Institute of Medicine National Academy of Sciences, National Academy of Engineering – författare

The federal government plays the predominant role in supporting research and development (R&D) and in establishing public policies that affect science and technology (S&T) in the United States. However, the federal government is no longer the sole focus of R&D funding and S&T policy making. State and local policy makers are unquestionably making more and more decisions that affect all of us on a daily basis. With this shift, states have also assumed an increasing responsibility for developing, formalizing, and institutionalizing policies and programs that support R&D and enable S&T evidence and expertise to be incorporated into policy making.

These issues were explored during a first-of-its-kind National Convocation organized by the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine in collaboration with the National Association of Academies of Science and the California Council on Science and Technology. Scientists, engineers, state policy makers, experts from state regulatory agencies, representatives from foundations, and experts in scientific communication from 20 states and the District of Columbia participated in this event. This report highlights the major themes from the Convocation that emerged from the presentations and from the rich discussions that occurred in both plenary and breakout sessions.

Although the United States is currently capitalizing on its investment in science and technology effectively, there remains much room for improvement. This volume identifies the ingredients for success in capitalizing on such investments to produce national benefits, assesses current U.S. performance, and identifies future challenges. The book cites specific examples and examines several cross-cutting issues. It explores the possibility that the national research portfolio is losing diversity as a result of less long-term research in critical fields such as networking and materials. It also examines the implications of imbalances in the supply of and demand for science and engineering talent in emerging interdisciplinary fields such as bioinformatics.

In this report, the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (COSEPUP) provides its observations on the federal science and technology (FS&T) portion of the president''s fiscal year (FY) 1999 submission. The FS&T budget (see box) reflects the federal investment in the creation of new knowledge and technologies and excludes such activities as the testing and evaluating of new weapons systems.

The National Science Foundation requested that the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy of the NAS, the NAE, and the IOM form a panel to evaluate the accomplishments of the NSF Science and Technology Centers program (not individual centers) against its goals in research, education, and knowledge transfer. This report is the result of the work of the panel charged with that effort, and provides recommendations for moving forward.

In this report to the Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable, authors Jerry Thursby and Marie Thursby summarize their research on the globalization of corporate R&D. The authors surveyed 200 multinational companies about recent and future R&D location decisions, and the factors influencing those decisions. The survey confirms that China and India are primary targets of R&D expansion, but this trend does not yet portend a "hollowing out" of R&D capability in the United States. R&D location decisions are complex and driven by a variety of factors, including the potential for market growth, the quality of R&D personnel, and the environment for collaborating with universities. The cost of research, while important, is not the primary factor in siting decisions.

The federal government plays the predominant role in supporting research and development (R&D) and in establishing public policies that affect science and technology (S&T) in the United States. However, the federal government is no longer the sole focus of R&D funding and S&T policy making. State and local policy makers are unquestionably making more and more decisions that affect all of us on a daily basis. With this shift, states have also assumed an increasing responsibility for developing, formalizing, and institutionalizing policies and programs that support R&D and enable S&T evidence and expertise to be incorporated into policy making.

These issues were explored during a first-of-its-kind National Convocation organized by the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine in collaboration with the National Association of Academies of Science and the California Council on Science and Technology. Scientists, engineers, state policy makers, experts from state regulatory agencies, representatives from foundations, and experts in scientific communication from 20 states and the District of Columbia participated in this event. This report highlights the major themes from the Convocation that emerged from the presentations and from the rich discussions that occurred in both plenary and breakout sessions.

In this report, the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (COSEPUP) provides its observations on the federal science and technology (FS&T) portion of the president''s fiscal year (FY) 1999 submission. The FS&T budget (see box) reflects the federal investment in the creation of new knowledge and technologies and excludes such activities as the testing and evaluating of new weapons systems.

Although the United States is currently capitalizing on its investment in science and technology effectively, there remains much room for improvement. This volume identifies the ingredients for success in capitalizing on such investments to produce national benefits, assesses current U.S. performance, and identifies future challenges. The book cites specific examples and examines several cross-cutting issues. It explores the possibility that the national research portfolio is losing diversity as a result of less long-term research in critical fields such as networking and materials. It also examines the implications of imbalances in the supply of and demand for science and engineering talent in emerging interdisciplinary fields such as bioinformatics.

The U.S. national security export controls system—which was instituted to impede Soviet acquisition of high technology from the West—is both necessary and appropriate. Balancing the National Interest provides a thorough analysis of this controls system, examining the current system of laws, regulations, international agreements, and organizations that control the international transfer of technology through industrial channels. Foreign Affairs calls it "the best on the subject to have been published in the 40 years that the United States has exercised controls on exports that might add to Soviet power."

The National Science Foundation requested that the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy of the NAS, the NAE, and the IOM form a panel to evaluate the accomplishments of the NSF Science and Technology Centers program (not individual centers) against its goals in research, education, and knowledge transfer. This report is the result of the work of the panel charged with that effort, and provides recommendations for moving forward.

This volume consists of four "white papers," prepared for the Clinton administration as it took office, on important national policy issues in which science and technology play a central role. Topics covered are science and technology leadership, climate change policy, technology policy and industrial innovation, and health care reform. Also included are brief summaries of ten potentially high impact reports issued by various committees of the National Research Council.

Prepared for the Office of Science and Technology Policy and the National Science Foundation, these briefings examine areas important to the progress of U.S. science and technology: the science of interfaces and thin films, decision making and problem solving, protein structure and biological function, and the prevention and treatment of viral diseases.

Will the adoption of new technologies by U.S. industry lead to widespread unemployment? Or will the resulting use of new processes and techniques, as well as the introduction of new products, open new opportunities for American workers? This volume studies the relationship of technology to employment and the effects of technological change on the workplace. The authors discuss the role of new technologies in strengthening U.S. international competitiveness, recommend initiatives for assisting displaced workers, and make recommendations to aid industry in developing and adopting the new technology it needs to compete successfully in the world economy.

The debate about the effects of corporate restructuring on industrial investment in research and development has important implications for public policy, since research and development is vital to the nation''s ability to compete in the global marketplace. Researchers worry that debt service will cut research and development funds; financiers argue that restructuring improves corporate efficiency without affecting research and development expenditures. This book eminated from a symposium sponsored by the Academy Industry Program. The speakers represented a range of opinions from government, Wall Street, industry, and academia. In addition to helping all sides in the dialogue learn something of the others'' needs and expectations by presenting various points of view on the issue, the discussions identify areas in which more research is needed to guide policy decisions.

In this report to the Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable, authors Jerry Thursby and Marie Thursby summarize their research on the globalization of corporate R&D. The authors surveyed 200 multinational companies about recent and future R&D location decisions, and the factors influencing those decisions. The survey confirms that China and India are primary targets of R&D expansion, but this trend does not yet portend a "hollowing out" of R&D capability in the United States. R&D location decisions are complex and driven by a variety of factors, including the potential for market growth, the quality of R&D personnel, and the environment for collaborating with universities. The cost of research, while important, is not the primary factor in siting decisions.