1 / 47

The Alliance for Science & Technology Research in America

The Case for Increasing Federal R&D Spending in the Physical Sciences, Engineering, and Mathematics Prepared by ASTRA for the Council for Chemical Research January 22, 2004. The Alliance for Science & Technology Research in America 1155 16th St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 202/872-6160. Our Story.

rudyard-wyatt
Download Presentation

The Alliance for Science & Technology Research in America

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The Case for Increasing Federal R&D Spending in the Physical Sciences, Engineering, and MathematicsPrepared byASTRAfor theCouncil for Chemical ResearchJanuary 22, 2004 The Alliance for Science & Technology Research in America 1155 16th St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 202/872-6160

  2. Our Story 1. Federal funding of basic research in the physical, mathematical and engineering sciences is in long-term decline 2. Under-funding creates imbalance in scientific research portfolio and disrupts academic training “pipeline” for S&T workers 3. Ripple effects spreading throughout economy, industry, academe & scientific research community

  3. Federal R&D As a Percentage of GDP Is in Long Term Decline ... and reached an all-time low in 2000 Source: Science & Engineering Indicators 2002

  4. Why the Problem? The Federal Research Budget in Context 1. Persistent Under-funding since late 1980’s 2. Cold war “build down” left $ gap 3. Budget Deficits = no increases in R&D $ 4. NIH Exception & “doubling” for some, but not all life science disciplines 5. Demographics, aging of S&T workforce

  5. The Impact on Society Innovation Impact • 73% of the citations in U.S. industry patents are from research conducted      at federally supported institutions Economic Growth Impact • Approximately a dozen economic studies (including those of Nobel Laureate Robert Solow) show “technological progress” accounts for 50% of economic growth, for all time periods studied (various intervals from 1869-1979) … Workforce Impact • Strong correlation  between federal R&D  funding and creation of  technically trained workers

  6. Percent Change in Federal Research Funding by Discipline 1993-1999 Note: Computer Sciences percentage growth attributable to very small initial base Source: National Research Council Trends in Federal Support of Research in Graduate Education, 2001

  7. Federal R&D Funding, by Budget Function FY’s 1980 - 2001 Source: Science & Engineering Indicators 2002

  8. Student Choice of Scientific Discipline (B.S. Degrees) Follows Federal R&D Funding Patterns 1950-2000 Source: Mayo, Bruggeman & Sargent (2002)

  9. FY 2004: More Deficits, More Tax Cuts, But More Defense and Homeland Security • $1.5 trillion in tax cuts over the next decade (larger than $1.35 trillion 2001 tax cuts) • Record budget deficits, with no return to surpluses in sight • Budget doesn’t include all costs of war with Iraq • $400 billion over 10 years for Medicare drug benefits • Proposed increases for defense and homeland security • Restraint for domestic discretionary spending

  10. DISCRETIONARY SPENDING: “Pushing on a String” for 4 years, and Now, Not Much Room for Growth,

  11. Decline in R&D in the “Big Six” Agencies, FY 2002-FY 2004: Only NIH Funding Exceeds Inflation Rate

  12. Administration’s R&D Requests by Agency: How FY ‘04 Compares to FY ‘03

  13. Other FY ’04 R&D Highlights • NIH – “Doubling” plan (almost) complete in FY ’03, FY ’04 budget of $27.9 bill. would slow growth down to 2.7% • NSF – ‘Doubling’ authorized actual appropriation only 5.2%, growth to slow even more in ‘04 • DOE – Office of Science funding flat for four years (’01-’04) at $3.1 bill. R&D, continuing increases for defense- related R&D, mostly in the national labs • NASA – Budget in flux because of Shuttle disaster, but declines in Space Station and aeronautics offset by large increase in Space Science and new launch technologies

  14. Big Picture: Federal Non-Defense R&D Flat in Constant Dollars Absent NIH Increases

  15. Dept. of Homeland Security • DHS began operations in January, consolidated existing programs March 1 • $669 million in R&D in FY ‘03, proposed to climb 50 percent to $1.0 billion in FY ’04 • In ’03, mostly transfers of existing DOD, DOE, DOT, and USDA programs; development-oriented • Bioterrorism R&D portfolio stays in NIH; DHS will have priority-setting role • New Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency (HSARPA) will be created in DHS on the DARPA model; funding priorities and levels unclear

  16. Federal R&D Funding by Discipline 1970-2003

  17. Imbalance in Federal Funding by Major Scientific Disciplines: 1980 - 2003

  18. Federal R&D Funding Health versus General Sciences 1990 - 2003

  19. Another Part of the Problem: Industry “R&D” is Mostly “D”, Not Basic “R”

  20. U.S. Bachelor’s Degrees in Non-Life Sciences & Engineering Continue Long Term Decline 1975-1998 Source: Science & Engineering Indicators 2002

  21. Global Context: Natural Sciences and Engineering Doctoral Degrees 1975-2000: U.S. Stagnant, Europe and Asia Surge Source: Science & Engineering Indicators 2002

  22. Total Degrees v. High-tech Degrees While the number of degrees earned since 1990 has increased 24%, the number of high tech degrees earned since 1990 has declined 2% Source: U.S. Dept. of Education National Center for Education Statistics 1998

  23. Global Competitiveness: WorkforceU.S. Lags Other Nations in Share of 24-year-olds With Natural Science, Engineering Degrees SOURCE: National Science Foundation, Science and Engineering Indicators 2000

  24. The Asian Century Begins?

  25. Engineering & Science Degreesas a % of All Bachelor Degrees

  26. Engineering Degree Production & Theorized U.S. Labor Demand through 2010

  27. Why ASTRA? The Alliance for Science & Technology Research in AmericaBecause It’s Time for an Advocacy & Research Organization for the Physical Sciences, Math and Engineering Disciplines ASTRA was Established in May, 2001 and is now tax exempt under IRS Code 501(C)(3)

  28. Why CCR & ASTRA? • Trend is Clear, if not us, WHO? …• Opportunity to Alter the Future • Working with small core of Key Technology/S&T Companies• Need Aerospace Participation • Role on ASTRA Interim Board & Future Advisory Committee

  29. ASTRA Industry Players Agilent DuPont General Atomics General Electric General Motors IBM Intel Lucent Hewlett-Packard Rockwell Collins Texas Instruments

  30. ASTRA Key Accomplishments 2002 - 2004 • Creation of Cross-cutting, Cross-Organizational Entity which EMPOWERS OTHERS to make the case • ASTRA = Collaboration, NOT a Bureaucracy • NSF Doubling Initiative 2002 • DOE Office of Science “Doubling” Begins 2003 • Mobilizing to save ATP Program a success 2003 • Working with OSTP, PCAST, GUIRR and others to Get Messages Across 2002 • State R&D Sheets are harbinger of more targeted research series 2001 … • Formation of Agency Budget Task Forces to determine “how much & why” increases needed 2003 • Industry-led group begins Aggressive Advocacy Campaign for FY ’2004

  31. A New Sort of Collaboration Within the S&T Community• Research & Advocacy• Shared Information, testimony, visits• Primary Policy Research• “Data Mining” of what already exists• Congressional & Administration Advocacy• Sign-on Letters & Mobilization• Educational Events & Seminars• Rapid communication within S&T groups• Coalition Participation and Coordination ASTRA Initiatives Include:

  32. State R&D Fact Sheets

  33. DOE Office of Science State Fact Sheets ASTRA supports new legislation — for example, the “Biggert Bill” or H.R. 238 — to “double” DOE Office of Science spending on engineering, mathematics and physical science research over 5 year period …

  34. Supplementing Activities of Others … ASTRA Members like GE, Hewlett-Packard, IBM & Lucent paid for this ad in Roll Call, a newspaper focused on Congress. ASTRA uses its network of “friends” to add a number of names to the sign-on letters (<24 hr. turnaround)

  35. ASTRA Advocacy: Collaborative Efforts Helped NSF “Doubling” Initiative Gain Momentum Through Effective Grassroots Advocacy & Policy Research in Congress … Above: House Science Committee Chairman Sherwood L. Boehlert (R-NY) and bipartisan group hold press conference announcing NSF “Doubling” Initiative on May 7, 2002. ASTRA’s Dr. Mary Good, ASTRA Chairman and David Peyton, ASTRA Vice Chairman, flank Rep. Boehlert, Committee Members, and representatives of key science organizations.

  36. ASTRA Advocacy: Collaborative Efforts Helped NSF “Doubling” Initiative Gain Momentum Through Effective Grassroots Advocacy & Policy Research in Congress HOWEVER … “Authorization” is one thing, achieving “Appropriations” funding goals is another … President Bush greets Rep. Nick Smith, Chairman of the House Science Committee’s Subcommittee on Research following December 19, 2002 White House signing ceremony for the NSF “Doubling” bill. Consider: Looming budget deficits, economic uncertainty and international instability will make it very difficult to make headway in a climate of fiscal austerity in the foreseeable future ...

  37. Making a Case Within the Administration … Example: President’s Council of Advisors on Science & Technology (PCAST) Final Report recommends increased funding for engineering, physical sciences and mathematics over long term following several meetings in which ASTRA and member organizations presented persuasive testimony … Important for OMB and FY2004 & 05 Budget Process

  38. ASTRA’s Testimony: Making Our Case Before Congress and The Administration General Electric’s Sr. VP for Global Research, Scott Donnelly Testifies on ASTRA’s behalf before the Research Subcommittee of the House Science Committee on March 13, 2002

  39. “Friends of ASTRA” List Serve • List serves about 3,400 individuals + media • Frequency is about 5-10 e-mails/month • Covers topics of community interest. Examples are: • how to nominate someone for the National Medal of Technology • where to send letters of support (or non-support) to Senate Committees on behalf of nominees awaiting confirmation • current status of federal R&D funding for the next fiscal year, and legislative status • significant bills introduced (e.g., Tech Talent Bill) & status • new research & policy reports worth note • links to ASTRA & other Web Sites • clearinghouse for other coalitions

  40. ASTRA’s New Web Site is Linking the S&T Community with Policy Makers and Many More Individuals Throughout the World … www.aboutastra.org

  41. Mark Your Calendar for the... 9th Annual SET Congressional Visits Day March 3 - 4, 2004 Core Message: Federally funded research promotes security, prosperity and innovation. To learn more about Congressional Visits Day 2003, visit the 2003 CVD home page. What is Congressional Visits Day (CVD)?The CVD is a two-day annual event that brings scientists, engineers, researchers, educators, and technology executives to Washington to raise visibility and support for science, engineering, and technology. Uniquely multi-sector and multi-disciplinary, the CVD is coordinated by coalitions of companies, professional societies and educational institutions. It is open to all people who believe that science and technology comprise the cornerstone of our Nation's future. Objective .. . to underscore the long-term importance of science, engineering, and technology to the Nation through meetings with congressional decision-makers. Participants . . . members of the Science-Engineering-Technology Work Group and other colleagues in the science and technology enterprise. Organizers … The Science-Engineering-Technology Work Group is an information network comprising professional, scientific, and engineering societies, higher education associations, institutions of higher learning, and trade associations. The Work Group is concerned about the future vitality of the U.S. science, mathematics, and engineering enterprise. Contacts: Debbie Rudolph (Phone 202-530-8332, Fax 202-785-0835, E-Mail d.rudolph@ieee.org) and Kevin Marvel (Phone 202-328-2010, Fax 202-235-2560, E-Mail marvel@aas.org).

  42. ASTRA can assist in many ways: for example, helping with graphics and research for the 9th Annual Congressional Visits Day 2004 event.

  43. ASTRA can assist in many ways: for example, helping with graphics and research for the 8th Annual Congressional Visits Day 2003 event. ASTRA has prepared 51 State R&D Fact Sheets as Hill Visit “leave behinds.”

  44. Conclusions 1. If no effective advocacy, federal R&D will continue to be INADEQUATE and DISPROPORTIONATE to the actual needs • If R&D funding from the government is lacking or mis-invested, the technology pool suffers 3. With less support going to the physical sciences, mathematics and engineering, industry cannot leverage its own resources with universities 4. Combination of these factors above results in current threat to U.S. economic prosperity, competitiveness and the National Security

  45. Something to Ponder … “If there are not enough trained people in the U.S., corporations will have to move R&D operations to where the trained people are. The pilot plant follows, because you need the R&D people nearby to help make it work. The manufacturing plant follows the pilot plant. Distribution, sales, and management follow the manufacturing. Once this process is started, it is not reversible. Corporations may not like it but they will survive if there is no R&D in the U.S. They will just go overseas. The U.S. economy, however, will not recover from the loss of this business.” – Quoted with permission from Bill Joyce, CEO of Hercules and previously CEO of Union Carbide

More Related