Questions? Call 888-624-8373

HARDBACK
list:$59.95
Web:$53.96
add to cart

Rights & Permissions

Free PDF Access

topleft topright

Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future (2007)
Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy (COSEPUP)

Page
140
bottomleft bottomright

The following HTML text is provided to enhance online readability. Many aspects of typography translate only awkwardly to HTML. Please use the page image as the authoritative form to ensure accuracy.


Rising Above the Gathering Storm: Energizing and Employing America for a Brighter Economic Future

fects both the number and the grant size of researcher proposals funded. In 2004, for example, only 24% of all proposals to NSF were funded, the lowest proportion in 15 years.5

Ultimately, increases in research funding must be justified by the results that can be expected rather than by the establishment of overall budget targets. But there is a great deal of evidence today that agencies do not support high-potential research because funding will not allow it. Furthermore, because of lack of funds, NSF in 2004 declined to support $2.1 billion in proposals that its independent external reviewers rated as very good or excellent.6

The DOD research picture is particularly troubling in this regard. As the US Senate Committee on Armed Services has noted, “investment in basic research has remained stagnant and is too focused on near-term demands.”7 A 2005 National Research Council panel’s assessment is similar: “In real terms the resources provided for Department of Defense basic research have declined substantially over the past decade.”8 Reductions in funding for basic research at DOD—in the “6.1 programs”—have a particularly large influence outside the department. For example, DOD funds 40% of the engineering research performed at universities, including more than half of all research in electrical and mechanical engineering, and 17% of basic research in mathematics and computer science.9

The importance of DOD basic research is illustrated by its products—in defense areas these include night vision; stealth technology; near-realtime delivery of battlefield information; navigation, communication, and weather satellites; and precision munitions. But the investments pay off for civilian applications too. The Internet, communications and weather satellites, global positioning technology, the standards that became JPEG, and even the search technologies used by Google all had origins in DOD basic research. John Deutch and William Perry point out that “the [Department of Defense] technology base program has also had a major effect on American industry. Indeed, it is the primary reason that the United States leads the world today in information technology.”10

5

National Science Board. Report of the National Science Board on the National Science Foundation’s Merit Review Process Fiscal Year 2004. NSB 05-12. Arlington, VA: National Science Board, March 2005. P. 7.

6

Ibid., pp. 5, 21.

7

The Senate Armed Services Committee. Report 108-046 accompanying S.1050, National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2004.

8

National Research Council. Assessment of Department of Defense Basic Research. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2005. P. 4.

9

Ibid., p. 21.

10

J. M. Deutch and W. J. Perry. Research Worth Fighting For. New York Times, April 13, 2005. P. 19.

Page
140
Front Matter (R1-R26)
Executive Summary (1-22)
1 A Disturbing Mosaic (23-40)
2 Why Are Science and Technology Critical to America's Prosperity in the 21st Century? (41-67)
3 How Is America Doing Now in Science and Technology? (68-106)
4 Method (107-111)
5 What Actions Should America Take in K–12 Science and Mathematics Education to Remain Prosperous in the 21st Century? (112-135)
6 What Actions Should America Take in Science and Engineering Research to Remain Prosperous in the 21st Century? (136-161)
7 What Actions Should America Take in Science and Engineering Higher Education to Remain Prosperous in the 21st Century? (162-181)
8 What Actions Should America Take in Economic and Technology Policy to Remain Prosperous in the 21st Century? (182-203)
9 What Might Life in the United States Be Like if It Is Not Competitive in Science and Technology? (204-224)
Appendix A Committee and Professional Staff Biographic Information (225-240)
Appendix B Statement of Task and Congressional Correspondence (241-248)
Appendix C Focus-Group Sessions (249-300)
Appendix D Issue Briefs (301-302)
K–12 Science, Mathematics, and Technology Education (303-324)
Attracting the Most Able US Students to Science and Engineering (325-341)
Undergraduate, Graduate, and Postgraduate Education in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics (342-356)
Implications of Changes in the Financing of Public Higher Education (357-376)
International Students and Researchers in the United States (377-396)
Achieving Balance and Adequacy in Federal Science and Technology Funding (397-414)
The Productivity of Scientific and Technological Research (415-422)
Investing in High-Risk and Breakthrough Research (423-431)
Ensuring That the United States Is at the Forefront in Critical Fields of Science and Technology (432-443)
Understanding Trends in Science and Technology Critical to US Prosperity (444-454)
Ensuring That the United States Has the Best Environment for Innovation (455-472)
Scientific Communication and Security (473-482)
Science and Technology Issues in National and Homeland Security (483-500)
Appendix E Estimated Recommendation Cost Tables (501-512)
Appendix F K–12 Education Recommendations Supplementary Information (513-516)
Appendix G Bibliography (517-536)
Index (537-564)