of the U.S. science and engineering communities and direct them most appropriately toward critical goals, both short term and long.6 This task will require an overall investment and research plan, appropriate institutional structures for research on future solutions and for engineering and procuring solutions that are technologically mature, funding allocations that fairly distribute the costs of counterterrorism protections across society, and a renewed population of talented young scientists and engineers to work on these problems. Chapter 12 identifies the steps needed in the federal government (both in the White House and in the agencies that contribute to homeland security) to ensure that today’s technological counters to terrorism are fielded and tomorrow’s solutions are found. In particular, in recognition of the importance and difficulty of determining goals and priorities, the committee discusses how the federal government might gain access to crucial analytic capabilities to inform decision making and assess risk and the effectiveness of measures to counter that risk.

The proposed budget for federal spending on homeland security programs in fiscal year 2003 is approximately $38 billion,7 of which less than 10 percent is estimated to be for research and development.8 While these resources will make a significant difference, they do represent strictly the efforts of the federal government. Yet however well the federal government organizes its own effort in homeland security, the overall national effort cannot succeed without critical contributions from other institutions. Essential partners in utilizing science and technology for countering terrorism will include nonfederal governments (states, counties, and cities), industry, universities, nongovernmental organizations, professional societies, and many other groups. While the bulk of this report is directed toward the federal government and actions it can take, all of these other institutions have vital contributions to make. In Chapter 13, the committee

6  

The committee recognizes, and has been greatly informed by, a number of excellent reports published in recent years that anticipated terrorism directed at our homeland and discussed the role of science and technology in countering such terrorism. Among them were reports by the Gilmore Commission, the Bremer Commission, the Hart/Rudman Commission, and the Marsh Commission (see the references for Chapter 12). While the present report is distinct in its scope and in its attempt to integrate science-based responses to terrorism across many disciplines, it is consistent with these earlier studies in its characterization of the country’s primary areas of vulnerability and the need to strengthen the federal government’s ability to address them.

7  

Of the $38 billion, $21 billion is focused on four missions: ensuring that state and local first responders (firefighters, police, and rescue workers) are prepared for terrorism; enhancing our defenses against biological attacks; securing our borders; and sharing information and using information technology to secure the homeland (Fiscal Year 2003 Budget of the U.S. Government, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, 2002, p. 17. White House budget documents are available online at <http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget>).

8  

Exact figures are not available but estimates by Kei Koizumi of the American Association for the Advancement of Science predict approximately $2.8 billion for R&D in the FY 2003 counterterrorism budget (personal communication, June 11, 2002).



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement