|
|
Questions asked
in this forum:
What should be the research goals of nation? How should research institutions adapt to the post-Cold War world? Would the creation of a quasi-independent agency further the nation's R&D goals? In this age of budget cutting, how should scientists and engineers justify R&D funding? What is the relationship between basic and "targeted" research? Is R&D tied to the economic health of the nation? Viewer comments
Online NewsHour Links
Browse the Online NewsHour's science coverage.
Dr. Richard Nicholson, executive director of AAAS and a participant in this forum, provides his general assessment of the current of American R&D.
External Links
AAAS R&D Budget and Policy Project
The National Science Foundation's annual report on R&D funding and the state of American science and engineering.
Forum guest Michael McGeary and his partner, Phillip Smith, argue for a balanced R&D portfolio in Science.
Ground-breaking research and innovative technology have become the modern engines of economic growth, and America's current edge in science and technology will become even more important as the world embraces a digital economy. Yet America's scientists and engineers, both those working for private industry and those working for universities or government agencies, are facing tough questions as they rethink assumptions formed during the Cold War. One of those questions is where the money will come. Neither increases in private R&D spending, which makes up about 60 percent of the $171 billion spent on R&D in the U.S., nor the federal R&D spending have kept up with inflation in recent years. As a result U.S. leadership in R&D funding is beginning to shrink. The U.S. spent more on research than Japan, Germany, France and the United Kingdom combined, according to the latest National Science Foundation's Science & Engineering Indicators, yet when one compares the ratio of R&D spending to the size of each nation's total economy, the U.S. is much closer to its economic competitors. R&D represents 2.6 percent of the total U.S. economy, while Japan spends 2.7 percent of its economy on R&D and Germany 2.5 percent.
There are also questions regarding research goals, especially research funded by the federal government. Ever since World War II, the federal government has been a key R&D funder, but a majority of federal funding is slotted for defense-related projects. The end of the Cold War, though, has resulted in a decrease in the significance of defense dollars in research and development; R&D spending by the Department of Defense now only accounts for 53 percent of the federal government's spending on scientific research, down from a high of 69 percent in 1987.
However, due to shifting in research priorities, non-defense spending on R&D has increased, especially money for biomedical research from the National Institutes of Health and space research from NASA.
There is also the question of how R&D money should be split between "basic" and "targeted" research. The federal government continues to fund the lion's share of basic research, and political support for R&D has mainly come from those that recognize the link between R&D and future economic growth. Some estimate the economic return on R&D dollars to society to be as high as 100 percent.
Congressional budget cutters, though, are eyeing R&D funds as they try to balance the budget, and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) estimates that non-defense R&D funding may suffer a 33 percent reduction from current levels. Scientists are increasingly pressed to justify their research in economic terms -- a difficult task for scientists doing basic research. Of course, without basic research the development of profitable technologies becomes impossible.
Our forum asks: What should be the research goals of the nation? How is R&D funding connected to U.S. economic growth? Has the nation achieved the proper balance between basic and "targeted" research? How should research institutions adapt to the post-Cold War world?
Your questions are answered by Dr. Richard Nicholson, executive director of the American Association for the Advancement of Science; Michael McGeary, a principle member of McGeary and Smith, a Washington consulting firm; and Prof. Wesley Cohen, a Carnegie Mellon University economics professor who studies the economic significance of R&D funding.
Questions asked in this forum:
What should be the research goals of nation? How should research institutions adapt to the post-Cold War world? Would the creation of a quasi-independent agency further the nation's R&D goals? In this age of budget cutting, how should scientists and engineers justify R&D funding? What is the relationship between basic and "targeted" research? Is R&D tied to the economic health of the nation? Viewer comments
 |
        |
|
| Support the kind of journalism done by the NewsHour...Become a member of your local PBS station. | ||
| ||
| PBS Online Privacy Policy Copyright ©1996- MacNeil/Lehrer Productions. All Rights Reserved. | ||
| ||
