SUMMARY

Early U.S. management models and the European models, based largely on dispersed stewardship and funding, have been shown to be unsatisfactory for the management of multidisciplinary user facilities because of the diffusion of responsibility and the instability of funding. The simple steward model works well as long as the steward has sufficient funds to fulfill its responsibilities. The steward-partner model works well as long as the steward agency funding a facility is also the dominant source of funds for the research programs conducted at the facility and has sufficient funds to fulfill its responsibilities. In practice, funding inadequacies have plagued both models. For example, the inability of the stewards of the DOE neutron facilities to obtain sufficient funding has caused a serious underinstrumentation of the facilities. (This is in sharp contrast to the NIST facility, which is adequately funded and instrumented.) The newer partners in the synchrotron facilities, the life sciences and environmental communities, have come to occupy increasingly more of the experimental usage. As a consequence, there has been increasing pressure for more financial support from these communities both inside and outside DOE. This threatens a return to the instabilities of dispersed funding of earlier days. The solution to this problem is to involve these other communities in support of the steward in a new cooperative stewardship management model, which will be discussed in Chapter 4.



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