Evaluation of R&D at METI

Evaluation of R&D at METI • Yoshiaki Tamanoue,1,2 Tetsuo Sugimura, 1 • and Shigeki Okamoto1 • 1Technology Evaluation Office • Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry of Japan. • 2AIST. • AEA2012 Minneapolis

Layout • Overview • Ex ante evaluation

1. Overview

Ministries conducting R&D

METI’s initiatives aimed at creating new industries and markets • Solution of social issues: innovation in life sciences and renewable energy • Realization of the potential of creative industries • Development of the potential of small and medium–size businesses • Promotion of focused innovation from basic research toapplication • Integration of public data

Focus of R&D • Energy • CO2 reduction • Materials • Information technology • Medical instruments • Aerospace

R&D evaluation (1) • For improvement of R&D • For accountability to the nation • For better allocation of the budget • For better policy of METI

R&D evaluation (2) • METI commissions the evaluation subcommittee of the industrial structure council to discuss the results of R&D in light of expert opinions. Prof. Kobayashi is a member of this committee. • The evaluation results are publicized to the nation as well as taken into consideration for industrial policy planning and for budget allocationwithin METI.

R&D evaluation (3) • The evaluation subcommittee of the industrial structure council can publish a statement requiring the division to make improvements pertaining to specific issues. • The division publicizes the method of improvement, making it mandatory to commit itself to the statement.

R&D evaluation (4) • Ex ante evaluation (since FY 2010) • Interim evaluation (since FY 1998) • Ex post evaluation (since FY 1998)

2. Ex ante evaluation

Ex ante evaluation • Prior to the budget allocation request, proposals for new R&D projects under consideration are evaluated, the results of which are submitted to the budget office. • Budget office of METI regards ex ante evaluation as indispensable, taking the results into consideration to determine whether or not to allocate the budget.

Preparation for ex ante evaluation • Before ex ante evaluation, the proposed projects are discussed with the division overseeing METI’s R&D, receiving various suggestions for improvements, such as measures for deregulation of laws, expansion of the market, creation of standards, or export of infrastructure.

Flowchart of the budget request process Budget & Account Division Ministry of Finance METI Evaluation results Industry Divisions R&D Division

Budget requests for FY 2013 (1) • Use of medium range thermal energy • Wind energy power generation • Geothermal energy power generation • Biomass energy power generation • Solar heat power generation • Solid oxide fuel cell • Utilization of hydrogen • Superconductive grid cable • Energy efficient process • Novel light material (consolidation of 3 projects) • Energy-efficient purification of low-grade copper • Information security for industrial machines • Energy-efficient interactive display

Budget requests for FY 2013 (2) • Novel process for cast iron • High-resolution nondestructive inspection • Tailored drugs (consolidation of 3 projects) • Nursing robots • Satellite technology • Miniaturization of high-resolution radar • Chemicals derived from inedible plants • Ecological material • Recovery of rare metals • Devices for smart mobility • Heavy ion radiotherapy • Promotion of high-tech startups

Budget requests for FY 2012 • Decommissioning of nuclear power plants (2 projects) • Safety of nuclear power plants (2 projects) • Autonomous robots for rescues after disasters • Application of IT to social systems • Low energy consuming electronics • Ecological chemical processing • Efficient magnet • Miniature manufacturing process • Recycling of rare metals • Genetic engineering for novel materials • Transfer of military technology • Efficient gas turbine • Organic solar battery • Lithium ion battery • Solid oxide fuel cell • Enhanced oil recovery at maritime wells • Promotion of R&D in rural areas • Promotion of R&D for small businesses

Budget requests for FY 2011 Evaluation of nano-materials Toxicity test of novel chemicals Novel carbon fibers Database for prevention and diagnosis of diseases Production of crops in a contained factory Guidelines for medical instruments Embedded systems Network-linked power controller Prediction of output from solar plants Maritime power plant Batteries for smart grid Processing of heavy oil (2 projects) Efficient hydrogen production • Standards for application of iPS cells • Development of medical instruments • Low energy consuming computer • Lithium ion battery • Nitric semiconductor • Fine processing of semiconductors • Photoelectric hybrid circuit • Material and process for printing • (2 projects) • Ecological chemical process • MEMS sensor • Membranes for separation of CO2 • Efficient air conditioning • Solar energy for houses

Ex ante evaluation indices • Necessity of the project (issues to solve) • 2. Outcome • 3. Strategy to realize the outcome • 4. Management • 5. Necessity of governmental support

1. Necessity of the project (issues to solve) • Social issues that may arise or deteriorate in the future are described. • The weaknesses of existing technology are stated. • As a means to solve the issue, the necessity of the proposed project is evaluated in comparison with existing or rival technologies.

2. Outcome • Social merit brought about by the realized outcome as well as the expected time of realization is described. • Economic effect of the outcome by solving issues as well as improving competence is described. • Appropriateness of outcome as well as expected time is evaluated.

3. Strategy to realize the outcome • The coordination between R&D and business is required to maximize the outcome. • Cooperation with other ministries is required. • Results of previous projects should be used. • Regarding the consortium, the strategies to improve business, acquire and use IP, and establish international standards and a certification system as well as the expected contributors must be explained.

4. Management • Involvement of an excellent researcher as a project leader as well as users to promote the practical application of the technology is described. • Effective coordination amongst academia, competent companies, and government is required. • Overall management as well as its transparency is evaluated.

5. Necessity of governmental support • There is a requirement to explain why governmental support is necessary, for example, reasons that issues cannot be solved by private businesses alone, necessity of deregulation and support for introduction in the market, support from governments in other countries, benefit to the nation, or contribution to the administrative policy.

Suggestions by the committee • Cooperation with other ministries • Human resource development • Protection of intellectual properties • Matching of businesses from different industries • Creation of a vertically-integrated consortium • Strategic approaches to devising de facto standards • Necessity to target the international market owing to prospects of steep market growth as well as to support exports

Negative comments • 1. Insufficient analysis of the status quo • Lack of analysis of market needs • Bleak prospects for R&D: mature technology • Optimistic forecast • An optimistic forecast of R&D progress, market expansion, and cost reduction. • Omission of a feasibility test • No logical explanation for a forecast of net increase in employment • Premature demonstration test • Budget too small, considering the target of the project • 3. Other comments • Subsidies for R&D of a particular company, not an industry • Unclear solution to a problem • No clear roadmap

Acknowledgement • Dr. Toyokazu Ishida • R&D division of METI • Current affiliation: AIST

Thank you for your attention

Evaluation of R&D at METI