Click for next page ( 35


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



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 34
7 Conclusion The many organizations that are neither purely academic nor purely industrial offer possibilities for expanding access through exchange of researchers and information. The pattern of the past, however, has been one of Japanese partici- pation in and access to these organizations in the United States, but no similar experience for U.S. technical personnel with respect to Japan. Because they are the targets of national government policy in both countries, national labs offer opportunities for increased exchange and collaboration under bilateral agreements such as the U.S.-Japan Agreement for Cooperation in Sci- ence and Technology. Because they are R&D organizations under the government's direct control, however, they can also become the objects of restrictive policies based on efforts to secure or maintain national technological leadership. Despite the gradual changes under way in U.S.-Japanese national lab cooperation, some believe the legacy of asymmetrical access, combined with increasing concerns about global competitiveness, may lead to restrictions on foreign access to the U.S. research environment or to a push toward indigenous technology develop- ment in Japan. U.S. federal labs, except for those conducting classified research, have tradi- tionally been open to foreign researchers. Last year Oak Ridge National Labora- tory received 1,200 visitors from Japan and 64 Japanese scientists and engineers conducted research there. Of its 1,090 guest researchers last year, NIST hosted 432 from foreign countries; 32 of those were Japanese. This openness represents a significant investment on the part of U.S. labs. It is estimated that a U.S. staff scientist who hosts a full time visiting researcher must devote about 20 percent of his time to guiding that researcher's activities.58 34

OCR for page 34
35 In 1987, all of Japan's national labs together received only 543 foreign re- searchers.59 Although ETL receives 1,200 foreign visitors each year, in fiscal year 1988, it had less than 40 foreign guest researchers.60 Of the 26 accepted as of November 1988, five were from North America. Japanese figures on national lab exchanges do not include large, national inter-university research institutes under the Ministry of Education, some of which receive numerous foreign re- searchers and conduct significant basic research. The National Laboratory for High Energy Physics (KEK), for example, received 325 foreign visitors in 1987, about 100 of whom stayed more than one month.62 In comparison with the 64 Japanese visiting researchers to Oak Ridge, the U.S. lab sent only four to Japan. The reasons for the disparity between the number of Japanese researchers in U.S. federal labs and the number of U.S. researchers in Japanese national labs are complex, including problems on both sides that extend beyond the policies of the laboratories. The career patterns of government researchers are different in the United States and Japan: Research abroad is generally seen to be more advanta- geous to a Japanese researcher's career than to that of his or her American counterpart. The shift in support for graduate education in the United States from grants to loans may also restrict the ability of young post-graduate researchers to go abroad. Research abroad is a luxury for a young U.S. researcher faced with a large student loan debt to be repaid. A number of other barriers have been noted, including expensive and inadequate housing in Japan, the language barrier, the lack of adequate accommodations for the education of foreign children, and a lack of experience in hosting foreign researchers from advanced industrial countries. There are signs of change, however. Researchers at NIST report that they have good access to Japanese national labs, including those of MITI and NTT. The number of foreigners in Japanese national labs, while still small, has been increas- ing in recent years,63 and recent changes in Japanese laws allow the employment of foreign researchers in Japanese national labs and universities. New fellowships specifically aimed at helping foreign researchers who want to work in Japanese national labs have also been established. As of October 1989, the NSF had awarded 22 STA fellowships. Although less than half of the slots administered by NSF have been filled, the number of U.S. postdoctoral researchers applying for and receiving these fellowships has been on the rise. On the U.S. side, federal labs are also beginning to encourage their research- ers to go to Japan, where there are good research opportunities. NIST and other U.S. labs offer Japanese language classes during working hours for interested researchers. There is also significant, ongoing collaboration between the United States and Japan through national labs. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, for example, is involved in collaborative research with Japan in areas such as new materials for fission energy, fusion development, nuclear fuel reprocessing, nu- clear shielding, and nuclear physics. In looking to the future, environmental and global issues offer"fertile ground" for additional collaboration. These include critically important areas that require

OCR for page 34
36 complex, expensive, long-term, multidisciplinary research; examples are ozone depletion, globally distributed contaminants, erosion, desertif~cation, ocean pollu- tion, urbanization, biodiversity, deforestation, and resource depletion. U.S. consulting organizations are becoming increasingly international. Some large U.S. not for profit consulting organizations have seen their contract research for Japanese clients grow, in terms of contract values, multiclient programs, and the joint commercialization of research results. Southwest Research Institute, for example, conducts research for Japanese clients in an array of engineering fields. These trends can lead to challenges as well as opportunities, a major one being the question of whether consulting organizations will assume a significant role in a two-way transfer of science and technology, particularly from Japan to the United States. Working with foreign clients can lead to expanded persome exchanges, an indispensable ingredient of technology transfer. The proprietary nature of much of the work of U.S. consulting organizations, however, requires that projects are compartmentalized and visitors escorted. U.S. consulting organi- zations will be increasingly challenged by potential conflicts between the interna- tionalization of research and maintaining their lifeline of confidentiality. The internationalization of science and technology also highlights the need for trans- lation of scientific materials in a timely maimer. For some U.S. not for profit consulting organizations with ties to Japan, access to scientific information from Japanese companies is facilitated by physical visits to the Japanese location. Although there have been isolated cases of restrictions on foreign attendance at meetings in recent years, professional associations may represent one of the most open avenues for international access to scientific and technological infor- mation. A few Japanese professional association journals, such as those of the JAST and the JSAP, are published in English, as are the results of some profes- sional associations studies leg., the JSPS study on rolling bearings). There is however, a considerable lag in receiving English language Japanese scientific and technical information, an indicator of the need for more, better, and faster trans- lation. An important obstacle to U.S. access is the fact that Japanese professional association meetings are conducted in Japanese. U.S. researchers will need to make special efforts to learn more about the information that is exchanged at Japanese professional association meetings. In view of the fact that Japan's national labs, professional associations, and "hybrid" organizations perform important roles in carrying out and disseminating the results of R&D useful to industry, these organizations offer unique opportu- nities for learning from Japan. In addition to the technology developed and adapted by these organizations, they are worthy of study from an organizational perspective. The "hybrid" organizations are still evolving, but they provide mechanisms to join efforts among competing private sector funs, a goal advo- cated by some in the United States today. While comparatively little attention has been paid to the professional associations in Japan, they are also actively involved in R&D projects useful to industry. "Professional associations" function some

OCR for page 34
37 what differently in the United States and Japan, but these differences must be taken into account if they are to play a large role in international R&D collabora- tion. Organizations that are not purely academic or industrial play important roles in the Japanese and American R&D systems, although those roles are often differ- ent. Some describe them as "bridging" organizations that provide links between basic research carried out primarily in universities and the more applied and proprietary research under way in private corporations; it is clear that they perform a wide array of other functions. It may be more accurate to view these organizations as islands in a river, with one bank formed by the university research facilities and the other bank by corporate laboratories. In this sense, the organizations that are neitherpurely academic nor industrial form important parts of a complex and dynamic R&D system in both countries. In addition to actually carrying out R&D, they in some cases help to set R&D priorities, diffuse technol- ogy domestically, and transfer technology internationally. Understanding these organizations better is a prerequisite for improving their effectiveness in two-way access to the R&D systems in the two countries.

OCR for page 34

OCR for page 34
Endnotes 1 National Science Foundation, The Scientific and Technology Resources of Japan: A Comparison with the United States (Washington, D.C.: June 1988), 53. 2 Kagaku Gijutsu Cho Gijutsu Seisaku Kyoku [Science and Technology Agency, Technology Policy Bureau], Kagaku Gijutsu Yoran [Science and Technology Survey], 1989, 52-53. ~ Nll is privately operated, however. 4 Somucho Tokei Kyoku [Management and Coordination Agency, Statistics Bureau], Kagaku Gijutsu Kenkyu Hokoku [Report on the Survey on Research and Development], 1987, 77, 81, 89. See Science and Technology Survey, op. cit., 53. By "government-owned" research institutions, we refer here to those which receive most of their funding from the national government, not including higher education institutions. It should be noted, however, that significant research and development is carried out in the United States with state and local government support. These organizations were not the subject of this meeting and are not covered in this report. 39

OCR for page 34
40 7 OECD, The Changing Role of Government Research Laboratories (Paris: 1989), 7. 8 There are a number of university-based facilities such as the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center in the United States and the National Laboratory for High Energy Physics (KKK) in Japan that are particularly active in basic research. They were subjects of discussion at the first bilateral meeting in this series and will not be dealt with here. 9 The IDA R&D budget (82 billion yen) made up almost one third of the total R&D budget for national laboratories in Japan in 1988. Masahiro Kawasaki, "Changing Role of National Laboratories in Japan," Keynote address, U.S.- Japan Dialog on Differences and Similarities in the Working Environment for Research, Workshop on National Labs and `'Bridging" Organizations, June 5-6, 1989. Some of this funding may be passed on in the form of con Tracts to others. 10 Agency for Industrial Science and Technology, Ministry of International Trade and Industry, Symposium on Opportunities for US-Japan Science and Engineering Research Cooperation (March 1989), 3. The budget for AIST including the headquarters was about $885 million. The labs accounted for $347 million. Throughout this paper, Me following average yearly exchange rates are used: 1985: $ 1 = 238.54 yen; 1986: $ 1 = 168.52 yen; 1987: $ 1 = 144.64 yen; 1988: $1 = 128.2 yen. 11 See Richard J. Samuels, Research Collaboration in Japan, MJT Science and Technology Program, 1987, 39. 12 See Samuels, ibid., 40. 13 The exact number depends on how they are counted. U.S. Departn:lent of Commerce, Directory of Federal Laboratory and Technologies Resources, 1988-1989 (Washington, D.C.: 19879; Office of Science and Technology Policy, Progress Report on Implementing the Recommendations of the White House Science Council's Federal Laboratory Review Panel, Volume I- Summary Report, July 1984. 14 In the United States, the term "national laboratories" is usually used to refer to DOE's large, multipurpose government-owned contractor-operated labs. Other U.S. government laboratories are generally called-"federal laborato- ries." For purposes of this paper, all U.S. government labs will be called "federal labs," to distinguish them from Japanese`'naiional labs."

OCR for page 34
41 15 Science and Technology Agency, National Laboratories and Research Public Corporations in Japan; Kagaku Gijutsu Cho [Science and Technology Agency], Zenkoku Shiken Kenkyu Kikan Meikan [Directory of Japan's Na- tional Research Organizationsl, 1987-1988. 16 National Science Foundation, The Science and Technology Resources of Japan: A Comparison with the United States (Washington, D.C.: June 1988), 53. 17 Masahiro Kawasaki, 4'Changing Roles of National Laboratories in Japan," Keynote address, U.S.-Japan Dialog on Differences and Similarities in the Working Environment for Research, Workshop on National Labs and "Bridg- ing" Organizations, June 5-6, 1989; National Science Foundation, Naiionol Patterns of Science and Technology Resources: 1987, 39. 18 U.S. government R&D funding increased 33 percent between 1980 and 1985 in constant 1982 dollars; the comparative figure for Japan is 17 percent. National Science Foundation, The Science and Technology Resources of Japan: A Comparison with the United States Washington, D.C.: June 1988), 52. 19 Kagaku Gijutsu Cho [Science and Technology Agency], Kagaku Gijutsu Hakusho, 1988 [Science and Technology White Paper, 1988], 242. 20 While the U.S. DOE labs may not be representative of all U.S. labs in terms of organization and management, they nonetheless reflect general govern- ment policy toward the labs. The prevalence of examples from DOE labs in this paper is a reflection of the fact that some of the U.S.-Japan dialog partici- pants were most familiar with those labs. DOE's large multipurpose labs represent a major segment of the U.S. federal labs. They include five energy labs Argonne, Oak Ridge, Brookhaven, Berkeley, and Hanford and three weapons labs Los Alamos, Livermore, and Sandia. 21 Even during the 1960s, the Council recommended strengthening basic re- search. The recent controversy over papaws modest performance in most areas of basic research indicates that this recommendation was not heeded. 22 Examples include the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980 (and subsequent amendments to it), The Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act of the same year, the Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986, (which provided a legislative mandate for the Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Transfer), the 1987 Technology Innovation Act, and two Executive Orders, including the 1987 order on "Facilitating Access to Science and Technology."

OCR for page 34
42 23 Alexander Zucker, Keynote address, U.S.-Japan Dialog on Differences and Similarities in the Working Environment for Research, Workshop on Na- tional Labs and "Bridging" Organizations," June 5-6, 1989. 24 Last year Oak Ridge National Laboratory issued 30 such patents. Lab representatives hold that these patents have been issued in areas in which U.S. industry is not involved, ea. ceramics processing and the development of new alloys. 25 "Government budget" refers to funds received from the ministry for joint research and development and does not include funds provided by industry participants. 26 Kagaku Gijutsu Cho [Science and Technology Agency], Kagaku Gijutsu Hakusho, 1988 [Science and Technology White Paper, 1988], 85-86. 27 Kagaku Gijutsu Cho [Science and Technology Agency], Kagaku Gijutsu Hakusho 1988 [Science and Technology White Paper, 1988], 43. 28 Science and Technology Agency, Research Development Corporation of Japan, 1986. 29 Research Development Corporation of Japan, ERATO, 2-3. 30 Michael K. Ozanian and Alexandra Ourusoff, "The FW International 500," Financial World, March 7-20, 1989, 86. 31 Iwao Toda, "An Overview of R&D Activities in NTr," U.S.-Japan Dialog on Differences and Similarities in the Working Environment for Research, Workshop on National Labs and "Bridging" Organizations, June 5-6, 1989. 32 Carla Rapoport, "The World's Most Valuable Company," Fortune, Vol. 118, Oct. 18, 1988, 92. 33 "Privatization" of NTr is an ongoing process that continues to be the subject of great debate in Japan. See, for example, "Mel bakari no Mineika" [Priva- tization in Name Only], Nihon Keizai, May 5, 1989, 1. 34 As noted above, some of this funding may be passed to others in the form of contracts. 35 This figure includes the budget of the AIST headquarters.

OCR for page 34
43 36 NIST's total budget includes funds reimbursed from sources other than federal government appropriations. NIST's federal obligations for 1987 were $117,286,000. 37 Office of Science and Technology Policy, Progress Report on Implementing the Recorrunendations of the White House Science Council's Federal Labo- ratory Review Panel, Volume II Status Report by Agencies, July 1984, 7- 8. ETL's 1988 budget amounted to about 3.5 percent of the total of Japanese national labs' budgets that year. Estimates for the same year show that NIST (then the National Bureau of Standards, NBS) accounted for less than .2 percent of U.S. federal R&D obligations. National Science Foundation, National Patterns of Science and Technology Resources: 1987, 53. 38 The result has been an increase in the average age of nahona1 lab researchers to 42.8 years. Although some believe that a similar problem exists in the United States, comparable data are unavailable and some DOE studies have concluded that this is not a serious problem. Nor should it be assumed that older researchers are always less productive. 39 Ministry of International Trade and Industry, Agency of Industrial Science and Technology, 1988, 5. 40 The Franklin Institute has been disbanded. 41 These consulting firms note that although the financial value of the work they do is less than one percent of the nation's total R&D budget, they have served virtually every major industrial firm in the United States. The industrial clients of not for profit U.S. consulting organizations range from small to very large companies both in the United States and abroad. On a dollar volume basis, however, service to large corporations predominates. 42 Southwest Research, for example, is able to conduct environmental technol- ogy development for the auto industry while simultaneously working with the Environmental Protection Agency to develop environmental standards because of circumscribed boundaries on each program that keep information compartmentalized. Battelle's policies are similar, prohibiting the organiza- tion from conducting the same research for two clients simultaneously. 43 Robert E. Schwerzel, "Battelle as a "Bridging" Organization: Some Specific Examples of Technology Transfer in Integrated Optics and Nonlinear Op- tics," U.S.-Japan Dialog on Differences and Similarities in the Working Environment for Research, Workshop on National Labs and "Bridging" Organizations, June 5-6, 1989.

OCR for page 34
44 44 An example of U.S. private, not for profit work for the government is DOE's Pacific Northwest Laboratory (PNL), which is an operating division of Bat- telle. 45 Most professional associations are voluntary and open for membership, usually subject only to minor restrictions on age, experience, and education. There are, however, organizations such as the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science asPS) that are not membership organizations but nonetheless play an important role in bringing together scientists and engineers from various sectors and in promoting international scientific exchange. Most profes- sional membership associations have membership dues that, coupled with subscription fees and conference attendance fees, support the organization. Institutional memberships or industrial company memberships, which some associations permit, commonly cost more than individual memberships. Membership size varies widely in both countries. The Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers has 300,000 members worldwide (240,000 in the United States). The American Chemical Society has about 137,000 mem- bers. The American Society of Mechanical Engineers has 119,000 members, including 19,000 students. The American Society for Engineering Education has about 10,000 members. The Japan Society of Mechanical Engineering has about 40,000 members. The Japan Society of Precision Engineering has 7,700 members. The Japan Society of Tribologists has 3,000 members. 46 The American Society of Civil Engineers, one of the oldest U.S. professional associations, was founded in 1852. The American Society of Mechanical Engineers was founded in 1880. The Japan Society of Mechanical Engineer- ing, Japan's largest professional association, was established in 1897. 47 The Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers dates its history back to 1884. 48 The JSME-ASME agreement consists primarily of an exchange of the two societies' publications. 49 "Nihon Ryugakusha ni Joseikin" [Subsidies for Foreign Studentsl, Nihon Keizai, March 25, 1989, 11. 50 Japan Society for the Promotion of Science, JSPS Annual Report, 1987-1988, 1. 51 J-TES, Inc.,"J-Ties," (College Perk: Autumn, 1987), 2-3.

OCR for page 34
45 52 Toshio Sata, "Technology Transfer in Japanese Academic Societies and Engineering Associations" U.S.-Japan Dialog on Differences and Similari- ties in the Working Environment for Research, Workshop on National Labs and "Bridging" Organizations, June 5-6, 1989. 53 The following discussion draws on remarks by Izuo Hayashi at the U.S.- Japan Dialog on Differences and Similarities in the Working Environment for Research, Workshop on National Laboratories and "Bridging" Organiza- tions, June 5-6,1989 and a paper on "Collaborative Research in Japan" by Izuo Hayashi, Masahiro Hirano, and Yoshifumi Katayama. 54 The Japan Key Technology Center was set up by MITI and the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications with dividends from the sale of NTT stock. It acts as a kind of venture capitalist, providing 60-70 percent of the investment in projects with the rest of the capital from the participating companies who actually operate the projects independently of the government. 55 The project is scheduled to run for ten years. It involves 13 member companies and 25 researchers working at the joint lab. 56 See Hayashi, et. al., op. cit., 38. 57 Kazuhiro Fuchi, presentation on the Fifth Generation Computer Systems Project, U.S.-Japan Dialog on Differences and Similarities in the Working Environment for Research, Workshop on National Laboratories and "Bridg- ing" Organizations, June 5-6,1989. 58 Alexander Zucker, Keynote address, U.S.-Japan Dialog on Differences and Similarities in the Working Environment for Research, Workshop on Na- tional Labs and "Bridging" Organizations, June 5~, 1989. 59 Kagaku Gijutsu Cho [Science and Technology Agency], Kagaku Gijutsu Hakusho, 1988, [Science and Technology White Paper, 1988], 45. 60 Koichiro Tamura, "Role of the Electrotechnical Laboratory as a Public Serv- ice Organization," U.S.-Japan Dialog on Differences and Similarities in the Working Environment for Research, Workshop on National Labs and "Bridg- ing" Organizations, June 5-6, 1989. 61 Ministry of International Trade and Industry, Electrotechnical Laboratory, 1989, 16.

OCR for page 34
46 62 Ken Kikuchi, "High Energy Physics in Japan," U.S.-Japan Dialog on Differ- ences and Similarities in the Working Environment for Research, Workshop on University Research Labs, Jan. 9-10, 1989. 63 Japanese national research institutes received 543 foreign researchers in 1987, up from 217 in 1984. Kagaku Gijutsu Cho [Science and Technology Agency], Kagaku Gijutsu Hakusho, 1988 [Science and Technology Agency White Paper, 1988], 45. There is no indication of the length of stay of these foreign researchers.