Click for next page ( 51


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 50
3. Basic Biomedical Sciences \ 1 1 Bioscience Ph.D. production has been essentially level since 1972 and can be expected to start dropping as a result of declining graduate enrollments. Conse- quently, the rapid growth in the number of biomedical scientists serving in postdoctoral positions during the 1970s is expected to level off in the 1980s. Nonacademic demand, especially in the new biotech- nology industry, is expected to be strong, but the universities will continue to be counted on to supply Students entering graduate school today will be completing their training in the l990s when long-term demographic trends will be-tin to chance again. the training. ,~ _ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Both short-term and long-term projections indicate the need to sustain tbe current level of support for both predoctoral and postdoctoral training in the basic biomedical sciences. INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW .In this chapter we discuss the national needs for research - personnel in the basic biomedical sciences and the supply available to meet these needs. From the most recent data and-from the extensive experience of Committee and Panel members are derived recommendations for the numbers of predoctoral and postdoctoral trainee and fellowship awards to be provided under the National Research Service Awards Act during the next 5-year period.. - One of the Committee's most important.tasks is the collection and analysis of the latest data on enrollments, degrees, R and D funding, and employment for doctorate-level scientists. The data in this chapter help to define the supply/demand situation for scientists in the basic biomedical fields as it existed in 1980-81, providing up to 3 additional years of data beyond that reported on by this Committee in 1981. Perhaps the most important trends shown by the recent data involve two variables to which the system is highly sensitive--postdoctoral 50

OCR for page 50
51 appointments and enrollments. Following a trend that began in the early 1970s, the number of biomedical scientists serving on postdoctoral appointments increased 5 percent per year between 197 9 and 1981 (Table 3.17. This growth occurred during a period in which Ph.D. production was essentially constant. But the rate of growth in postdoctoral appointments appears to have slowed somewhat in 1% 1, and as the analyses in this chapter will show, there is reason to expect this growth to continue to moderate in the near future. As for enrollments in the basic biomedical sciences, it is clear that they have leveled off after a long period of steady growth since 1960. Estimated undergraduate enrollment reached a peak in 1976 and dropped for 3 years in a row before rebounding somewhat in 1980. Bioscience baccalaureate degrees have been declining since 1976, and bioscience graduate enrollments reached a peak in 1978. As of 1982, enrollment in medical schools was still growing at less than 2 percent per year, but preliminary data for FY 1983 show practically no growth. Biomedical science R and D funding in colleges and universities has continued to advance at approximately 4 percent per year (after adjusting for inflation). Research grant expenditures by the NIH declined in FY 1% 1, after gaining almost 5 percent per year in real terms since 1975. A similar pattern was exhibited by total national expenditures for health related R and D. The total Ph.D. labor force of biomedical scientists approached nearly 70,000 individuals in 1981, with just over half employed by academic institutions. Academic employment has been increasing by more than 4 percent a year. Employment in the industrial sector is growing much faster, and self-employment is the fastest growing category. The unemployment rate remains low at just over 1 percent. This report contains recommendations based on both short-term and long-term considerations. Our main objective is to promote a stable system in which biomedical scientists are trained and absorbed into productive research positions. For this we must take a long-term look at the system, including trends in graduate school enrollment and the age profile of university faculty members. Consideration of these and other factors point to a decreasing supply of bioscientists and an increasing attrition rate from the active pool of researchers in the 1990s. In the shorter term, the supply of trained individuals appears adequate although heavy industrial recruitment, particularly in areas related to biotechnology, may create shortages in some disciplines. We will return to the supply/demand outlook for biomedical scientists later in this chapter after discussing the predoctoral and postdoctoral training systems for these scientists. THE TRAINING SYSTEM IN BIOMEDICAL SCIENCE FIELDS In this section, the stages in the career of young biomedical scientists are described to assist in understanding the system in which they are trained in this country. These stages are shown in Figure 3.1. Data in the diagram are the average numbers of scientists

OCR for page 50
s2 U3 C) .O C] c,7 oR .~ m C0 Cd3 o a> ._ .= Cal So: 4 A: Cot m ~ .~ t~ ~ boo be O s ~ ~ C-: ~ ~ Cal All<,= o 3 o=` _ >m _ _ .. E 5 C: ~ ~ a . ~ C,)-,, Z lo,= ~ US 00 .O CO ! 3 a 2 And' ~ ~ ~~ ~~ a _ ~0 ~ V) ~ ~ O O 1 _ 1 t ~ O O O ~ ~ 00 _ 1 00 ~ ~ 00 00 ~) _ ~ ~ 00 _ ~ ~ cd ~ ~ O GO d. ~ ~ ~ _ _ \0 ~) d ~ Ct _ O ~ O C t'~ 00 ~ ~ r4 C~ ~ ~ ~ U~ O4 ~ O ~ O O O ~ ~ U: O O O. O ~) V~ 6. ~ O ~ cr' O 1 ~ kD 00 _ r _ _ 6. S - ~V _ _~ ~ 6~ ~ om o _ _ ~ ~ ~ O ~ ~ U~ ~ 00 ~ \0 ~ ~ 0\ O ~ _ t_ ~ ~ O ~ 00 '~D ~ (~) O ~ ~ et t 0 00 ~ 00 iD 0\ u~ ~ ~ _ ~ 0\ _ r~ ~ ~ \0 ~ ~ ~4 ~ 1 o~ ~ ~ O O . . . 1 0\ . . . _ ~ _ 1 ~ ~ Ct _ ~ CO 00 O O ~ _ _ O ~6~ 0 \0 ~ e~ ~r _ 0` 6. 0 00 O ~ ~ 00 t _ ~ ~ 0 6. o o - - .e ~ ~ X ~ ~ ~ a ~ ,, O C~ ~ ~ ~ Ct C' _ ~ 4 - ~ _ C ~ ~ ~ XC ~ ~a ~ ~ , c,$ ~ _O :r: ~ %~., ,,~ C~ - . . C~ o 0 0 m 00 ~ ~ 0\ o' ~ 0 _ ~ - i 0 0 00 ~ '`o ~ ~ ~ 0 0 o~ ~ ~ ~o o~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ 0 _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 00 ~ 00 ~4 ~ 00 O '= d ~ oo cr' o~ O4 C: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ rn O 0\ . 0\ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 _ ~ ~ 0\ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r~ ~ _. \0 v~ 0~ ~ 00 ~D 0 00 \0 ~ _ _ ~ r~ - ~0 0 0 c~ c) c~ a~ _ ~ O c~ >, E ~ ~ ' ~ E ' m o ,~O ZO 43) o =) ~ .D ~ ~ ~ =; 00 S _ - . ~ ~ _ ~4 00 ~ ~ ~4 o .. E~ c~ Z - ~ ~ _ 0 ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ 3 ~: ~ ' 2 ' a =, E c =- m =.o ~ ~ + m. ~ .~' 0 ~ _ _ ~ ~ cz c~ ~ :s ^ _ .~'c ox _ ~' ~ ~ ~ .O 3 0 ~ Z c~ ~ =- u, c~~ + ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ Z ' 3 E =- ` ~ ~ G, ~ '' ~ O & o ~ ~ ,1 5 5 ,=, ~ ~ ~ tlO Cl5 43~ 00 _ C) A S C ~ _ _ ~ _.D ', 0` 0- 0 +~ ~ ~ a. ~ m _ ~ ~ ~s ~ c~ ._ <~l ~3 0 ~ c ~ ~ [y) o~ 2 ,,, ~u B o E ~ E

OCR for page 50
- B-s- ' DEGREES I N 5,300 LIFE ~ SC I ENC ES (est. size in 1981: 65,100) ram , 2,500, I B.S. I ~ I DEGREES ~ 1 I I N OTHER ~ F I ELDS J PH.D. PROGRAMS IN BIOMEDICAL SC I ENC ES I~ ~ NEW PH . D . S 1 I FROM OTHER 1 1 F I ELDS L_ -____ ___J 53 r - - - - - - _ _ _] I EMP LOYMENT OR ~ 1 1 200 ~ POSTDOCTORAL I ,~ , IN OTHER F I ELDS, ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ 1,200 2,000 ~ SC I ENC E S 300/ (est. size in 1981: 8,204 ~ ~ 1 2 ~ POSTDOCTORA L POPULAT ION IN ' RInMEDTCAI TOTA L ACAD EM I C A ND NONACAD E M I C PH.D. WORKFORCE EXC LUD I NO POS TDOCTORA LS IN BIOMEDICAL SC I ENCES ~ (est. size in 1981: 60,900) 400 Aim RET IRE- FIGURE 3.1 Doctoral training system in the biomedical sciences. Estimates represent the average annual number of individuals following particular pathways during the 1973-81 period. No estimates have been made for immigration, emigration, or reentry into the labor force. each year from 1973-81 who have followed particular routes. Depicted on the left is the incoming supply of baccalaureate degree recipients headed for doctoral training in the biomedical sciences. To the right is the active Ph.D. labor force. Estimates of the pool sizes in 1981 are given where these can be made. During 1973-81, attrition from the labor force due to death and retirement has averaged only 400 scientists a year (path I), while the total number entering has averaged 3,500 scientists annually (paths 0, G. and H). Consequently, there has been an annual net growth in the biomedical Phi. labor force of approximately 3,100 individuals. The "training system" may be viewed as a network of interconnected pools, with a flow of trainees from left to right. The flow between pools is determined by the number of individuals having the credentials (and interest) required to enter the next stage in their career development. The transition from one stage to another is influenced by a variety of factors including the trainee's personal career preference, the availability of student financial support, institu- tional resources (space, supplies, faculty), and institutional admissions policies.

OCR for page 50
54 The pathways described in Figure 3.1 represent the available routes to careers in research. Students may leave at any stage, but they must generally re-enter where they withdrew. The route most commonly followed by undergraduates interested in research careers in this field is through doctoral (paths A and B) and postdoctoral training (path E} in the biomedical sciences. Completion of doctoral training may require between 5 and 7 years from receipt of the baccalaureate degree, and Ph.D. scientists typically spend between 2 and 4 years on postdoctoral apprenticeships. Thus, from the time a student enters graduate school to the time he or she completes postdoctoral training may take from 7 to 11 years (with a median of 9 years in postgraduate training). As shown in the diagram, there are three separate stages through which aspiring young biomedical scientists pass: undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral training. Described on the following pages are the features of each phase that affect both the numbers and the quality of young investigators trained to fill the nation's need for research personnel in the basic biomedical sciences. Undergraduate Training Most of the undergraduates preparing for research careers in the basic biomedical sciences pursue baccalaureate programs in biology or chemistry, but some also receive their degrees in physics, mathematics, or a social science. Attrition in undergraduate programs Is high--an estimated 40 percent of the matriculants do not graduate--and a majority of those who do graduate are either not interested in or do not qualify for graduate study. The decision to enroll in a doctoral program is influenced by several considerations. Most biology undergraduates plan careers in one of the health professions, and they generally receive very little encouragement to pursue careers in biomedical research--especially since the numbers of faculty openings in this field have diminished in recent years. The availability of federal training grant support may also directly or indirectly affect career decisions by undergraduates. In times when federal funds for graduate training were more plentiful, the staff at research institutions often pursued active recruiting programs that included visits to non-research colleges and the provision of summer research opportunities to sophomores and juniors. In the last few years these efforts have diminished. Furthermore, students considering careers in biomedical research may view the diminishing level of federal training support as an indication that the recruitment of well-qualified investigators into this field is no longer an important national priority. Doctoral Training The primary goal of those undertaking graduate study in the basic biomedical sciences is to begin to establish credentials as an

OCR for page 50
55 independent investigator. Admission of students into graduate school is usually based on undergraduate grade point average, performance on the Graduate Records Examination (or a comparable test), and faculty recommendations. In many instances considerable weight is also given to the undergraduate research experience of the candidate and a personal interview. During their first 2 years in graduate school, students are expected to take advanced courses in their major area of work and in related areas. There is generally great freedom allowed in the selection of courses so that each individual develops a unique set of skills. After completion of course work, students must pass qualifying examinations (written, oral, or both) and then concentrate on their areas of research interest. A doctoral candidate typically spends between 3 and 4 years (beyond course work) developing skills as an independent investigator. Submission of a doctoral dissertation, describing a significant and original scientific contribution, is a primary requirement for successful completion of the Ph.D. program. Often students present manuscripts based on their research which are accepted for publication in refereed journals. At every step in the development of a research scientist, new skills are required. As an undergraduate, a student may do very well with a high capacity to memorize and to study. A graduate student must be able to pose questions, devise experiments to answer them, carry out experimental protocols (often devising new procedures and creating new instrumentation or equipment), and manage time in an unstructured environment. The Ph.D. candidate must display creativity and have the motivation to function independently with only limited supervision. The student will succeed only if he or she can work alone and grow in scientific independence. Many doctoral students withdraw because they cannot make the transition from undergraduate to graduate school setting--even though they possess the intellectual capacity required. Attrition due to academic failure is not common but does occur. Also, some students, having been exposed to the research environment, may reassess their career goals and decide to pursue other interests (e.g., careers in medicine or in other scientific fieldsJ. Half the students enrolling in doctoral programs do not complete requirements for the Ph.D.--some terminate study at the master's level--and there is no compensating inflow of replacements for those leaving. This attrition rate has always been high. Neither faculty nor students have a reliable basis for predicting which students have the necessary personal commitment that is essential for completion of the degree. Keeping uncommitted students in the program would be truly wasteful. While in doctoral training, many students hold teaching assistant- ships, research assistantships, traineeships, and fellowships and receive an average annual stipend of approximately 36,000. Graduate students are involved in a very large share of the projects sponsored by the NIB, NSF, and other federal agencies funding health-related research. On the average, each student contributes 3-4 years of full-time effort directed toward the elucidation of a carefully selected scientific question. While the proportion of the overall research effort attributable to graduate students cannot be reliably

OCR for page 50
56 estimated, it is evident that they play an essential role. Typically, the supervisory faculty member selects the areas of focus for research, obtains the required funding and other resources, provides direction and consultation, bumpy do little of the actual experimen- tation or data collection. The last are major responsibilities of the graduate students and postdoctorals, although both play significant roles in the design of experiments as well. The contribution of graduate students to the leadership position in the biomedical sciences now held by the U.S. must be recognized. If the number of graduate students is decreased, or if fewer stay to complete degrees, research productivity in the basic sciences will be directly diminished. The graduate student contribution cannot be replaced by technicians who generally do not contribute to experi- mental design. They cannot be replaced by postdoctorate unless the latter category is increased substantially--and that can only be achieved by having;more graduate students to feed the postdoctoral pool. Nevertheless it seems essential to face up to the longer-term prospects of a different mix of contributors to the research work force. Smaller numbers of graduate students, larger numbers of postdoctorals, who are better paid and who hold more permanent positions, as well as larger numbers of technicians can be expected. Postdoctoral Training An estimated 60 percent of the Ph.D. recipients in the basic biomedical sciences now go on to postdoctoral appointments, and that percentage has been increasing steadily over the past 15 years. Unlike undergraduate and graduate training programs that are the shared responsibility of departmental faculty groups, postdoctoral training is generally the province of individual faculty members. Each member directs the activities of his or her research group, and that group and the interactions among individuals within the group provide the environment for postdoctoral training. The principal determinants of whether a graduate student pursues postdoctoral training are the career goals of the individual, the opportunity to work with a highly regarded mentor or research team, the availability of attractive employment~aiternatives, and a variety of personal considerations (e.g. r geographic location, financial incentives). For those interested in faculty careers at major research institutions, a minimum of 1-2 years postdoctoral apprenticeship is generally required. Although there is no formal certification attached to the post-Ph.D. training, 3 years is accepted as the standard time needed to achieve the appropriate level of experience. Many young scientists extend their studies to 4 or more years because of interest in a particular project, desire to complete their research and publish the findings, or a lack of alternative employment opportunities. Although the postdoctoral stipend--ranging from $14,000 to $18,000 per year--is well below the salary paid to a junior faculty member, many young biomedical scientists find the postdoctoral experience

OCR for page 50
57 highly rewarding, as witnessed by this passage from a previous NAS study. From the perspective of the young investigator the postdoctoral appointment has provided a unique opportunity to concentrate on a particular research problem without the burden of either the teaching and administrative responsibilities usually given to a faculty member or the formal degree requirements of a graduate student. As the competition for research positions has intensified during the past decade, the opportunity as a postdoctoral to establish a strong record of research publications has become increas- ingly attractive to many young scientists interested in careers in academic research. (NRC, 1981a, p. 82) Those holding postdoctoral appointments contribute to the quality, creativity, and productivity of the research enterprise. The roles that these individuals play in the research effort depend on the modus operandi of the senior investigator, the nature of the research problem, the size and composition of the research team, departmental and institutional policies, and the talents and experience of the individual. Frequently the importance of the postdoctoral scientist's contribution to the research effort is recognized in his or her inclusion as the principal author of one or more articles based on the f indings. Furthermore, many postdoctoral appointees are substantially involved in the training of gradm te and undergraduate students. Following completion of the postdoctoral tenure, most individuals are expected to move on to research positions in academia or in industry and government laboratories. An increasing fraction, however, remain more-or-less permanently employed as senior research associates in the university setting. These scientists are often key members of a research group--providing continuity through the training of new group members and maintaining the research environment and oral history of long-term projects. These senior research associates complement the lead faculty members and provide day-to-day supervision of the laboratories. EXPANSION OF THE POSTDOCTORAL POPULATION For several years now the Committee has paid particular attention to changes in the size of the postdoctoral population in the basic biomedical sciences. During the 1973-81 period the number of biomedi- cal scientists holding postdoctoral appointments in universities has climbed at a reasonably constant rate of 9 percent per year--signifi- cantly higher than the rate of growth for faculty. The net annual increments to the postdoctoral group have averaged approximately 420 scientists (Figure 3.2), while the total number of Ph.D. graduates each year has increased only slightly.

OCR for page 50
58 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 en 5,000 an 4,000 3,000 2,000 1 ,000 - \1,555 O . 1' 1 73 75 6 ,893> Academi c _ Pn~tdnec Ph.D. Awards _ 3,838' Fi rst-Year Postdocs- ~ 2,150 FISCAL YEAR FIGURE 3.2 Estimated growth in the numbers of Ph.D. awards, academic post- doctoral appointments, and first-year postdoctoral appointments in the bio- medical sciences, 1973-81. First-year appointments are estimated from the number of Ph.D. recipients each year planning to take postdoctoral training positions in an academic setting after completing their graduate education. See Appendix Table B3. This postdoctoral growth has important implications for both research and research training in the biomedical disciplines. In terms of numbers, the postdoctoral group constitutes an estimated 18 percent of the full-time equivalent bioscience research personnel in Ph.D.-granting universities (NRC, 1981a, p. 1951. Because they bring with them fresh ideas and new techniques and devote their full energies to their scientific investigations, the importance of the postdoctoral group to the quality, creativity, and productivity of

OCR for page 50
59 scientific inquiries is much greater than their numbers alone suggest. On the other hand, there is some concern that in recent years more biomedical science graduates have taken postdoctoral appointments than may find career opportunities in research. In an earlier report the Committee found that more than 40 percent of the FY 1971-75 Ph.D. recipients who held postdoctorate in 1976 indicated that they had prolonged their appointments because of difficulty in finding employment positions they desired {NRC, 1975-81, 1977 report, Vol. 2, p. 31~. Other evidence presented later in this section reveals that since 1973 a steadily declining fraction of postdoctoral scientists in biomedical fields have subsequently moved on to faculty positions in major research universities. With this concern in mind the Committee has made a detailed examination of the postdoctoral growth during the 1973-81 period. The analysis has focussed on six questions: 1. What are the principal factors underlying the postdoctoral expansion in the basic biomedical sciences? 2. In which university settings has most of the expansion occurred? Have the demographic characteristics of the postdoctoral population changed significantly during the 8-year period? Do those who have held appointments 4 years or longer differ from other postdoctoral scientists--in terms of their training background and other characteristics? 5. Have the more recent graduates encountered greater difficulty in pursuing careers in research after completing their postdoctoral training? 6. IS the rapid rate of postdoctoral expansion observed the past 8 years likely to continue? The following examination of these questions relies exclusively on detailed tabulations of data collected in the NRC's biennial {1973-81) Survey of Doctorate Recipients. The survey includes responses from a 15 percent sample of biomedical scientists who had earned their doctorates within the previous 43 years; responses have been weighted to provide population estimates. Factors Contnbuting to Postdoctoral Expansion The steady growth in the postdoctoral population in academia may be attributed primarily to two factors: an increase in the numbers of new Ph.D. recipients pursuing additional research training in the biomedical sciences and an increase in the average length of time individuals spent in postdoctoral apprenticeships As illustrated in Figure 3.2, the number of first-year postdoctoral appointees is estimated to have grown at a rate of approximately 75 individuals a

OCR for page 50
60 year--accounting for two-fifth of the postdoctoral expansion between 1973 and 1981. It may be presumed that the remainder was due to a prolongation of postdoctoral tenure. During this 8-year span the median length of time spent in postdoctoral training increased frOm 2 to 3 years. Table 3.2 presents data describing the percentages of At., TABLE 3.2 Estimated Percent of Biomedical Ph.D. Recipients Entering Postdoctoral Training Immediately After Graduation Who Still Held Appointments 3, 4, and 5 Years Later Ph.D. Cohorta Percent Holding Postdoctorals After: 3 Years 4 Years 5 Years 1967-68 3.9 1968~9 9.8 1969-70 22.2 10.9 1970-71 19.1 1971-72 33.5 10.7 1972-73 20.2 1973-74 42.1 12.1 1974-75 26.8 1975-76 47.8 22.9 1976-77 32.8 1977-78 47.1 . aEach cohort includes Ph.D. recipients from the 2-year period specified wl~o indicated at Me time they completed requirements for their doctorates that they had firm commit- ments to take postdoctoral appointments. SOURCES: National Research Council (1958-82, 1973~2~. biomedical Ph.D. recipients taking postdoctoral appointments immediately after graduation who still held training appointments 3, 4, and 5 years later. Recent graduates have typically held post- doctoral appointments for appreciably- longer periods of time. For example, as many as 33 percent of the 1976-77 cohort remained in postdoctoral status 4 years later, compared with 10 percent of the 1968-69 cohort. Whether or not these biomedical scientists have extended their apprenticeships because of difficulty in finding employment situations or because of other reasons unrelated to the availability of career opportunities cannot be ascertained from the survey data collected. Nevertheless, it is obvious that the prolongation of apprenticeship (for whatever reason) has been a major factor contributing to the expansion of the postdoctoral population in the biomedical sciences. In deriving this fraction it has been estimated that, if there had been no change in average length of postdoctoral apprenticeship, the 1981 postdoctoral population would have included approximately 4,900 biomedical scientists.

OCR for page 50
77 demand is expected to be between 650 and 3,400 positions with a best-guess of about 1,950 positions. Line 4 shows the number of academic positions to be filled by individuals with postdoctoral research training experience. With the help of datable the inflows and outflows from academic employment in the biosciences between 1979 and 1981 shown in Table 3.6, we estimate that 70 percent of all vacancies will be filled by former postdoctoral trainees. In the best-guess case, this number is estimated to be 1,360. TABLE 3.6 Inflows and Outflows from Academic Employment for Biomedical Science Ph.D.s, 1979-81 I. Average Annual Attrition from Academic Employment in the Biomedical Sciences 1. Total biomedical Ph.D.s employed in academia in 1979: 3 3 ,6 8 7 A, ~ ~ ~ G 2. Leaving academic employment between 1979 and 1981 in the biomedical sciences to: % of Academic N Employment a. nonacademic sectors 4~t 819 2.4 b. postdoctoral appointments ' ~~' 138 0.4 ~ ~ c. death and retirement 432 325 1.0 I r d. unemployed tic ' tr. 1 11 0.3 e. total attrition A; ~ 1,393 4.1 ';~ ~ rig I'. Average Annual Accessions to Academic Employment in the Biomedical Sciences 1. Total biomedical Ph.D.s employed in academia in 1981: 36,497 2. Entering academic employment between 1979 and 1981 in the biomedical sciences from: - % of Total N Accessions a. nonacademic sectors _~. . 531 19.0 b. postdoctoral appointments ~ I c;= 1,299 46.4 c. other fieldsa 169~ 6.0 d. unemployed \ ~ ~ 200 ~ 7.2 ~ ; e. Ph.D. recipients 1979-81b 6~5 598 21.4 ~ ~ 'N f. total annual accessions 2,797 it's 100.0 ~ ~ :. A ~ . . .. ... III. Balancing: 1979 academic employment 33,687 - 2( 1 ,39 3) + 2(2,797) = 36,49S c - attrition + accessions = 1981 academic employment aThese individuals were all academically employed in 1979 and 1981. The number shown represents the estimated net inflow to biomedical fields from other fields. bIt is estimated that 70~o of these new Ph.D. cohorts took a postdoctoral appointment before taking an academic position. CDoes not agree with line II.1 because of rounding. SOURCE: National Research Council (1973-82). ,....

OCR for page 50
78 Line 5-indicates the size of the biomedical postdoctoral pool ~- required to supply the necessary number of individunq.. with postdoctoral training under certain assumptions about the length of the postdoctoral training period and the proportion of the pool seeking academic employment. Currently, bioscience Ph.D.s are typically spending about 3 years in postdoctoral appointments, up from 2 years in the early 1970s. As stated earlier in this chapter, we don't know whether this lengthening of postdoctoral training is due to difficulties in finding more permanent employment, the complexity of the training curriculum, or other reasons. We intend to examine this important issue in more detail. If the appropriate length of postdoctoral training is assumed to be 3 years, then the pool size needed to produce 1,360 trained scientists each year is 3 times 1,360 or 4,080. If 70 percent of the trainees seek academic appointments after completing their training, then the necessary pool size must be 6,800. Line 6 shows the estimated number of biomedical science postdoctoral trainees that should be supported annually by NRSA programs under different assumptions about the proportion of total support provided by that source. The resulting range is between 700 under the lowest set of assumptions, and 5,950 under the highest set. The best-guess assumptions yield a range of 2,330-3,400 postdoctoral trainees. Demand Outside the Academic Sector For most of the 1970s, employment of biomedical science Ph.D.s in the nonacademic sector has been growing faster than within the academic sector. This trend appears to have accelerated in the last few years. The industrial sector is the second largest employer of biomedical scientists next to academia, employing almost 15 percent of the 69,000 biomedical Ph.D.s in the labor force. The growth rate in the industrial sector has been 8 percent per year since 1973 versus 5 percent per year in the academic sector. Of course, chemical and drug manufacturers employ most of the biomedical Ph.D.s within the business sector. But employment in the new biotechnology industry appears to be growing quite rapidly. As shown in the last line of Table 3.7, the number of biomedical science Ph.D.s employed in the nonclassifiable group of companies has been growing by 25 percent per year since 1973. Many of these are biotechnology firms that are so new or so small that their Standard Industrial Classification code could not be determined. But close examination of this group reveals that many are indeed recently formed firms engaged in biotechnology R and D. The biomedical field in general, and the new biotechnology in particular, are currently the subjects of intense scrutiny by government, academia, and business groups as these fast-moving fields appear on the verge of producing important practical developments. Just in the past 5 years, a whole industry of some 200-300 firms has sprung up around the belief that recently developed knowledge concerning the manipulation of genes can be commercialized success- fully. This proposition has yet to be proven on any large scale, but

OCR for page 50
1 79 TABLE 3.7 Ph.D.s Employed by Business and Industry in the Biomedical Sciences, 1973-81 Fiscal Year 1973 1975 1977 1979 1981 1973-81 TOTAL BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY 5,285 6,645 6,918 8,461 9,957- 8.2% Annual Annual Growth Growth Rate Rate 1979-8 1 8.5% Average Annual Change 1973-8 1 6,645 6,9 1 8 8,46 1 9,957 - 584 Agriculture,Forestry&Fish. 76 67 42 66 50 -5.1% -13.0% -3 Mining 0 0 5 75 45 - 22.5% 6 Construction 6 7 27 64 32 23.3% -29.3% 3 Manufacturing 4,408 5,460 5,714 6,149 7,032 6.0% 6.9% 328 Chemical and drugs 2,814 3,69S 3,988 4,105 4,739 6.7% 7.4~O 241 Petroleum refining 138 129 94 255 207 5.2% -9.9 9 Medical instruments 182 267 303 295 429 11.370 20.6~o 31 Other 1,274 1,369 ' 1,329 1,494 1,657 3.3~O 5.3~O 48 Transport., Communication, Elec., Gas & San. Services 39 69 71 159 114 14.35to -15.3~c 9 Wholesale & Retail Trade 37 110 61 70 21 -6.8% -45.2% -2 Chemical and drugs 5 31 14 15 0 - - -1 Other 32 79 47 55 21 -5.1% -38.2% - -1 Finance,Insur.&RealEstate 52 50 25 36 122 11.2~o 84 loo 9 Services 388 413 389 534 814 9.7~O 23.5% 53 Medical 169 120 113 283 179 0.7% -20.5% 1 Other 219 293 276 251 635 14.2% 59.1% 52 Biotechnologya n/a n/a n/a 153 262 n/a 30~9% 55 (1979-81) Nonclassifiable Companies 279 469 584 1,155 1,465 23.0~o 12.6% 148 aThese are biomedical science Ph.D.s employed by firms that could be identified as being in Me biotechnology industry according to avail- able directories for the industry. The numbers shown probably understate the true numbers employed by biotechnology fumes. since the directories are not all-inclusive. SOURCE: National Research Council (1973-82). many industr ial f irms are betting huge sums that commercially prof itable products will emerge . In this highly technical and competitive race, several f irms have moved to insure themselves of quick access to the latest developments by investing in joint ventures with academic institutions. Hoechst AG, a German pharmaceutical house, has agreed to fund a new department of molecular biology at Massachusetts General Hospital (affiliated with Harvard Medical School) at a cost of $70 million or more over the next 10 years. AlSo at Harvard, a new genetics department will be supported by a $6 million grant from E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co. Monsanto has committed $23.5 million over ~ years to Washington University in St. Louis for research on proteins and peptides, and another $4 million to Rockefeller University for research on the structure and regulation of plant genes in photosynthesis. Even some firms not involved with biomedical research are being attracted by the potential payoff to biotechnology. Cornell University recently announced the establishment of a new biotechnology institute with support from Union Carbide, Eastman Kodak, and Corning Glass (Walsh, 19B3~. Each firm has pledged up to $2.5 million annually for the next 6 years. In addition to the industry-university relationships, many industr ial f irms are enter ing into joint ventures with other f irms . In most cases, a large firm provides financial support to a smaller one in return for technical expertise. Investments by Standard Oil in Cetus, Texaco in Applied Molecular Genetics, and Fluor in Genentech are examples. . .

OCR for page 50
80 Thus, there is ample evidence that significant funds are being invested in various aspects of biomedical research by industrial firms both here and abroad. The main point of concern in this report is whether or not an adequate supply of properly trained biomedical scientists will be available to meet the demand expected to be generated outside the academic sector. It seems clear that while industry may provide an increasing share of employment opportunities for biomedical scientists, the university s will still be counted on to provide most of the training. Surveyor Biotechnology Firms To learn more about the impact of the new biotechnology on The labor market for biomedical scientists, this Committee and the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment collaborated on a survey of the biotechnology industry. Some 265 firms who could be identified as being engaged in some aspect of biotechnology using recently developed techniques were sent a questionnaire (see Appendix E) in February 1983. Usable responses were received from 138 firms for a response rate of 52 percent. Questions were asked about the firm's biotechnology applications, the kinds of specialists being sought, and immediate plans for hiring. Growth of the Industry If there is any doubt that this is a very.young industry, it should be dispelled by the data in Figure 3.9. Almost 80 percent of the firms initiated research and development activities related to the new biotechnology since 1978. There was continual growth in the 30 co He I_ '3 25 He to ~ 20 _I Go co an Lo cat 15 10 Before 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 1970 YEAR STARTED IN BIOTECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY FIGURE 3.9 Percentage distribution of the year of firms' initiation of operations in biotechnology industry. See Appendix Table Bib.

OCR for page 50
8 1 number of respondent firms starting operations from 1977 through . 1981. The number of start-ups declined somewhat in 1982, which might be due partly to the recession and partly to the consolidation and concentration that usual ly occurs after the rapid emergence of many small firms. . The biotechnology industry is.so new that it is quite difficult to find good data about the total number of firms operating in Strand the total number of scientists employed.. Several directories exist which provide lists of biotechnology firms, but there are large variations among them. Until further investigation can be made of the.validity of these directories, we cannot make an accurate estimate of the total employment in the industry. However, our survey results can provide some information on the number of scientists per firm and the specialties in which.they are employed. The majority of firms responding to our survey employed less than 10 biomedical science Ph.D.s. But there wer.e..a few who reported a substantial number of Ph.D.s--the maximum was over 90. The percentage distribution of the number of biomedical Ph.D.s per firm is presented in Figure 3.10. On average, the number of biomedical Ph.D.s per firm reported by the respondents was almost 12. ~ . .+ 50 45 ., 40 ~5 30 25 20 15 10 o Ma 0 1- 6- 11- 16- 21- 26- 31- 36- over 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 40 NUMBER OF PH . D. S PER PI RM . . . . FIGURE 3.10 Distribution of the number of biomedical Ph.D.s per firm in the biotechnology industry. See Appendix Table B16.

OCR for page 50
82 Shortages of Specialists Almost one-third of the respondents said they had experienced shortages of Ph.D.s in one or more specialties. Three specialties were most often cited as having shortages--bioprocess engineering, recombinant DNA/molecular genetics, and gene synthesis. Comments from the respondents reveal how they feel about current and anticipated personnel shortages. Some examples are as follows: Cat the present time, we perceive that there is a def inite shortage of well-trained bioprocess engineer s and plant molecular biologists who have worked with microorganisms desirable for use in industr ial fermentation such as Bacillus, Streptococcus, and even, to some extent, Yeast.. A medium size R and D firm involved in animal and plant agr iculture, and human vaccine applications. Major shortages will exist in fermentation bioengineering in the next 2-5 years. ~ A large established manufacturer with a smaL 1 R and D group involved in human diagnostics . people with strong background in recombinant tech- nology and bus iness, or recombinant technology and law (good patent people) are very rare at the moment.. An average s ize R and D f irm involved in pharmaceutical s and human diagnostic applications . owe have been successful in hiring the people we need. Hence we do not feel a shortage of candidates. Most of the projected hiring will be from outside our company--new graduates and some experienced people.. A large, establ ished chemical manufacturer . .... we anticipate that major expansion will occur in several areas as the needs of the company change: (a) hybridoma/monoclonal antibody technology applicable to the diagnostics market, b) microbial production ~ fermentation) technology (e.g., industr ial microbiology, bioprocess engineer ing, ~ and associated areas relevant to product quality assurance (e .g., pharmacology , toxicology) . ~ A relatively large biotechnology f irm engaged in f ine chemicals, pharmaceu- t icals, human d iagnostics, and agricultural applications.

OCR for page 50
83 "Personnel shortages at this point are due more to a lack of applicable experience than they are to academic training. The one specialty where there are shortages both academics ly and experientially is Biochemical Engineering. Furthermore, as biotech- nology firms become more fully integrated, there will be an increased need for skilled technical support people; particularly in process development and manufacturing. This points out a clear need to continue our efforts toward improving university understanding of, and articulation with, developing biotechnology firms throughout the United States.. A large biotechnology firm with interests in fine chem~c~ s and pharmaceutical applications. Recombinant DNA/molecular genetics is currently the dominant specialty in the industry--more than 22 percent of all Ph.D.s are employed in this category (Table 3.8~. General biochemistry, containing almost 12 percent of the Ph.D.s, is the second largest. TABLE 3.8 Biomedical Ph.D.s Employed by Biotechnology Firms Responding to Survey Employment Specialties (listed in order of number of Ph.D.s employed) 1. Recombinant DNA/Molecular Genetics 2. Biochemistry, General 3. Hybridomas/Monoclonal Antibodies 4. Microbiology, General 5. Enzymology/Immobilized Systems 6. Bioprocess Engineering 7. Industrial Microbiology 8. Other Biotechnology Specialties 9. Cell Culture 10. Analytic Biochemistry 1 1. Pharmacology 12. Plant Molecular Biology 1 3. Toxicology 14. Cell Biology/Physiology 15. Gene Synthesis 16. Classical Genetics 17. Plant Biology Physiology 18. Cell Fusion 1 9. Physiology 20. Animal Reproduction/Embryotransplantation 2 TOTAL Ph.D.s Employed by 138 Responding Firms N Increase Expected in 18 Months 52.1 16.5 39.4 22.3 26.4 56.3 58.1 20.6 45.3 26.0 28.3 75.0 14.3 28.6 75.8 25.0 66.7 41.7 0.0 200.0 Shortages Indicated by Respondentsa N ~ 303 158 104 94 91 80 74 63 53 50 46 40 35 35 33 28 27 12 12 22.6 11.8 7.8 7.0 6.8 6.0 5.5 4.7 4.0 3.7 3.4 3.0 2.6 2.6 2.5 2.1 2.0 0.9 0.9 0.1 1,340 100.0 12.3 3.8 7.5 2.8 6.6 14.2 6.6 4.7 5.7 4.7 0.9 6.6 1.9 3.8 10.4 0.9 1.9 2.8 0.0 2 1.9 39.0 107 100.0 aEach respondent could indicate multiple shortage categories. Therefore, the number of responses in this column total more than the 50 firms reporting a shortage. 13 15 6 6 11 o SOURCE: Committee/OTA Survey of Biotechnology Firms (1983).

OCR for page 50
84 Substantial growth in the employment of biomedical scientists by these firms can be expected for';the next year or two. The respondents expect to increase their employment of~biomedical Ph.D.s by 39 percent over the next 18 months. If the employers' plans hold up--they are often overly optimistic--some specialties will show dramatic increases in demand. The number of specialists in gene synthesis employed in the industry can be expected to increase by 76 percent. Employment in the specialties of plant biology, industrial microbiology, and bioprocess engineering may also show large increases. Long-Term Considerations As already discussed in this chapter, increasing numbers of recent biomedical science graduates have found employment opportunities in research outside the academic sector. Should this trend continue--and the results of the survey of biotechnology firms indicate that it will--it should have a significant impact on the future demand for '" biomedical research-personnel. - Also, the number of scientists who are expected to reach retirement age will steadily rise during the next 20 years--thereby creating an additional demand for investigators. Furthermore, if one assumes that the level of ~redoctoral support in FY 1985-87 (the period for which the Committee is making recommendations) affects primarily the stock of students entering graduate school during this period, then the major impact of any changes in this stock on the' labor force are not likely to be realized until 1994-96, when these students have completed 6 years of graduate education and another 3 years of postdoctoral research training. In view of the above considerations the Committee believes ~hat, in arriving at its recommendations for this report, a comprehensive approach that takes into account both nonacademic demand and long-term . , requirements is needed. Such an approach, however, must be inter- preted with circumspection--due to the great uncertainties involved in making long-range projections and to the dearth of information about the key determinants of demand outside the academic sector. ' Some data have already been presented on recent expansion in employment in the nonacademic sectors. These trends are illustrated in Figure 3.11. As reported in the previous section, preliminary findings from a survey of biotechnology ' firms suggest that further increases may be anticipated for the next several years. While longer range projections of expansion in the nonacademic sectors are considerably more uncertain, the Committee finds no reason to expect the growth trends of the past decade to be curtailed in the future. Should the total numbers employed in the nonacademic sectors continue to increase at 6 percent per year, for example, the net result would be an accretion of more then 18,000 positions over the next 10 years and more than 52,000 over the next 20 years. Such increases, should they occur, would obviously have a major impact on the overall requirements~for biomedical research personnel.

OCR for page 50
85 25 20 Other To Government Bus i ness/ I ndustry T Ire l ~ 1 973 1 975 1 977 1 979 1 981 FIGURE 3.11 Number of Ph.D. biomedical scientists employed out- side the academic sector (excluding postdoctoral appointments), 1973-81. See Appendix Table BS. Far more predictable are projections of the numbers of job openings created as a result of deaths and retirements. The loss through attrition may be estimated from the age distribution of the 1981 biomedical science labor force--using~the number of individuals who will reach the age of 65 by a specified year. Illustrated in Figure 3.12 are estimates of annual attrition from the academic and nonacademic segments of the labor force during the 1~ 3-2001 period. As shown in the figure, the number of employment positions becoming available each year as a result of attrition is expected to be more than triple in the academic sector over the next 20 years and more than double in the nonacademic sectors. By the year 2001 a total of more than 13,200 replacements in the Ph.D. labor force in the biomedical sciences are expected--with 8,200 of these in universities and colleges. It should be pointed out, however, that if the average age of retirement should become significantly older (as a consequence

OCR for page 50
86 1 ~ 500 1, 000 U' of - AS - JO _ to so 500 an an/ // ,,tf O I I I , I I .. , . ~ . 1983 85 87 89 91 93 FISCAL YEAR 95 97 99 2001 Academi a Other Sectors FIGURE 3.12 Annual number of biomedical scientists in the FY 1981 Ph.D. labor force expected to reach the age of 65 during the FY 1983- 2001 penod. See Appendix Table B18. of legislative change), this would have the effect of delaying the impact of the expected increases in replacements. Nevertheless, even if the average retirement age were to increase by as much as 5 years, the annual loss from the biomedical labor force in the year 2001 would still be more than 2-1/2 times the size of the present attrition. What are the implications of these projections for future requirements for research personnel in the biomedical sciences? If Ph.D. production were to remain at its current level of approximately 4,000 grade yes each year, then the supply may be adequate to meet

OCR for page 50
87 what is perceived to be a relatively strong demand for talented young investigators. However, recent trends in first-year gradm te enrollments in the biomedical sciences (see Figure 3.4 presented earlier in this chapter) suggest that the supply of new Ph.D. recipients may decline by as much as 20 percent over the next 5 years. This decline can be attributed, in part, to demographic changes. The size of the college-age population began to fall off in the ~ d-1970s, and this trend is expected to continue until the late l990s. Consequently, there is an increased likelihood that further declines in Ph.D. output in the biomedical sciences will occur during the late 1980s, and throughout the l990s. Should such declines occur shortages of biomedical research personnel could develop in the next decade. To avoid such an occurrence, we believe that it is in the national interest-for the federal government to maintain its support of graduate training for promising young investigators in the biomedical disciplines.