NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #30/NN_1992_30.iso/spool/sci/research/1369

Internet Message Format | 1992-12-21 | 6.6 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!dtix!relay!diamond.nswc.navy.mil!rsherme
From: [e-mail] (Russel Shermer (R43))
Newsgroups: sci.research
Subject: fyi #157:  Four Reports Address Technology Policy Issues
Keywords: science, policy, administration, reports.
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 18 Dec 92 14:18:56 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]
Organization: NAVSWC DD White Oak Det.
Lines: 134

Posted for:
Public Information Division
American Institute of Physics
Contact:  Audrey T. Leath
Phone: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]



Four Reports Address Technology Policy Issues

FYI No. 157, December 17, 1992

While few details are known about the incoming Clinton
Administration's plans for science and technology (S&T), it is
expected that Clinton will promote a more comprehensive national
technology policy, with Vice President Gore acting as "technology
czar."  If Clinton is seeking advice, there is a proliferation of
reports on the subject.  This FYI summarizes four reports released
in the last six months that provide science and technology
recommendations for the nation.

The National Science Board's Committee on Industrial Support for
R&D released a report this fall entitled, "THE COMPETITIVE STRENGTH
OF U.S. INDUSTRIAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY: STRATEGIC ISSUES."  The
91-page report looks at the U.S.'s declining leadership in several
industrial areas.  It attributes this loss not only to increased
R&D spending by foreign competitors, but to the fact that "the
United States is spending too little, not allocating it well, and
not utilizing it effectively."

The Committee finds that "the real rate of growth in U.S.
industrial R&D spending has declined since the late 1970s."  The
report argues that too little is spent on nondefense R&D relative
to defense, too little is spent on process technology relative to
product technology, and greater effort should be devoted to
fundamental engineering research and emerging, precompetitive
technologies.

The Committee also claims that "the U.S. time horizon has become
too short, and the Nation's business decisions tend not to be based
on strategic technological considerations."  It concludes that
"stronger Federal leadership is needed in setting the course for
U.S. technological competitiveness."  Its recommendations include
implementation of a national technology policy, fiscal policies
that encourage industrial R&D growth, and NSF support for
activities "that focus on the integration of technology and
management," and "activities that lead to faster dissemination of
knowledge and research results among researchers in academia,
industry, and other sectors."

"ENABLING THE FUTURE: LINKING SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY TO SOCIETAL
GOALS," a 61-page report issued in September by the Carnegie
Commission on Science, Technology and Government, echoes many of
the same themes.  It warns that "for too long, our science and
technology policies, apart from the support of basic research, have
emphasized short-term solutions while neglecting longer-term
objectives."  The Carnegie Commission urges the federal government
to enhance "strategic planning capabilities and develop explicit
long-term S&T goals in the context of broader national goals
established by Congress and the President."

It advocates closer linkages between major sectors of society--
government, industry, academia, the public, and non-governmental
organizations-- to "examine ways in which science and technology
can be focused on achieving the nation's long-term objectives."
Specific recommendations include a non-governmental National Forum
on Science and Technology Goals, participation by the Office of
Science and Technology Policy and the Office of Management and
Budget in establishing goals and monitoring federal progress, and
congressional oversight hearings.

The Commission specifically emphasizes the importance of a strong
S&T base.  It cautions that "long-range S&T goal-setting certainly
should not hamper, but rather encourage... freedom to discover,"
and warns that "in the case of basic science and generic technology
development, where applications to specific societal goals are not
clearly foreseen, the establishment of long-term goals may not be
necessary or helpful."

Another September release by the Carnegie Commission, entitled,
"SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY AND THE STATES IN AMERICA'S THIRD CENTURY,"
advocates a stronger role for the states in establishing and
pursuing science and technology goals.  The 54-page report
recommends that all state governors have an S&T advisor and an
independent S&T advisory body for the state.  It also suggests that
states form "interstate compacts" to cooperate and disseminate
information.  Enhanced cooperation, the report says, could enable
the states to "speak out with a single voice to shape national
policy."

A fourth report, received this month from the General Accounting
Office (GAO), discusses "FEDERAL RESEARCH: LESSONS LEARNED FROM
SEMATECH."  Sematech is a joint industry-government consortium
formed in 1987 in response to the U.S. semiconductor industry's
loss of market share to Japan.  Industry members contribute at
least half of the annual funding, with the government's funding and
oversight managed by DARPA.

The 14-page GAO report states that "Sematech has demonstrated that
a government-industry R&D consortium on manufacturing technology
can help improve a U.S. industry's technology position."  The
report finds that "member companies have shared so-called
`precompetitive' information about their manufacturing processes
and equipment," and that Sematech contributed to the industry's
efficiency by the development of industrywide standards.

GAO recommends that future consortia follow the Sematech example,
with industry members directing the effort and providing at least
50% of the annual funding.  It further recommends that the
consortia attempt to improve relationships between manufacturers
and their key suppliers, and that the government partner establish
clear criteria for when its participation terminates.  The report
warns that, due to the complex international business climate, a
consortium will not necessarily lead to more jobs in the U.S.
economy.

The National Science Board report (NSB-92-138) is available from
Forms and Publications, the National Science Foundation, (202)
357-7861.

The Carnegie Commission reports can be obtained by calling the
Carnegie Commission at [phone].

The GAO report (GAO/RCED-92-283) can be ordered from the GAO
Superintendent of Documents, [phone].


###############
Public Information Division
American Institute of Physics
Contact:  Audrey T. Leath
[phone]
##END##########