world, the United States does not always seem interested in other coun‐ tries rising as fast as might be possible. Having said that, he added that there is a real growing interest in democracy, even in China. "It may be a different kind of democracy than we would have, but certainly those kinds of values are wide‐ ly shared. There is no alternative order out there," said Burrows. In response to a question about the importance of the United States remaining engaged with the rest of the world, Burrows said that this was a point that everybody outside of the United States talked about, with the Chinese being one of the most em‐ phatic about it. "You can look at this as a transition period," said Burrows, one in which economic power is changing but in which only the United States has the ability to manage this transition in terms of getting coalitions together to deal with the world's major problems. REFERENCES Daniel Kahneman. 2010. Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York, NY: Farrar, Straus and Giroux. NIC (National Intelligence Council)

Read the entire page →

Next Chapter Skim →

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.

1 Introduction and Overview Pages 1-6

1 Introduction and Overview
Pages 1-6