Special programs for young investigators may be necessary, given the frequent propensity of older scientists to dominate international activities of both countries. Consideration of jointly organized summer camps and meetings devoted to the frontiers of science in various subsets of biology seems warranted. Also, establishing special quotas for young investigators who apply for competitive international programs may be appropriate. A particularly noteworthy development has been the agreement between the Russian Ministry of Education and Science and the U.S. Department of Education calling for exchanges of a limited number of outstanding university science students. While there have been thousands of student exchanges that have touched the life sciences, this is the first time that the importance of exchanges of science students have been formally recognized in an agreement by the two governments.
In addition to reaching the foregoing conclusions, this chapter has set the stage for discussion of other conclusions in the chapters that follow.
1. The plans of the U.S. and Russian governments to promote biotechnology, for example, are set forth in the White House, National Bioeconomy Blueprint, April 26, 2012, http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2012/04/26/national-bioeconomy-blueprint-released and Decree of the Chairman of the Russian Government, Complex Program, Development of Biotechnology in the Russian Federation until 2020, No. 1853P-P8, April 24, 2012, http://s3.amazonaws.com/zanran_storage/www2.foi.se/ContentPages/115876758.pdf.
2. Appendix E.1 summarizes some of the relevant interests of the BPC.
3. Estimate is based on data provided by the Higher School of Economics (HSE), Moscow, May 2012. See, for example, HSE, Science Indicators: 2012, p. 48.
4. David Joravsky, The Lysenko Affair, University of Chicago Press, 1986.
5. Op. cit., Science Indicators, pp. 372–375.
6. Committee members have had many discussions over the years with experts from both countries concerning the intersections of civilian and defense research interests.
7. National Research Council, Biological Science and Biotechnology in Russia, Controlling Diseases and Enhancing Security, Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press, 2006.
8. Stephen A. Morse, “Public Health Surveillance and Infectious Disease Detection,” Bioseecurity and Bioterrorism: Biodefense Strategy, Practice, and Science, Volume 10, Number 1, 2012.
9. In a speech at the Eurasia Foundation in Washington, D.C., in May 2012, Deputy Secretary of State William Burns described this relationship as follows: “Few regions matter more to our success and security than Russia and the other independent nations that emerged from the break-up of the Soviet Union…. Home to a quarter of a billion people, the countries of the region hold vast hydrocarbon reserves and pipelines critical to a secure global supply of energy. Beyond its oil and gas riches, Russia remains an influential player on the world stage…. It remains deeply in the interest of the United States to see a strong Russia continue to re-emerge, a prosperous and modernizing Russia fully integrated into the global economy, a Russia which makes it possible for their citizens to realize their extraordinary potential…. We cannot afford to be detached observers.”
10. See Appendix F.4 concerning a U.S.-Russian assessment of the scientific basis for regulating GMOs.