NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20418
NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance.
This report has been reviewed by a group other than the authors according to procedures approved by a Report Review Committee consisting of members of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine.
This study was supported by the Cooperative State Research Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, under Agreement No. 94-COOP-2-0001 and by the Farm Foundation, and the W. K. Kellogg Foundation. Additional support was provided by the National Research Council. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the Board on Agriculture and do not necessarily reflect the views of the sponsors.
Library of Congress Cataloging Card No. 94-74039
International Standard Book No. 0-309-05235-1
Additional copies of this report are available from:
National Academy Press
2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20418
©1994 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
No part of this book may be reproduced by any mechanical, photographic, or electronic process, or in the form of a phonographic recording, nor may it be stored in a retrieval system, transmitted, or otherwise copied for public or private use without written permission from the publisher, except for the purposes of official use by the U.S. government.
Printed in the United States of America
BOARD ON AGRICULTURE
DALE E. BAUMAN, Chairman,
Cornell University
PHILIP H. ABELSON,
American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, D.C.
JOHN M. ANTLE,
Montana State University
WILLIAM B. DELAUDER,
Delaware State University
SUSAN K. HARLANDER,
Land O'Lakes, Inc., Minneapolis, Minnesota
RICHARD R. HARWOOD,
Michigan State University
T. KENT KIRK,
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Madison, Wisconsin
JAMES R. MOSELEY,
Jim Moseley Farms, Inc., Clarks Hill, Indiana, and Purdue University
NORMAN R. SCOTT,
Cornell University
GEORGE E. SEIDEL, JR.,
Colorado State University
CHRISTOPHER R. SOMERVILLE,
Carnegie Institution of Washington, Stanford, California
PATRICIA B. SWAN,
Iowa State University
JOHN R. WELSER,
The Upjohn Company, Kalamazoo, Michigan
Staff
SUSAN OFFUTT, Executive Director
CARLA CARLSON, Director of Communications
JANET OVERTON, Editor
VIOLA HOREK, Administrative Assistant
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences.
The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Robert M. White is president of the National Academy of Engineering.
The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine.
The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. Robert M. White are chairman and vice-chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council.
Preface
The development of agriculture in the United States represents an unparalleled achievement in increasing the productivity of U.S. resources. Nonetheless, in the past 3 decades there has been considerable public dialogue about the unintended consequences that growth in agriculture has had for rural communities, the environment, and human health. On the threshold of a new age of farming based on innovations in biological and information technologies, rather than chemical and mechanical technologies, the agricultural research community has reason to be optimistic about the prospects for reconciling gains in agricultural productivity with a broader range of societal objectives. Success in this endeavor turns largely on the same issue as have efforts over the past century: the adequacy of scientific understanding of the fundamental processes of food and fiber production.
In 1988, the Board on Agriculture of the National Research Council decided to address, by its own initiative rather than in response to a legislative or executive branch request, a key issue for the future of agriculture—public support for agricultural research. In the process of gathering information and identifying the views of those concerned about the agricultural, food, and environmental system, the board solicited ideas from many groups, including professional scientific societies broadly related to agriculture. Following its assessment, in 1989 the board released its report Investing in Research: A Proposal to Strengthen the Agricultural, Food, and Environmental System (National Research Council, 1989). The report called for an increased investment in research by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to assure attainment of three fundamental goals: (1) to maintain and increase the competi-
tiveness of U.S. agriculture by investing in research and capitalizing on new developments in science and technology; (2) to improve human health and well-being through research advances that lead to higher quality and nutritional value in the food supply and greater food safety; and (3) to sustain the quality and productivity of natural resources—including the health of soils, the quality of the water supply and atmosphere—and preserve the biological resources that are the endowments for future generations.
The report called for an expanded federal investment in research support for agriculture, food, and the environment. It recommended an increase of $500 million to fund research through the mechanism of competitive grants administered through the USDA's Office of Science and Education. Many of the board's recommendations were initially incorporated as a presidential initiative in budget proposals and subsequently through the Food, Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (1990 farm bill) as a legislative mandate known as the National Initiative for Research on Agriculture, Food, and Environment (NRI), which along with intramural research, formula funds to the State Agricultural Experiment Stations, and grants for special research and development initiatives, provides a sound foundation for enhancing U.S. agriculture.
It has now been 5 years since the inception of the effort to build the NRI. In that time there has been significant liberalization of trade in agricultural markets important to the United States. Emphasis continues on the key role agriculture plays in assuring the health of the nation's people by providing them a safe and abundant food supply, and the need to protect the quality of the natural resources on which agriculture depends is still pressing. The contribution that high-quality science can make to fulfilling these commercial, health, and environmental goals is constrained by holding funding of the NRI at far less than the $500 million originally envisioned. The linkage between scientific opportunity and progress toward national goals was underscored by President Clinton's statement in August 1994, Science in the National Interest (Executive Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology Policy, 1994). Against this backdrop, the board felt it timely to contemplate the future of the NRI for the consideration of science policy makers in the Congress, the executive branch, and the public that supports and is affected by the program's results.
The board believes that it is yet too soon to conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the NRI, its program areas, and the benefits from the research it has supported. Although early results are indeed encouraging, the NRI is only now on its fourth granting cycle, and, given the lag between grant application and award decision and the start of work, only 2 years of projects have been completed. This relatively brief experience, coupled with lack of an established methodology for evaluation, meant that an assessment going beyond project description was not feasible for the board to undertake. However, it is
helpful now to review the board's original recommendations made in 1989 in Investing in Research to assess its initial impact and to consider its implementation in the expansion of USDA competitive grants.
The board reviewed data provided by USDA's NRI program office, and it also sought, once again, the views of the agricultural and scientific community. In gathering information, the board convened a forum in October 1993 at the National Academy of Sciences' Beckman Center in Irvine, California. The board invited representatives from 69 professional scientific societies related to agriculture, food, and the environment. Participants from academia, industry, government, and nonprofit organizations were also present. It is important to note that attendees were invited to contribute and express opinions based on their personal experiences rather than on their organization's point of view.
The U.S. agricultural system has many components and serves many constituencies—consumers, agricultural and food industries, citizens concerned about the environment, agencies of the USDA and the states, other governmental departments, scientists, and colleges of agriculture and land grant universities. Often these groups express divergent priorities for agricultural research and for policy. Through a public forum, the board sought a better understanding of how the NRI has evolved in structure and function and how it might support future advances in research and address society's concerns in the broad areas of agriculture, food, and the environment.
In convening "Investing in Research: A National Research Initiative Forum," the board engaged four individuals to provide, as the basis for discussion, their views on the role of public agricultural research. The speakers were Elizabeth Anne R. Bird, Center for Rural Affairs, Walthill, Nebraska; Roger Salquist, Calgene, Inc., Davis, California; Katherine Reichelderfer Smith, Henry A. Wallace Institute for Alternative Agriculture, Greenbelt, Maryland; and William A. (Skip) Stiles, House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, U.S. Congress, Washington, D.C. The speakers' views were preceded by a historical summary of the NRI by Theodore L. Hullar, then-chair of the Board on Agriculture, and by a review of the USDA's competitive grants program and the NRI by Arthur Kelman, Chief Scientist (1991 to 1993), USDA Cooperative State Research Service National Research Initiative Competitive Grants Program.
Reflecting what was heard and discussed at the forum, the board here presents its conclusions and recommendations for the future development of the NRI. In the Executive Summary the board identifies the challenges facing the agricultural sector and highlights its recommendations. Chapter 1 provides an overview of the reasons for and context of development of the NRI program. Chapter 2 details the NRI program's content and administration. Chapter 3 offers a historical perspective of the program. Chapter 4 reemphasizes the conclusions drawn and the board's recommendations for enhancement of the
NRI program. The Appendix is a reprint of the Executive Summary from the 1989 report.
Ultimately, the board found the rationale for the establishment and vigorous expansion of the NRI more compelling than ever. Originally the board wrote (National Research Council, 1989:p. 1):
The United States needs to invest in the future—in human capital and the scientific knowledge base—to revitalize and reinvigorate one of its leading industries, the agricultural, food, and environmental system, in its broadest sense. A sound investment strategy for research is fundamental to sustain economic performance, to respond competitively to the increased economic strengths and manufacturing capacities of other nations, and to maintain the U.S. quality of life. The commitment called for in this proposal should therefore be part of a national agenda to strengthen the United States.
The board hopes for a reinvigoration of purpose and a renewed determination to enable the NRI as an integral component of the federal scientific research portfolio to reach its objectives and enhance the agricultural system's ability to meet the needs of the next century.
DALE E. BAUMAN
CHAIRMAN
Investing in the National Research Initiative |
This page in the original is blank. |