Appendix C

Guiding Questions for Workshop Speakers

The Space Studies Board's Committee on International Space Programs is exploring, along with the European Space Science Committee (ESSC) of the European Science Foundation (ESF) and the Space Research Committee (SRC) of the Japan Science Council (JSC), the history of space cooperation among the three entities to understand better what are the elements that improve cooperation and what are the impediments that have been encountered in the past. Three missions have been chosen (Geotail, Yohkoh, and ASCA), with rough histories being prepared on each from the perspective of each of the participants. We will hold a workshop on May 19-21, 1999, to compare our views and to consider changes in policy that may improve the environment for future cooperation.

Below is a set of questions that may assist you in extracting insights on U.S. participation and collaboration in the case missions. They are intended to serve as a guide, rather than implying systematic analysis. You may wish to call attention to other aspects of the U.S. participation in these missions that illuminate important lessons for future cooperative activities with Europe and Japan. It would be most helpful to get a written version of your perspectives, even an informal one, to facilitate their integration into a workshop summary. Should you choose to draw on sources in your informal writeup, please provide references for your work. This is not intended to be a formal exercise, so feel free to present your views as a story.

  1. Basic mission profile

    • Who was involved with the project, what were the scientific objectives, and what is the present status?

  2. Historical background

    • How was the project initiated? Were agreements necessary and, if so, how long did it take to work them out?

    • Who were the central actors?

    • Was initial planning realistic or unrealistic, and why?

    • Is there any other relevant historical information?

    • Were internal funding restrictions (e.g., for meetings) a problem?

    • What was the motivation for initial consideration of cooperation (e.g., funding limitations, access to equipment, likely scientific contributions of collaborators, etc.)?

  3. Cooperation

    Consider issues such as:

    • What were the mechanisms for collaboration?

    • Was there a division of responsibility between scientists and managers, and with what effect?

    • Did funding prove to be a problem, and/or were there cost-savings?

    • What were the perceived net benefits of the collaboration?

    • Were the parent agencies supportive?

    • Was the scientific community supportive, and was the mission science considered a high priority?

    • How did personalities, people, and management approaches affect the collaboration?

    • Were there problems in communication among agencies, scientists, engineers, etc.?

    • What were the specific issues or requirements that impeded collaboration, if any?

    • Were there other aspects that appeared to be key elements leading either to success or difficulties?



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 19
U.S.-EUROPEAN-JAPANESE WORKSHOP ON SPACE COOPERATION: SUMMARY REPORT Appendix C Guiding Questions for Workshop Speakers The Space Studies Board's Committee on International Space Programs is exploring, along with the European Space Science Committee (ESSC) of the European Science Foundation (ESF) and the Space Research Committee (SRC) of the Japan Science Council (JSC), the history of space cooperation among the three entities to understand better what are the elements that improve cooperation and what are the impediments that have been encountered in the past. Three missions have been chosen (Geotail, Yohkoh, and ASCA), with rough histories being prepared on each from the perspective of each of the participants. We will hold a workshop on May 19-21, 1999, to compare our views and to consider changes in policy that may improve the environment for future cooperation. Below is a set of questions that may assist you in extracting insights on U.S. participation and collaboration in the case missions. They are intended to serve as a guide, rather than implying systematic analysis. You may wish to call attention to other aspects of the U.S. participation in these missions that illuminate important lessons for future cooperative activities with Europe and Japan. It would be most helpful to get a written version of your perspectives, even an informal one, to facilitate their integration into a workshop summary. Should you choose to draw on sources in your informal writeup, please provide references for your work. This is not intended to be a formal exercise, so feel free to present your views as a story. Basic mission profile Who was involved with the project, what were the scientific objectives, and what is the present status? Historical background How was the project initiated? Were agreements necessary and, if so, how long did it take to work them out? Who were the central actors? Was initial planning realistic or unrealistic, and why? Is there any other relevant historical information? Were internal funding restrictions (e.g., for meetings) a problem? What was the motivation for initial consideration of cooperation (e.g., funding limitations, access to equipment, likely scientific contributions of collaborators, etc.)? Cooperation Consider issues such as: What were the mechanisms for collaboration? Was there a division of responsibility between scientists and managers, and with what effect? Did funding prove to be a problem, and/or were there cost-savings? What were the perceived net benefits of the collaboration? Were the parent agencies supportive? Was the scientific community supportive, and was the mission science considered a high priority? How did personalities, people, and management approaches affect the collaboration? Were there problems in communication among agencies, scientists, engineers, etc.? What were the specific issues or requirements that impeded collaboration, if any? Were there other aspects that appeared to be key elements leading either to success or difficulties?

OCR for page 19
U.S.-EUROPEAN-JAPANESE WORKSHOP ON SPACE COOPERATION: SUMMARY REPORT Were there U.S. government policies (e.g., annual budgets or transfer of technology restrictions) that impeded collaboration? Were there policies of other countries that impeded collaboration or that specifically furthered collaboration? Lessons learned What conclusions can be drawn that would help in the planning of future bilateral or multilateral collaboration with Europe and Japan? Were cost savings an important element? Was the collaboration worthwhile scientifically? Did the collaboration lead to larger effects or new projects? Were there institutions that proved to be important or essential (e.g., Committee on Space Research)? Were there technological aspects that influenced the result (e.g., access to new information technology, formal data exchanges, etc.)? To what extent did the political and/or policy environment in the countries involved, or in their relations, affect cooperation? Additional comments or conclusions