🚀 go-pugleaf

UPDATE   UPDATE   UPDATE   ---29 September 1992---    UPDATE   UPDATE   UPDATE

***   BASIC  RESEARCH  IN  PERIL  at the  NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION (NSF)  ***

The Director of the National Science Foundation (NSF), Walter Massey, has
expressed clear intent to redirect the NSF away from its mission in basic
research toward a new mission to "accept a major role in fostering links
between research and technology" to foster product development and assist
industry. As a result of his efforts, Congress passed a report with language
similar to the original Senate report appearing below (at the bottom). This
was attached to a large VA/HUD/IA appropriations bill, consequently receiving
very little attention, and was not publicized. 

All of this comes at the urging of the National Science Board (NSB), the agency
overseeing NSF. The NSB report is also excerpted below. James Duderstadt,
President of the University of Michigan, is chairman of NSB.

A special commission was created to study how to integrate NSF efforts with
the needs of industry. This "Special Commission on the Future of NSF" has 
been given only 75 days from its first meeting to come up with a final report.
They are accepting input through October 15 -- THAT'S JUST 2 WEEKS FROM NOW
This whole process has not been well advertised in the scientific community,
and most of the scientific community does not know about it!

****************************************************************************
WHAT YOU MUST DO:            remember, input deadline is Oct 15

1) PASS THE WORD AROUND-- share with faculty members in all interested
departments (physics, chemistry, atmospheric & oceanic sciences, earth
sciences, math, and various humanities including linguistics, poli. sci. and
anthropology). Share with YOUR DEANS AND RESEARCH ADMINISTRATORS

2) WRITE TO THE COMMITTEE:
Special Commission on the Future of NSF, Rm. 546
National Science Foundation                     
1800 G St., N.W.                               
Washington, D.C. 20550    fax: (202)-357-7346

3) TALK TO THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS:         *=member of National Science Board
William Danforth, Co-Chair.   Chancellor of Washington U. in St.Louis
Robert Galvin, Co-Chair.      Former CEO of Motorola, and a lawyer.
Jacqueline Barton             prof. of chemistry at Cal Tech University
Lindy Boggs                   former U.S. Representative from Louisiana
Lewis Branscomb               prof. of public service at Harvard University
Peter Eisenberger             director of Materials Institute at Princeton
Marye Anne Fox *              prof. of chemistry at U. of Texas
C. Peter Magrath              president, National Association of State 
				  Univerisities and Land-Grant Colleges
Ruben Mettler                 former CEO of TRW
Percy Pierre               research vice-president at Michigan State University
Frank Rhodes *                president of Cornell University
Earl Richardson               president of Morgan State University
Ian Ross *                    president emeritus of AT&T Bell Labs
William Rutter                CEO of Chiron Corporation
Donna Shalala                 Chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-Madison

***************************************************************************

Data and definitions from Science and Engineering Indicators, 10th Edition,
NSB-91-1, issued by the National Science Board:

Basic research: Basic research has as its objective a fuller knowledge or
understanding of the subject under study, without specific applications in
mind. In industry, basic research is defined as research that advances 
scientific knowledge but does not have specific commercial objectives,
although such investigations may be in fields of present or potential 
interest to the reporting company.

Applied research: Applied research is directed toward gaining knowledge or
understanding necessary for determining the means by which a recognized and 
specific need may be met. In industry, applied research includes investigations
directed to the discovery of new scientific knowledge having specific
commercial objectives with respect to products, proceses, or services.

U.S. R&D funds in millions of constant 1982 dollars (dollars adjusted by GNP)
1=total R&D(sum of 2,3,4)  2=basic research  3=applied research  4=development
FFRDC=Federally Funded Research and Development Center    *=preliminary

	       -----SOURCE OF FUNDS------     -------PERFORMER OF WORK---------
	        fed. indus- univer-  non-     fed. indus- univer-         non-
  year   total  govt  try   sities profits    govt  try   sities  FFRDC profits
1 1990* 110470 48591  56757  3376  1746      12213  79173  12137  3641  3305
2 1990*  16636 10357   3441  1972   865       1972   3609   7851  1896  1307
3 1990*  25742  9622  14337  1161   623       2883  17514   3675   569  1102 
4 1990*  68092 28612  38979   243   258       7358  58050    611  1176   897

1 1980   73255 34557  36065  1574  1059       9006  51919   7171  2650  2508
2 1980    9922  6963   1485   939   535       1395   1546   4769  1326   887
3 1980   16232  7530   7809   525   368       2931   9858   2004   594   846
4 1980   47101 20065  26771   110   156       4680  40516    399   730   776


International Research & Development, as a % of Gross National Product
1/2/3: 1=total R&D, 2=non-defense R&D, 3=% of total R&D on basic research

19xx  United               West                 United
year  States    Japan     Germany    France     Kingdom      Italy     Sweden
75 2.2/1.6/13 2.0/2.0/12 2.2/2.1/26 1.8/1.5/NA 2.1/1.5/14 0.9/0.9/20 1.7/1.4/NA
76 2.2/1.6/13 2.0/2.0/15 2.1/2.0/25 1.8/1.4/NA  NA/ NA/13 0.9/0.8/20  NA/ NA/NA
77 2.2/1.6/13 2.0/2.0/15 2.1/2.0/25 1.8/1.4/21  NA/ NA/13 0.9/0.9/20 1.8/1.5/18
78 2.1/1.6/14 2.0/2.0/16 2.2/2.1/22 1.8/1.4/NA 2.2/1.6/13 0.8/0.8/19  NA/ NA/NA
79 2.2/1.6/14 2.1/2.1/15 2.4/2.3/21 1.8/1.4/21  NA/ NA/13 0.8/0.8/16 1.9/1.7/18
80 2.3/1.7/13 2.2/2.2/14 2.4/2.3/21 1.8/1.4/21  NA/ NA/13 0.9/0.8/15  NA/ NA/NA
81 2.4/1.8/13 2.3/2.3/13 2.5/2.4/22 2.0/1.5/21 2.4/1.7/13 1.0/1.0/15 2.4/2.2/23
82 2.5/1.8/13 2.4/2.4/13 2.6/2.5/21 2.1/1.6/21  NA/ NA/NA 1.1/1.0/15  NA/ NA/NA
83 2.6/1.9/13 2.6/2.5/13 2.5/2.4/21 2.1/1.7/21 2.2/1.6/NA 1.1/1.1/16 2.6/2.4/NA
84 2.7/1.9/13 2.6/2.6/13 2.6/2.5/NA 2.2/1.7/20  NA/ NA/NA 1.0/ NA/16  NA/ NA/NA
85 2.8/2.0/12 2.8/2.8/12 2.8/2.7/18 2.3/1.8/20 2.3/1.6/NA 1.1/1.1/16 3.0/2.6/20
86 2.8/1.9/14 2.8/2.8/13 2.8/2.7/NA 2.2/1.8/20 2.4/1.7/NA 1.1/1.1/17  NA/ NA/NA
87 2.8/1.9/14 2.8/2.8/13 2.9/2.8/19 2.3/1.8/20 2.3/1.8/NA 1.2/1.2/NA 3.0/2.7/23
88 2.7/1.9/14 2.9/2.9/13 2.9/2.7/NA 2.3/1.8/23 2.2/1.7/NA 1.3/1.3/NA  NA/ NA/NA

Note how basic research is a small fraction of the total research, and is
supported primarily by the federal government, with most of the work being 
done at universities. Basic research is the underpinning of the advancement
of science, the very foundation of technology, and we get all this for a mere
0.4% of the GNP. But the total pot for NSF is unlikely to increase 
commensurately with the new demands on it, so reductions in basic research
are inevitable unless we can convince the Committee to restore basic science
as the principle mission of NSF. In 1985, NSF was ordered to support
"fundamental engineering research" but the budget was not increased to
accomodate the expanded mission.

The following has been excerpted from an e-mail put out by APS:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
AN EFFORT IS UNDERWAY TO DRASTICALLY REDEFINE THE MISSION OF THE NSF

The NSF was created with the objective of insulating basic research from the
pressures of short-term crises. But those who favor increased emphasis on
applied science are seeking to restructure the NSF to be more responsive to
the needs of industry. If they succeed, the impact on programs in basic
research would be severe, since any shift of funds will be coming out of a
declining research budget.

BACKGROUND:   In August, the National Science Board [the panel overseeing NSF] 
issued a report that calls for the NSF to emphasize support for American 
industry (excerpted below). A Special Commission on the Future of the NSF is 
being formed by the NSB to condider the redirection of the NSF.

ACTION:    It is urgent that we alert Congress to our concerns. In the absence 
of open discussion within the scientific community, or major hearings in
Congress, this attempt to redefine the mission of the NSF is premature at best.
We must ask Congress to allow a full discussion before implementing such a
drastic move.  [my note: this has passed the Congress]

Updates on the issue will appear in "What's New", the weekly electronic APS
newsletter. If you are not currently receiving it, pleace contact the
APS office of Public Affairs.

Francis Slakey   OPA@AIP.bitnet   APS/Office of Public Affairs

NATIONAL SCIENCE BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS ON HOW TO RESHAPE THE NSF TO BETTER
SERVE INDUSTRY'S NEEDS:
"Encourage and assist in the expansion of Federal support of fundamental
engineering research. Expand and stregthen NSF's Eningeering Research Program.
Expand the effectiveness, scope, and oureach of NSF's Science and Technology
Centers, Industry/University Cooperative Research Centers, and other industry-
related programs, and couple these programs even more closely with future
industry needs. Increase the support of science and engineering research and
education programs that emphasize production systems engineering and the 
integration of design and manufacturing".

Copies of this report, "Competitive Strength of US Industrial Science and 
Technology" (NSB-92-138) are available from Forms and Publications, NSF,
Washington, D.C. 20550

SENATE REPORT TO ACCOMPANY THE VA/HUD/IA APPROPRIATIONS BILL:
"   While recognizing the role the Foundation has played in establishing U.S.
leadership in basic research over the past 40 years, the Committee believes that
the new world order requires the Foundation to take a more activist role in
transferring the results of basic research from the academic community into the
market place. The Committee believes the Foundation will play the key role in
making the Nation's academic research infrastructure more accessible to those
endeavoring to build America's technology base and improve U.S. economic
competitiveness. This role should include: opening applied research programs to
greater participation by nonacademic personnel; making education programs better
prepare future scientists and engineers for theneeds of industry; building 
day-to-day working relationships with other Federal agencies whose missions 
require cutting edge technology. The Committee directs the Foundation to revise
its strategic plan to address these issues and include in the plan, yearly 
funding and personnel requirements to accomplish these goals. The Foundation 
should submit this revised strategic plan concurrently with the submission of 
the fiscal year 1994 budget request. However, the fiscal year 1993 operating 
plan should specify the specific steps and funding levels associated with each 
step, that demonstrate a commitment to these important milestones.
    The Committee directs the Foundation to establish a formal working
relationship with NIST to coordinate programs in areas of commonality such as
manufacturing, materials research, and engineering research, and to share 
institutional expertise. The Foundation shall implement such an arrangement
and report to the committee before January 1, 1993."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stephen Jascourt    stvjas@meteor.wisc.edu