Hearing on Global Economy, Human Resources,
and International Exchanges

---

Summary

Friday, October 29, 1999
8:30a - 4:00p
National Science Foundation, Room 1235, Arlington, Virginia

I. NSF Overseas Offices
NSF Europe Office
Shindel gave examples of his functions in the three basic mission objectives of the Europe Office: representation of NSF to all countries and international organizations in Europe; reporting on S&T developments in Europe, and disseminating NSF information; and identifying, promoting, and facilitating opportunities for cooperation in Europe. Representation: Schindel served on the delegation to NATO's Science Committee, was an observer at the recent meeting of the European Science Foundation (ESF), and participated in the G-8 Working Group. Reporting: unlike science journalism, his reporting is tailored to NSF needs, and he highlights areas of interest to NSF in "real-time" reports of meetings attended. Facilitation: Schindel was involved in discussions about research training and mobility programs; reform of Italian science and its 300 research institutes; and European Union/US cooperation and interactions in materials research.

NSF Tokyo Office
Perrolle noted that, in addition to generic functions similar to those of the Europe Office, the Tokyo Office serves as liaison on a variety of fellowship and exchange programs and assists NSF-funded researchers in Japan. Perrolle summarized the first 20 years of the Tokyo Office (1960-1980), using slides prepared by Miyahara. The Tokyo Office started after a binational committe designated NSF as lead US agency for a new program, intended to redress the imbalance in the flow of personnel. Although the ratio for long-term student exchanges has changed little over the past 25 years, exchanges of shorter-term duration have become better balanced. The US-Japan Cooperative Science Program continues today and is the longest running bilateral program of NSF; the majority of activities under the program involve exchanges of a few days (e.g. seminars and workshops) to a few weeks (e.g. collaborative research). Participating scientists totaled over 25,000 from 1961-1998; about 47% were from the U.S.

In a prerecorded videotape, Miyahara covered the NSF-Japan relationship since 1980 During the 1980s, frictions due to the increasing trade imbalance between the United States and Japan occasioned a review of the overall US-Japan relationship, including S&T. In 1988, the Japanese Government began several initiatives to improve American access to research facilities and institutes in Japan. NSF is the U.S. agency for recruiting and nominating candidates. The initiatives include: a summer institute for graduate students, postdoctoral fellowships, and a special fund for senior-level researchers. More than 1300 Americans have participated in these programs to date. Miyahara then described his vision of the Tokyo Office serving a regional function, promoting S&T collaboration with other economies in Asia that are emerging as S&T powers in the 21st century.

II. Role of Office of General Counsel in NSF's International Activities

The Office of General Counsel (OGC) is the legal adviser and advocate for the NSF. Rudolph described OGC's role in the U.S. Antarctic Program to illustrate OGC's wide range of involvement in international issues. In the 1980s, OGC helped lay the groundwork for the exemplary environmental practices that now exist at NSF's research stations in the Antarctic. In the process, OGC has also forged a strong partnership with the State Department on matters affecting the Antarctic Treaty. State relies on NSF/OGC to help frame issues and participate as a lead agency in the interagency Antarctic Policy Working Group. OGC has worked closely with OPP to strengthen our Antarctic Conservation Act enforcement program. OGC and OPP together play a pivotal role in international negotiations involving the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty and the ongoing development of a liability Annex that will define each country's financial exposure to environmental harm or damage that occurs in the Antarctic, even if solely as a result of an accident. The State Department relies on NSF's ability to balance sound environmental stewardship with the conduct of scientific activities in the Antarctic, and OGC will continue to define and assert this balance in Treaty discussions on this liability Annex.

Another key domain for OGC is intellectual property rights (IPR), an issue that affects all NSF Directorates and the scientific and engineering communities. OGC participated in developing the U.S. position that successfully questioned the soundness of a proposed international treaty on database protection that could have interfered with the open exchange of scientific data among scientists. Among other issues, OGC identified proposed changes to U.S. immigration laws which would impact the availability of visas for foreign scientists; co-sponsored with INT a State Department symposium on the legal requirements for international agreements; and assisted INT and Astronomy in several aspects relating to GEMINI (involving the construction and operation of twin 8-meter telescopes in Hawaii and Chile): obtaining export licenses from the Commerce Department, helping negotiate and draft the international agreements, and persuading the U.S. Customs Service to allow duty-free entry of the GEMINI telescope mirror into Hawaii. OGC is fully engaged on the difficult and controversial issue of patenting the human genome. Rudolph foresees the Foundation increasingly partnering with more countries on large-scale scientific projects; the increased complexity of these agreements will require OGC involvement.

III. Programs and Projects that Support International Exchanges:
Viewsfrom the Field

1. Ocean Drilling Program (ODP)
Moran described ODP as a research program that is thoroughly international: in funding, governance, and operations. With support from a wide array of countries, regional consortia, and multinational organizations, ODP studies the earth, specifically tectonics and the environment. An international science group staffs the research ship. Funds are given directly to NSF, which contracts with JOI, a non-profit organization. 45-46 million USD is the annual operating budget. JOI subcontracts ship operations to Texas A&M University, and to Columbia University for borehole services. 1000 specialists devote time each year to ODP. JOI has a science advisory group; ODP's advisory structure is comprised of several panels, all international, that provide advice on all aspects of the program. The Head of the Science Committee is in Germany. Industry is also involved. ODP is a model for international science management.

Huber described the daily routine of the ODP cruises on which he participated. Collaborative teamwork is essential to achieving cruise objectives. Because ODP draws scientific talent from a large number of countries, it can mobilize much deeper expertise in particular research specialties than would be available from a pool limited to one or only a few countries. The close interaction aboard ship among researchers working in one disciplinary area, as well as the interaction among different laboratories on board the vessel, fosters partnerships and friendships. Huber believes his scientific career has been advanced significantly due to ODP and international collaboration.

2. International Long-Term Ecological Research (ILTER)
Gosz cited a need to create opportunities in terms of science in the terrestrial environment and to integrate efforts better: on an individual basis, across disciplines, and across nations. ILTER is a network of researchers at sites around the world that exchange data that adhere to common standards. Although ILTER is only six years old, many countries around the world have adopted the model and joined the network, because ILTER enables countries to gather information that allows them to better manage their resources. ILTER is a research platform; it is not a monitoring effort. Because data gathered for only 1-2 years can be misleading, the need for long-term ILTER sites is clear. Since different cultures can interpret the same set of data differently, an international effort safeguards against parochialism. Gosz then described the generic process by which a site becomes part of the ILTER network. It requires identification of a candidate site, finding a "champion", governmental endorsement, convening of a workshop with other network members, and formation of a national committee.

Peters described her participation in a U.S.-Hungary project involving comparisons of grasslands. The project goals are to sample vegetation at six research sites in two countries. The project involves scientists from both sides at various stages of their careers, and has included an exchange of graduate students and training of undergraduates. NSF/INT funded the initial planning grant, and has helped tremendously in facilitating project development. The partners bring complementary strengths. The U.S. strength is experimental manipulations; the Hungarians have a very strong background in analyzing pattern. The project's successes include: technology transfer from Hungary to the U.S. (analytical solutions) and from the U.S. to Hungary (simulation modeling); education and training of students; and scientific productivity and achievements. A major problem, Peters said, is obtaining funding for PI salaries and graduate student support; these items are normally not provided in INT grants. Doing research with just INT funding is very difficult to accomplish.

IV. New Partnerships for New Opportunities in a New Era

For Malone, the International Geophysical Year (IGY) in 1956 marks the opening of "a new era in the history of the human race", capitalizing on advances in science and technology. He commended to the Task Force three lessons from the IGY's success: the effective partnership between the governmental and nongovernmental sectors; NSF's leadership in guiding that partnership and in orchestrating federal interagency cooperation; and the engagement of nongovernmental leadership that the opportunity for new partnerships.

Malone noted a recent trend toward renewed emphasis on international S&E. In 1994, an NRC paper prepared for the World Bank challenged the world to make knowledge the organizing principle for society. By 1999, the World Bank had published the results of an international conference on Knowledge for Development. It is now maintaining a website (www.globalknowledgepartnership.org) to nurture a Global Knowledge Partnership. In September 1999, the Kellogg Commission on the Future of State and Land-Grant Universities published a report on Returning to Our Roots -- A Learning Society. This kind of a society is now considered by educators to be within our grasp. Clearly, new patterns of interdisciplinary collaboration must be created among the physical, biological, health, social and policy sciences, engineering, and the humanities. There is an opportunity for leadership by the NSB in nurturing these partnerships. Malone mentioned a new initiative, a Western Hemisphere Knowledge Partnership 21 (WHKP 21) to address these issues in the Americas during the 21st century.

V. National and International Trends

Wood said that issues affecting the development and commercialization of science and engineering in the U.S. and around the world are of great concern to the Industrial Research Institute (IRI). IRI's International Committee fosters IRI-like organizations in other countries, organizes international R&D discussion meetings, and develops information about R&D in other countries. Among recent activities, IRI has hosted R&D roundtable discussions focusing on opportunities with the Czech Republic and Hungary. Increasing global competition is a key agenda item for CEOs and CTOs in major corporations, as noted in two IRI Position Statements that Wood handed out. Wood then cited some key R&D trends, showing: an increase in industry investment in R&D; leveling off of U.S. Government funding of industrial research since 1993; tripling of R&D expenditures in the U.S. by foreign-owned companies since1987; and close to tripling of R&D spending by U.S. companies in other countries during the same period. More than half of these U.S. investments are in just five countries: Germany, UK, Canada, France, and Japan. Wood urged the Task Force to adopt recommendations and policies that: encourage strong academic research and educational programs; enable the effective transfer of technology to industry; and foster the ability of industry to develop and commercialize new technology.

VI. Keynote Address: The Globalization of International Science & Technology

Schmitt discussed Thomas Friedman's view that globalization has produced "fast world" and "slow world" countries, making the concept of First, Second, or Third World no longer appropriate. He believes that technology is driving globalization in governments as well as industry. He then discussed the global availability of human resources and the globalization of research, as supported by NSF data on science and engineering trends in: degree production (US behind Europe but ahead of Asia); graduate enrollments of US citizens (decreasing since 1994); graduate enrollments of foreign citizens in US universities (increasing since 1994); and numbers of foreign-born engineering students enrolled in US universities who choose to return home (significantly increased this decade compared to last). The U.S. depends significantly on foreign-born scientists and engineers; they comprise 28% of the entire S&E labor force in the US. Regarding research facilities, in the 1980s, foreign firms established labs in the US and US firms established labs abroad. In the '90s, all firms go to where they can get the S&T they need; borders and oceans are no longer significant barriers to these activities. Schmitt articulated strategy recommendations for the US Government, for the Department of State, and for the National Science Foundation, to be prepared for the challenges presented by globalization. He believes the US must support and strengthen the global S&T capacity in nations moving toward democratically-based, market oriented, and merit-driven systems. For the Department of State, existing international S&T organizations (e.g., ICSU, IIASA, and NATO Science) need continuing attention, support, and strengthening. For NSB/NSF, the challenge is to craft imaginative programs to respond to globalization, as NSF has done successfully in the past with other challenges, (i.e., SBIR, EPSCOR, ERCs, etc).

VII. Industry Perspectives

Brunner said that Procter & Gamble's goal, to be the lead innovator with superior technology-based products, gives it a vital interest in making sure that public policy is supportive of global innovation. P&G has 19 significant laboratories around the world. 40% of P&G's R&D personnel are outside of the US. The collaboration of P&G technologists from around the world provides insights and connections that are clearly superior to what any single region can provide. This leads to better product designs, earlier market exposure, and, ultimately, faster global product expansion. Global Ramp;&D has been a huge asset not only for P&G but also for the US. Economic benefits to the US are in jobs (new opportunities), tax revenues (over $1 billion from P&G in 1998), and shareholder value (P&G stock price increase). Overall, the globalization of R&D is good for US companies, the US economy, and, most importantly, benefits every US citizen.

Strauss discussed the current international controversy over issues of food safety and genetically modified organisms. The precautionary principle, as defined by the EU, is an approach to risk management that is applied in circumstances of scientific uncertainty, reflecting the need to take action in the face of a potentially serious risk without awaiting the results of scientific research. The G-8 has charged OECD to look at biotechnology and report back in June 2000 on how the OECD and the G-8 should be studying the issues regarding food safety and related matters. Strauss described the debate within that forum as over whether science should be the fundamental basis or whether the precautionary principle or other factors should be included in the decision. Strauss opined that countries have the right to manage risk however they wish within the framework, but when one totally decouples risk assessment from risk management, one loses much of the knowledge and the scientific underpinning. Strauss then described another forum, the Codex Alimentarius, which is a governmental organization, funded by FAO and WHO, to develop standards, guidelines, and codes of practice to protect the health of consumers and ensure fair practices in food trade. The General Principles Committee of Codex is currently dealing with the precautionary principle and factors other than science that are relevant in food safety standards. Strauss believes that the primacy of science and what that means to risk assessment and risk management is very important for the US, as well as for industry in general. Equally important is how scientific research and understanding is interpreted by WHO, FAO, and the World Trade Organization.

VII. Human Resources

Vaz described the Global Perspective Program at WPI as an innovative, project based, outcome-oriented approach to undergraduate education. Under this program, all WPI students must complete three project degree requirements in order to graduate. One of these, the IQP (Interactive Qualifying Project), requires the student to research and report on a problem that examines how science or technology interacts with societal structures and values. An increasing number of WPI students are completing the project requirements abroad. Students and faculty travel together to various WPI Project Centers around the world to work on real world problems, typically for government agencies, or NGOs and nonprofits, and sometimes for corporations. The students receive academic credit. A typical project involves a two-month sojourn in the host country, coinciding with one instructional term. The cost to the student is a negligible amount higher than on-campus. The program has proven to be an effective recruiting tool for potential incoming freshmen. Vaz described in detail one such international project, that was based in Thailand. Following Vaz, Mello described the more traditional type of exchange program that WPI also offers. She also described WPI international initiatives for eliminating cost barriers, re-entry programming, and faculty development.

Grathwol described the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation (AvH) in terms of its guiding principles, its programs, and its particular strategy of follow-up. A guiding principle of AVH is the creation of a lifelong partnership and worldwide network; it tries to maintain contact with all former re-search fellows and research awardees. Thus there is a network of more than 20,000 researchers in more than 120 countries. The follow-up program supports a variety of activities, such as subsequent research stays in Germany; fellowships to support German post-docs to collaborate with Humboldt "alumni" at their institutions outside Germany; and colloquia and regional meetings of Humboldtians, held both outside Germany and in Germany. In addition, there are 85 Humboldt clubs and Humboldt associations in fifty countries around the world. The follow-up program is the major link between one-time sponsorship and a life-long relationship. Grathvol expressed interest in exploring possible cooperation between the AvH Foundation and NSF.

IX. State Perspective

Bendis recounted the origin and achievements of KTEC. KTEC was a response to a slump in the mid-1980s of the three primary Kansas industries, aviation, agriculture, and petroleum. The ensuing recession prompted a move to diversify and strengthen the economy. KTEC was created as the single entity responsible for all S&T programs in Kansas. It is a holding company that manages a portfolio of programs, investments, subsidiaries and affiliates that operate as for-profit and not-for-profit entities. Although created by the state government, KTEC has the powers and functions of a private corporation, with the ability to own equity and make investments. The KTEC mission is to create, grow, and expand Kansas's enterprises through technological innovation. Bendis views technology as the engine of economic growth, and science as the fuel for technology's engine. Internationally, KTEC has relations with Africa, Asia, Europe, and Latin America. A number of European companies have a presence in Kansas, and Kansas is an exporter to Europe. Bendis mentioned KTEC support for SBIR and noted that KTEC finances both academic and industrial research that leads to new or improved products.

NSB/ISE 00-3