National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: The European Community
Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×

GERMANY

HUBERT S. MARKL

President, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG)

I have been asked to address questions regarding the future of the German research enterprise. Let me start with two disclaimers. First, I do not believe that our future is at all foreseeable, and I believe that the future of the research enterprise is even less foreseeable than our overall future and that the future of German research affairs presently is again even less foreseeable than those in other parts of the world. I believe that we cannot foresee but have to invent and build our way into the future.

I believe strongly that we will only be able to cope with future challenges if we do not just assiduously follow preconceived trends and plans but are always open to surprises and unexpected opportunities

What may sound in the following like the prediction of trends or challenges should be regarded as the present state of my perception of what might be sensible next steps in our task to build our common future together with our friends and competitors around the world. I believe strongly that we will only be able to cope with future challenges if we do not just assiduously follow preconceived trends and plans but are always open to surprises and unexpected opportunities.

Second, please note that I do not represent the government of the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). As the President of the DFG, which is not a governmental agency but an autonomous scientific body set up as a society under private law, I can only speak for the scientists of my country.

R&D Organization in the Federal Republic of Germany

Let me first give you a quick thumbnail sketch of the state of R&D organization in the FRG, at least as it presented itself up to October 3, 1990, the date of unification. Of German R&D expenditures—in 1990 roughly 70 billion DM or around 2.8 percent of our GNP—about two-thirds derive from private industry and somewhat more than this (70 percent) are also expended there. The publicly funded R&D effort of about 25 billion DM divides into about 60 percent coming from the federal government, and 40 percent coming from the states (Länder), which are, for constitutional reasons, predominantly in charge of funding research in our 50 major and 200 minor universities. Altogether, R&D in universities is financed with approximately 10 billion DM; about 25 percent of this money comes from external grant sources, of which, again, 25 percent is from private sources. The federal government funds—mostly through the Ministry of Research and Technology but also through other Ministries—mainly the 13 large National Research Centers (Grossforschungseinrichtungen), other national laboratories, and the better part of the Max Planck Society, the

Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×

DFG, and the Fraunhofer Gesellschaft, which all get also, in varying shares, funds from state governments.

Through the DFG, which mainly funds fundamental research of all disciplines in universities, and through the targeted mission- or application-oriented programs of the Ministry of Research and Technology, the federal government is also strongly involved in competitive grant funding of research in universities. It bears as well the major responsibility for funding German participation in international research projects, programs, or institutes of all kinds.

The flow of financial resources through the many different channels of the German federal political organization and through the many subsidiary autonomous bodies in charge of funding and/or performing research makes the German R&D system exceedingly pluralistic, frustratingly complicated, and fortunately resilient against one-sided influence from pressure groups of whatever kind. At times, however, the system also is dangerously uncoordinated, conservative, and slow moving. It is certainly difficult to push it around, but it is sometimes just as certainly difficult to push it to go in any direction at all. The system is very decentralized and reacts not lightly to central political directives or to the call of public bandwagon trumpets. It offers publicly funded individual researchers wherever they work plenty of independence in the pursuit of their research interests and a multiplicity of funding sources where they can apply for support.

The flow of financial resources through the many different channels of the German federal political organization and through the many subsidiary autonomous bodies in charge of funding and/or performing research makes the German R&D system exceedingly pluralistic, frustratingly complicated, and fortunately resilient against one-sided influence from pressure groups of whatever kind.

Working conditions generally are not bad, except for in the new eastern part of the country, but the outcome of research efforts, whether in private industry or public institutions, is more often than not impressive because of thoroughness, solidity, and breadth and depth of pursuit rather than because of avant garde imagination and inventiveness.

The human resources distribution—in full-time researcher equivalents (scientists and engineers taken together)—gives a good general overview of actual distribution of R&D performance: roughly 100,000 researchers work in private industry; 30,000 work in our universities of all kinds; and 20,000 work in all other public research institutions taken together. To these one should add altogether 120,000 technicians and approximately the same number of supporting staff, which totals about 400,000 persons involved in R&D for the old FRG (add approximately 20 to 25 percent of each category for the new unified Germany).

Although, evidently, most applied R&D in Germany is pursued in private industry, a sizable and economically highly important part of applied and application-oriented research goes on in the laboratories of our major technical universities (as in Aachen, München, Stuttgart, Hannover, etc.) and in the Institutes for Applied Research of the Fraunhofer Gesellschaft. For small- and medium-size enterprises, such as our machine-building industry, research performed in our technical universities is a life line of innovation. It deserves mention that, as a rule, you cannot become full professor in any department of engineering in Germany unless one first has

Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×

worked successfully in the R&D sector of private industry for a couple of years. This assures lifelong links between these departments and industry, both for two-way communication and for funding, and it ensures as well that students in technological fields are taught by professors who know what they talk about from personal firsthand experience. Fundamental research, on the other hand, has its strongholds in universities, in the institutes of the Max Planck Society, and in most of the National Research Centers, which also are strongly involved in strategic and mission-oriented, often internationally coordinated and integrated research.

There is general political and scientific agreement that universities should remain strong in fundamental research and that the system of large National Research Centers should not expand very much beyond the present state.

Trends in Size, Mission, and Character of R&D

I believe, in probably typical old-fashioned German fashion, that the size relationships among the different financing and performing sectors as just described will not change dramatically in the next decade. There is, for instance, general political and scientific agreement that universities should remain strong in fundamental research and that the system of large National Research Centers should not expand very much beyond the present state.

Nevertheless, I foresee that the most influential trend for R&D in Germany will be rising interdisciplinary and intersectorial coordination, cooperation, and integration on a national, European, "Western" (or OECD), and, finally, global scale. Industrial R&D investment is already today in most major industrial branches planned and executed on a European scale, creating rapidly international and inter-enterprise links of variable geometry. It will become more so with every year, and it will become even more global with every year. Part of the reason for that may be perfectionist German environmental and other legal overregulation—as, for instance, in the areas of biotechnology or nuclear energy. But the major reasons are those of the needs of international market demand pulls and innovative pushes from active competitors.

On the national home scene it is also evident that cooperative links between different disciplines in fundamental research—for example, between mathematics and engineering, neurobiology and psychology, linguistics and computer science—will dominate and rapidly change the most active research fronts. Closer and closer cooperation, with flexible exchange of R&D personnel, common use of research facilities, and joint funding schemes also will characterize the relationship between industrial research and research in universities and public research institutes.

With every year it will be more natural to host and exchange researchers throughout Europe and beyond, especially with the Anglo-Saxon industrial nations. It is also to be hoped that our future common Europe of research and science will be a larger and more comprehensive Europe than the present 12-nation European Community (EC), including, quite naturally, all European Free Trade Association (EFTA) countries but also our Eastern neighbors, which until very recently we called "socialist bloc countries"; maybe we can soon dub them "postsocialist nations."

Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×

What other trends can be traced?

  • Evidently, and not very surprisingly, we expect major innovative impulses from advances in information technology, new materials technology, polymer chemistry, and molecular biotechnology—just as everyone else does. We try to face these challenges—by investing heavily in all these areas both in fundamental and in applied research, in public institutions and in industry, and also in joint research centers—with varying success but with unvarying hopes for better and more of it in the future.

  • Ecological constraints, coming, as elsewhere, often more from the psychological problems of the people (as fostered through a multimedia industry in this field) than from actual physical conditions, will relentlessly drive innovative technologies in resource exploitation, energy use, manufacturing processes up to the final stages of waste-use technology, and recycling in almost every industrial sector.

  • The demography of a rapidly aging and (without immigration) dwindling population, in addition to labor union pressures for still shorter working weeks and ever-higher wages, will provide continuous pushing power for further rationalization and automatization of production processes, calling for continuous R&D efforts to provide the grist for this mill of industrial progress.

  • Global ecological and demographic problems of different kinds certainly will be major driving forces for internationally coordinated R&D efforts to overcome at least the worst problems arising from a multi-giga-mankind with multi-tera-impact on the global biosphere. German scientists generally feel that we have to contribute more actively to joint international research efforts on global environmental, demographic, and economic problems of mankind. We will have to change our teaching institutions and their curricula in an appropriate fashion to make Germans better prepared for a common Europe, but also to better fulfill their responsibilities in a global world community.

Future R&D Roles and Responsibilities

My views on the question of optimal division of roles and responsibilities in R&D among universities, government institutes, and industrial and independent laboratories can be put rather succinctly: I do not believe that an optimum can be defined; therefore, we will never know how to reach it. We should try hard instead at least to "satisfize" rather than to optimize.

We will have to change our teaching institutions and their curricula in an appropriate fashion to make Germans better prepared for a common Europe, but also to better fulfill their responsibilities in a global world community.

It seems that acceptable and competitively fairly successful relationships can be attained in different countries using rather different mixes of the four components listed (cf., e.g., France, Italy, Germany and Japan). Therefore, it may be more important to keep a particular historically grown configuration lively and going in which the players are accustomed to operating effectively, than to dream about optimal conditions and about changing everything only to gain nothing. From this you may take it that I regard the

Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×

distribution of roles among the four sectors as presently evolved in my country to be a rather satisfactory arrangement.

I would tend to advise putting much more effort into making the different R&D performers perform more effectively in their turf, within their respective terms of reference and constraints, rather than drawing up new blueprints or flowcharts for distribution of tasks and responsibilities. I would also, as already mentioned, tend to put more effort into bringing about more effective intersectorial, temporary, task-defined cooperation than to redistribute obligations according to a clever new optimal plan. In other words, I would rather rely on promoting more effective self-organization of R&D through those researchers who actually perform it than on more planning in the quest for a more perfectly organized total R&D system.

I would rather rely on promoting more effective self-organization of R&D through those researchers who actually perform it than on more planning in the quest for a more perfectly organized total R&D system.

I confess, however, that even after five years as president of the DFG, I have remained enough of a university professor to believe firmly in the importance of training students in universities that are actively contributing at the cutting edge of research in their different disciplines. A strong base in lively fundamental research in all branches of scholarship, driven by the inventiveness and imagination of individual researchers or groups of them together with their students in universities, seems to me the fountainhead of a humane and competitive industrial civilization. But, of course, this may be the ''deformation professionelle'' of a German university professor about to head back for his alma mater.

I hasten to add, however, that I am just as convinced that even the best R&D system in universities and in independent or public institutes will stagnate and become even immobile and sterile if these sectors cannot continuously link up, by transfer of researchers to and fro, with a healthy and thriving private industrial research base—as we have in Germany in many of our major industrial enterprises, I am certainly glad to say.

German Unification

What will be the consequences of German unification? As you probably know, the GDR had an active R&D system of the typical East-bloc type, with most of the research concentrated in central academy institutes rather isolated from the advanced educational system of the universities and with much of the development performed in university laboratories in the service of industrial combines, making university research institutes in many cases into little more than prolonged scientific work benches of these combines. In preparing the unification treaty, both German governments agreed to change this Soviet-type R&D system back to the western German type of organization, a process that has just begun and that may take the better part of the next decade to complete. Thus, many academy institutes will be dismantled, and many of their groups of researchers will move over or back into the universities; some will end up in new Max Planck or Fraunhofer institutes or in new national laboratories.

Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×

The major problem with all of this—as with the whole unification process—is that enormous amounts of capital are needed to build up both the economic and the scientific base of the old East Germany to a level of productiveness and competitiveness on a par with the old West Germany. I am pretty well convinced that these demands, together with the resources needed for a comparable build-up phase for the scientific/economic systems of our eastern neighbor countries, will mean that for the next decade West Germans will have to learn to tighten their belts somewhat. I am also convinced that it will be not only necessary but very worthwhile to do so; after all, we can gain from some slimming of our waistlines.

However, one problem with all of this will be that with the right to move freely, finally, within Germany and further on, many East Germans—both researchers and other skilled personnel—will most probably move in large numbers, either temporarily or even permanently, west. This type of migration has already set in. This is probably inevitable and perhaps even advantageous, at least if we can convince them or others to move back east now and later on in order to help build up eastern Germany's productive base. I would certainly hope that many of my eastern German compatriots from the scientific R&D field would be welcome to work for a couple of years not only in western Germany but also in other Western countries, especially within Europe but also in the United States, in order to become more fully adapted to and more quickly integrated into the political and economic community of which we West Germans have since long ago become an inseparable part.

HEINZ RIESENHUBER1

Minister for Research and Technology, Federal Republic of Germany

The constitution of the FRG stipulates the freedom of science and research as an inalienable human right and thus as a basic element of the human community. This necessarily means that the government considers it a major task to guarantee adequate working conditions as a prerequisite for scientific research. In Germany this task is shared by the federal government and the 16 governments of the constituent states, or Länder.

During the 42 years since the foundation of the FRG a diverse research structure has evolved that, on the whole, is considered an optimum research environment and a basis for successful future-oriented science policy in Germany, even after its unification on October 3, 1990.

The German research environment includes the differentiated higher education system with its traditional research-based universities, the proven technical universities, and the practice-oriented Fachhochschulen; it includes DFG (Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft/German Research As-

1  

Minister Rtesenhuber was unable to attend the symposium, but provided his prepared remarks for inclusion m this proceedings report.

Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×

sociation) and MPG (Max-Planck-Gesellschaft/Max Planck Society), both of which focus on basic research, the National Research Centers with their particular research assignments, and the Fraunhofer Society, which focuses on the application of research results in industry. These institutions cover the entire research process, from the establishment of a knowledge base up to application via committed institutions. In this way the government also ensures a high level of training of R&D staff, including laboratory workers and technicians as well as basic researchers.

The strong commitment to scientific research today arises mainly from political goals: the responsibility for humans and for the ecological system in which they live and with which they increasingly interfere prompts us to strengthen the rationale of our action.

The government's commitment to scientific research is reflected by relevant figures. Regarding government funding, the FRG spends a greater share of its gross domestic product (GDP) on civilian research than does any other major industrialized nation (0.92 percent as compared with 0.42 percent in the United States, 0.44 percent in Japan, 0.86 percent in France, and 0.51 percent in the United Kingdom). The better part of these funds goes to basic research, which accounts for a substantially higher share in total research funding in Germany (19 percent) than, for example, in the United States (12 percent) or in Japan (13 percent).

German industry also has fully recognized the growing importance of research and has for many years been increasing its expenditure. Industry's share in the German R&D budget was 65 percent in 1989, compared with 56 percent 10 years earlier; only in Japan is this share higher, where industry made similar efforts in the past decade (59 percent in 1979 and 72 percent in 1989).

Regarding national R&D funding, the FRG is among the leading industrialized nations, together with Japan and the United States (2.8 to 3.0 percent of the GDP).

Research Policy Goals

The strong commitment to scientific research today arises mainly from political goals: the responsibility for humans and for the ecological system in which they live and with which they increasingly interfere prompts us to strengthen the rationale of our action.

In order to tackle these mostly global tasks, we must commit ourselves to speeding up the international coordination of research strategies.

  • On the one hand, we have to secure the basic necessities of life for a permanently growing world population, reduce the exploitation of natural resources, and provide the people of the Third World, if at all possible, with an increasing share of public wealth.

  • On the other hand, bearing in mind our responsibility for future generations, we must counter the overexploitation of the Earth's ecosystem and stop the destruction of the genetic heritage.

In order to tackle these mostly global tasks, we must commit ourselves to speeding up the international coordination of research strategies.

The success of research and technology policy depends on broad-based and efficient basic research, which, on the one hand, widens the knowledge base for the development of new technologies and, on the other hand, trains

Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×

young scientists for research work at universities and in industry by familiarizing them, with topical issues and modern methods of research. It can be noted today that on the forward edge of research, the complexity of problems and the degree of specialization are increasing steadily so that often a global pooling of intellectual capacities is needed for tackling relevant topics. Furthermore, despite increasing specialization within disciplines, a high degree of interdisciplinary work is needed if we wish to arrive at long-term reliable solutions. An excellent case in point is research on global change, where virtually all disciplines must cooperate, including atmospheric chemistry and marine research, fluid physics, and research into the biological processes in major ecosystems, such as the sea or the rainforest.

Another crucial task for international research policy, in my view, is to agree on appropriate structures that are conducive to the coordination of national planning efforts in big science with a view to avoiding unnecessary duplication of investment and excessive competition.

Thus, it is a major task for research policy to strengthen the motivation of researchers as well as their creative thinking and their mobility. An important aspect is the promotion of international cooperation, which provides an optimum environment for researchers to exchange resources, views, and results. This applies also, and particularly, to the highly motivated research communities of smaller countries with fewer financial resources that wish to contribute to important research issues, including researchers in eastern Europe who are now free to exchange scientific concepts and ideas.

Another crucial task for international research policy, in my view, is to agree on appropriate structures that are conducive to the coordination of national planning efforts in big science with a view to avoiding unnecessary duplication of investment and excessive competition. This applies, above all, to the large-scale experimental facilities in astronomy and physics. In addition, it is a particular challenge for research policy to bring about international coordination between research strategies in areas that were, until recently, considered to be "little science." The urgent problems—such as the securing of the basic necessities of life for a growing world population; the organization and the handling of the ethical consequences, of such megaprojects as human genome mapping and human brain research; and the attempts to arrive at an understanding not only of the evolution of the cosmos after the big bang but also of the evolution of life, which is still going on on this Earth—call for a new readiness to engage in international cooperation, for which new global instruments have to be developed.

In contrast to the situation in big science, no inherent structure has as yet evolved in "little science" so that a new task has evolved for international science policy, which has to be developed and optimized. Initial experience has been gathered through such projects as HFSP and HUGO.

The frequently voiced fear of a brain drain (i.e., the draining off of knowledge produced with considerable national effort and resources, without an adequate quid pro quo being provided) should be countered with the elaboration of suitable mechanisms to be agreed on by the countries concerned.

Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×
Technological Strategies

The development of new close to the market technologies must be demand oriented early on, taking into account the possibilities for implementation. The major financial burden must be shouldered by the enterprises of the respective sector. One focus of governmental action is the design of a suitable framework for R&D that ranges from the protection of intellectual property to the promotion of adequate training opportunities; to the funding of excellent basic research; and to reliable local conditions, including environmental, safety, and labor protection requirements that are the same for all countries involved and therefore do not affect competition. International harmonization is of major importance in this sector, so major collaborative efforts must be made to bring about such harmonization. This paradigm of German research policy, which is based on the principle of subsidiarity, is reflected by the decrease in government project funds for technology development and innovation in trade and industry.

Furthermore, global subjects have to be identified for the targeted and speedy development of new technologies according to goals set by society. A case in point is the sector of the resource-saving technologies. On closer inspection, virtually all resources turn out to be depletable, particularly if we consider the Earth's natural environment a resource for life. The development of new technological solutions that enable a still growing humankind to live in dignity and prosperity is a task for the community of nations, with the large industrialized nations bearing a special responsibility.

The development of new technological solutions that enable a still growing humankind to live in dignity and prosperity is a task for the community of nations, with the large industrialized nations bearing a special responsibility.

Energy supply is one area where specific action is needed. The strategy to be pursued by the international community must first and foremost focus on the reduction of emissions that damage the environment and interfere with the global climate. Renewable sources of energy and the utilization of solar energy play an increasingly important role; assuming their responsibility for the overall system, the industrialized nations must aim to achieve rapid progress while attaching major importance as well to increasing the efficiency of energy-consuming machines and to conserving energy. The FRG has been actively involved in this sector for years; an international comparison shows that it is Germany, of all countries, that spends the largest share of its GDP on renewable energy R&D.

Another vitally important field is transport. The increases in the international commodity flow and in passenger transport, with their related risks for man and the environment (tanker accidents are a case in point), but also the undeniably favorable future prospects of a considerable efficiency increase, require major technological efforts and should be considered an international task.

Numerous countries have realized that the development of technologies for exploiting the international knowledge potential, for overcoming language barriers, and for processing information is a major task for technology policy. Great efforts are made and considerable funds provided for tackling relevant issues; cooperative activities have assumed hitherto un-

Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×

known global dimensions. The end of this development is not yet in sight; new information and communication technologies will continue to permeate all spheres of society. Solutions to specific problems will become increasingly important—a process that can be perceived as evolutionary differentiation. It is crucial that the compatibility of systems and components be guaranteed early on by the conclusion of appropriate standardization agreements. This seems to be the only way to avoid monopolization trends, which are undesirable in terms of both foreign trade policy and industrial policy.

Provision for the Future of Mankind

German science policy for years has supported preventive and anticipatory research with annually increasing funds, thus making provision also for future generations. Relevant research includes not only the above-mentioned field of environmental and climatic research but also the investigation of the basis for healthy living, of the causes of disease, and of the opportunities for curing or alleviating them. Most of these research activities are not limited to local issues and should therefore involve international cooperation and division of effort.

It is crucial that the compatibility of systems and components be guaranteed early on by the conclusion of appropriate standardization agreements. This seems to be the only way to avoid monopolization trends, which are undesirable in terms of both foreign trade policy and industrial policy.

New findings of genetic engineering—in particular, knowledge about the human genome and the potential of genetic engineering to modify genetic material—have given rise to new ethical issues that have to be discussed and settled with a great responsibility. Responsibility for the natural environment particularly for human life must not stop at national frontiers. The FRG therefore continues to tackle these issues with great interest and commitment. Joint efforts must be made to identify the potential benefits and risks of technologies even earlier and to agree on joint action.

Thus, finding a comprehensive and sustainable solution for the final disposal of radioactive wastes and other substances that are hazardous to the Earth's biosphere is an immediate goal to be pursued by all industrialized nations, fully aware of their responsibility for future generations.

Research in Unified Germany

Owing to the reunification on October 3, 1990, the territory of the FRG has become larger, and the number of people who can now live, learn, work, and do research in the free democratic German system has increased by about 25 percent as compared with the situation before unification took place. The German research environment has thus not only become larger but more diverse. In the sector of government-funded institutes (excluding academic institutions) alone more than 6,000 qualified researchers will be working in the new German Länder, and from 1992, following a phase of reorientation and reshaping, optimum working conditions will be speedily established that will soon strengthen the entire German R&D capacity.

Nevertheless, the federal government's research budget for 1992 is a solidarity budget requiring creativity and clear priorities as well as the ex-

Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×

ploitation of any synergy and saving opportunities. In view of the tremendous increase in tasks, the growth rates are rather modest.

The institutes of the former GDR's Academy of Sciences were examined and evaluated by independent experts on the Science Council who concluded that 40 of the former academy's institutes will be able to continue their work. From the academy's 19,000 staff members reported for the beginning of this year, 11,000 will remain in employment.

The long-term development of new, meaningful structures and/or the adaptation of existing ones must be the primary goal in the new German Länder. Supporting measures are as follows:

  • the establishment of new research institutions

  • scientific research in higher education and

  • the promotion of research in enterprises and institutes.

The research environment of the FRG in its boundaries before October 3, 1990, will serve as a model. Through action in the new German Länder and beyond, the FRG hopes to continue to be a reliable partner for the international research community.

DISCUSSION

Question: Professor Markl, you mentioned that 60 percent of your budget comes from the federal government and 40 percent from the Länder. That means that politicians in a sense give you your resources. Most politicians view R&D as the engine for economic development. To what extent can you allocate your funds on the basis of excellence of a proposal, and to what extent are you under political pressure to distribute the funds into local districts by politicians?

The long-term development of new, meaningful structures and/or the adaptation of existing ones must be the primary goal in the new German Länder.

Professor Markl: At the DFG we are very fortunate that we feel very little political pressure. Mind you, we spend about 2 percent of the total R&D of the country and 5 percent of the public money through the channels of the DFG, which is a small amount of the total R&D money available. But still, it is a respectable amount, so you would expect many politicians to think that they could apply pressure and drive funds in this or that direction.

I believe that one of the reasons we feel less pressure is that since the Länder and the federal government always comprises different political parties, if one group tries to push in a certain direction, we very easily find allies who say, leave the DFG alone, we will not allow your party to tell the DFG what to do. Whether this is true or whether there is just a sensible consensus among politicians that there must be a sector of the R&D funding that should be managed mainly by scientists themselves, I do not know. But up until now, at least, we have still kept the confidence of the politi-

Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×

cians in the type of work we are doing, and they have not posed more awkward questions.

Question: The German universities in the first part of this century were famous for their connection with industry, especially the chemical industry. In the United States there was no relationship between universities and industry. In the second half of the century, that relationship has been building. How would you characterize the relationship today between the research universities and German industry? Is it as strong as it was before, or even better?

Professor Markl: I think the university-industry relationship goes on quite unchanged and is even expanding. Again, after a short period in the 1960s, when some professors were accused of being the slaves of industrial research because they received too much money from the chemical industry, there has been, in the universities, agreement that receiving funds is perfectly all right if the strings attached are not too tight. This means if the work done can be published, and if the researchers are free to decide whether they want to do the work or not, they can as easily as ever receive funds from industry for projects.

This is especially true in our chemical and pharmaceutical industries, and perhaps even more so in the engineering sector. In engineering, if you go to some of the important institutes in production technology or general mechanics, you will find that 70 to 80 percent of the money is actually coming from industry contracts.

I think this will continue and will be developed even further. We have an organization for computer linguistics in Stuttgart that we founded about three years ago. This organization involves universities, Max Planck institutes, people from national laboratories, and IBM. IBM does not fund the project; instead, it adds expertise, people, new knowledge, and access to machines that otherwise might not be available. So we do not discuss so much whether the money comes from this place or that, but whether the contributions really will produce a stronger program. As far as we see it, this is a very productive involvement.

Question: To what extent do you face politics within the scientific community, big science versus little science, junior investigators versus senior investigators, some areas of research versus others? Or is the German scientific community strictly objective?

Professor Markl: It is interest driven, like every scientific community. We have these discussions continuously. For instance, there is at present a big debate on whether we will be able, with all the other exigencies we see now in the national and international scene, to fund manned space research as previously planned and agreed. The German Society of Physicists has brought out a very strong statement against German involvement, or expanded involvement, in manned space research. There is general agreement that space research is very important but that it should be unmanned. So here you have big versus little.

Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×

In the DFG we try to keep about 50 percent of the budget for single investigators who can approach us at any time with any subject. The other 50 percent we divide among collaborative schemes, where people from all over the country agree to work together on a specific subject. Whenever one part tries to expand at the cost of the other, there is an agreement in the community to stop it, because the single investigator projects should get about 50 percent of the cake. This agreement is there.

As for big politics, how much money actually goes into increases for Max Planck or DFG as compared to increases in more industry-related research through our Ministry of Research and Technology or big programs in the national laboratories? This is very contentious, and the influence of scientists is not felt very strongly. I think this is mainly back-room power politics, where the big contenders try to push what they can.

But we haven't done too badly. We have an agreement to have a fixed 5 percent increase for six years. The government has decided that for the next four years we will assure 5 percent increases for the DFG, and we will get additional money for the new part of the country as well. So I think we haven't done too badly on that.

Question: Professor Markl said that local governments provided 40 percent of the research support at universities and the federal government 60 percent. He said as well that the 40 percent was related to educational process. My question is, does the 60 percent give you objectives that are contradictory to good educational practice?

Professor Markl: I don't think so, because it is mainly driven by the interest of the researchers. The money does not come with strings attached to be used only in those areas that the federal government is most interested in. It has hopes, but it leaves it very much to the decision process of the peer review procedures.

The government can only drive research in one or another direction when it links up with specific programs where the money does not go through autonomous bodies like the DFG but instead goes directly to the universities. But we do not, at present at least, see any influence that drives it in the wrong direction.

Question: Professor Markl said that the professors of engineering in Germany have five to 10 years industrial experience. Is that deemed desirable, important, or required?

Professor Markl: All of those. It is one of the founding principles of our technical schools, really. That's how they built up. These schools recruited their first professors from industry, and they kept doing that. The major engineering professors from electrical engineering, production technology, and so on are very proud to have been leading executives in research in some of the major industries. When they are called back to the universities, they get the professor's title and a lot of freedom to do contract work, which gives them, actually, much more freedom than they had while they were working in industry.

Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×

Question: How much is the DFG and its funding influenced by the various and growing numbers of EC research programs?

Professor Markl: We are very lucky, compared to the British, that attribution has not yet become a used word. In England, of course, money that is given to the European Community is attributed to what the research councils get, and they actually get less. In Germany we have not experienced that, so what I find is often a complementary, sometimes even synergistic, effect between programs funded at the national level and those funded by the European Community. But on the other hand, the European Community runs most of its money through rather large, strategically focused programs, where anyone from the sciences can come with any project at any time. This is a fraction of the sums available in Germany for similar work through the DFG. So I think if there were interactive effects, we would not see them up to now. But, generally, we do not feel that our government somehow is trapped because it has to give money to the European Community. It gives additional money for research through the European Community, which is welcome from our side.

Question: I would like to know about how the government R&D budgets are really decided upon in Germany. As you know, in this country we have a lengthy and open process that takes about two years, with a lot of public participation. Is there anything remotely like that in the process in Germany?

Professor Markl: In Germany the process is very similar. But what seems most important to me is that ministers for science and technology or for education and science are rated for political effectiveness based on how well they manage to get more money out of the treasury for research. They therefore work very hard on showing that their budget has increased more than other ministers in the cabinet.

This general atmosphere exists not only within the ruling party; each of the two major parties tries to demonstrate that it is more in favor of science and technology than the other. The parties are not always in favor of the same type of research—say, nuclear energy—but there is a very strong general agreement in each that Germany should never fall in its commitment to civil spending in science and technology. Thus, the goal of 3 percent of the GNP is something like a sacred cow. Among the public, also, there will be strong debate whenever there is a danger of falling back.

For instance, we discussed cutting back the percentage of public expenditure in the total R&D. In Britain the problem was handled by cutting back the public funding to produce a lower percentage; this was declared a success. But in West Germany we convinced industrialists to increase their share so that, overall, we have reduced public participation but have more money altogether. We have the same figures for percentage changes, but they are achieved in a different way.

Question: I wonder if there isn't a very serious potential for problems, now and down the road, where people believe that international coopera-

Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×

tion somehow impairs any competitive advantage coming from public investment in scientific research and in training a skilled scientific work force. If this is a possible problem, how do you think it should be addressed by the leading voices in science?

Professor Markl: We see the problem and don't know another way to invest—maybe even more to strengthen—our competitiveness because the alternative is to fall back and say we might be investing too much where others gain. But if we don't invest and don't contribute in this game, we will not be partners. Over the long run, we will suffer because we will not be able to play on the same field as the leading nations. So even though we have these discussions, there is no proposal that by investing less in research and technology, we could do better.

Question: You have emphasized the importance of internationalizing research efforts. I'm wondering if you view this as a means for individuals in your country to receive funds from outside or if you view it as a means by which your country will put money into international research efforts— say, by teams from the United States and your own country.

Professor Markl: We do not expect that internationalization will bring additional funds from outside for our researchers. We not only pay for most of our people who go out for limited terms to work in other countries but we pay as well for most of those who come into Germany. We try to balance it a bit; if some of our postdoctorates are in U.S. laboratories for the first year, on our money, and they are very enthused about it and write to the state for funding for a second year, we might say, why don't you pay for the second year since we paid for the first, and we make an agreement on that.

But we do not make this a policy. I think we profit a lot from our people going abroad, learning, and then coming back. The money spent in that respect is good. In general, I think it would be good in these international programs for each country to pay for its own effort—at least the ones wealthy enough to do so. We should together provide funding for scientists from countries who cannot participate because they are not well enough off, as in those from developing countries.

But to enter into international programs in order to relieve funding stresses on the home front I think is a poor strategy, for if everyone pursues it, it will not work. As far as industrial sources are concerned, that is another subject. If Japanese industry pays for research in England, if they see fit and want to do it, that is a different thing. But as long as we stay in the area of public funding, I think that each country, if it can, should contribute for its participants.

Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×
Page 29
Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×
Page 30
Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×
Page 31
Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×
Page 32
Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×
Page 33
Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×
Page 34
Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×
Page 35
Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×
Page 36
Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×
Page 37
Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×
Page 38
Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×
Page 39
Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×
Page 40
Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×
Page 41
Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"Germany." Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences, and National Academy of Engineering. 1992. Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/1975.
×
Page 43
Next: United Kingdom »
Future National Research Policies Within the Industrialized Nations: Report of a Symposium Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $45.00
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

This book is a summary and proceedings of a symposium sponsored by the Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable and the National Science Foundation. It includes presentations by senior government science policy officials and leading scientists who are directly involved in the research and higher education policy formulation processes in various countries. Included are their assessments of current challenges to their national research systems, descriptions of national strategies for meeting these challenges, and a discussion of options for national research systems in the twenty-first century.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!