Printable Version

Innovation and US Competitiveness (6-5-08)

Maintaining U.S. competitiveness in the global economy through scientific and technological innovation has become a significant concern in the 110th Congress. Following the release of recommendation reports by the National Academies and the Council on Competitiveness, a myriad of legislation has been introduced in the House and the Senate. This legislation involves many issues of interest to the geoscience community, including an increased federal investment in basic scientific research, new grants for early career researchers, additional funds for undergraduate and graduate scholars and support for math and science teacher training.

Report on Advancing Research in Science and Engineering from the American Academy of Arts and Sciences
In its newly released white paper Advancing Research in Science and Engineering (ARISE), the American Academy of Arts and Sciences focuses on two issues that the Academy sees as critical to the preservation of America’s leadership in scientific and technological innovation. The issues that preoccupy the report are the obstacles facing early-career faculty researchers and the de-emphasis among grant-funding agencies on high-risk, potentially high-reward research. ARISE recommends increased support for early-career faculty and research with the potential to transform scientific disciplines.

To study how the current federal funding mechanisms will meet the needs of the American scientific enterprise, an Academy-assembled committee analyzed data from the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), and the Office of Science at the Department of Energy (DOE); conducted interviews with leaders of federal and nonprofit research-funding agencies; and considered personal anecdotes provided by early-career science faculty.

Before making its recommendations concerning early-career faculty, the committee considered data on the average age of first-time grant awardees, the proportion of primary research grants awarded to first-time investigators, and the number of times new investigators must submit grant proposals. The average age for first-time recipients of NIH primary research grants has risen from 37.2 in 1980 to 42.4 in 2006. NSF funding for new investigators decreased from 22% to 15% between 2000 and 2006. Also, increasingly, new investigators must submit research proposals numerous times before receiving funding for their research projects. In 1980, 86% of new investigators received an NIH grant upon their first grant proposal submission; in 2007, however, only 28% did so. Indeed, at the press conference heralding the release of ARISE, Thomas Cech, chair of the committee that produced the ARISE report and President of the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, remarked that early-career faculty are “squirreled away in their offices serving as serial grant writers” because their attempts to get grants repeatedly fail.

ARISE makes recommendations concerning early-career faculty scientists to federal agencies, universities, and private foundations. For the federal agencies, ARISE recommends the creation of new grant programs dedicated to funding only early-career faculty. The federal agencies, the report says, should also pay special attention to early-career faculty in the merit review of regular grants and remain sensitive to the fact that early-career investigators cannot bolster their grant applications with previous successes and may not be skilled in writing grant proposals. Universities should, among other things, mentor early-career scientists and revisit promotion and tenure policies. Federal agencies and universities should address the needs of early-career investigators who are primary caregivers, namely women. ARISE encourages private grant-awarding foundations to distribute first awards to a greater number of early-career scientists.

Researchers believe that grant-awarding agencies prioritize traditionalist, paradigm-extending rather than creative, paradigm-breaking research projects, according to the ARISE report. The Academy bemoans the pervasive concern among scientists that only research known to be fruitful should be included in the grant proposal. To support and foster potentially transformative research, the ARISE report recommends that the grant review process “place a premium on innovation.”

ARISE devotes itself to consideration of present and possible future modes of funding for scientific research. While the report is, as Thomas Cech said, “silent on the level of funding,” it notes that the current tight funding environment produces conservative funding decisions that adversely impact early-career faculty and risk-taking in research.

AGI submitted a statement of support for the ARISE report. Nineteen other organizations and companies also submitted statements of support for the white paper. AGI’s executive director, Dr. P. Patrick Leahy, attended the June 3rd ARISE press conference and panel discussion.

The full ARISE report can be downloaded from the American Academy of Arts and Sciences website at www.amacad.org/ARISE.  (06/08)

-LB

Report Recommends Establishment of National Innovation Foundation
The Brookings Institution and the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation released a report entitled “Boosting Productivity, Innovation, and Growth through a National Innovation Foundation.”  The report recommends the establishment of the National Innovation Foundation (NIF), “with the sole mission of promoting innovation” to help keep America competitive in a technology-driven and knowledge-based global marketplace.

The report details the loss of innovation leadership experienced by the U.S. citing declines in the percent of U.S. gross domestic product devoted to research and development, the number of new patent applications by Americans, the number of scientific publications authored by Americans, and the number of college degrees in science and engineering awarded in the U.S. since the mid-1980s. It also highlights the limitations of existing federal policy to spur innovation at the scale needed for the U.S. to regain leadership stating that “federal innovation programs that do exist operate in an ad hoc manner” and “treat innovation as a byproduct of other goals.”

The report suggests three different organizational options for the NIF, proposing an annual budget of $1 billion for the agency. According to the authors NIF would: 1) catalyze industry-university research partnerships; 2) expand regional innovation-promotion; 3) encourage technology adoption; 4) support regional industry cluster; 5) emphasize performance and accountability; and 6) champion innovation. (04/08)

The full report can be accessed at: http://www.brookings.edu/reports/2008/04_federal_role_atkinson_wial.aspx

International Science Tests: American Students Rank Low
The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is administered by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and is an internationally standardized assessment that was jointly developed by participating countries and administered to15-year-olds in schools. The survey was implemented in 43 countries in 2000, 41 countries in 2003, 57 countries in 2006 and 62 countries have signed up for the test in 2009. In each country between 4,500 and 10,000 students take the tests.

PISA is one of the few mechanisms for regularly and directly comparing the quality of educational outcomes in the countries that make up almost 90 percent of the world's economy. PISA measures the capacity of fifteen-year-old students in OECD countries to apply what they've learned in the classroom in order to analyze, reason, and communicate effectively.

On December 4, 2007, PISA announced the results of the 2006 tests in press conferences throughout the world, including one in Washington DC. The 2006 tests focused on science, while also testing math and reading. U.S. students achieved a mean score of 489 points in science, below the OECD average of 500 points. Finland scored the highest at 563 points, six participants scored between 530 and 542 points (Canada, Japan and New Zealand and the non-OECD countries/economies Hong Kong-China, Chinese Taipei and Estonia) and thirteen participants scored above the 500 point average (Australia, the Netherlands, Korea, Germany, the United Kingdom, the Czech Republic, Switzerland, Austria, Belgium, Ireland and the non-OECD countries/economies Liechtenstein, Slovenia, and Macao-China). The U.S. ranked 21st in science among the 30 OECD countries.

Results were similar for the PISA math tests. The U.S. achieved a mean score of 474 points below the average of 498 points for OECD countries and the U.S. ranked 25th among 30 OECD countries in math. Due to an error in printing of the tests the reading results for U.S. students are not available.

PISA provides a much more detailed analysis of their tests and their results on their web page. For more information about the testing and the possible reasons for the scores, please visit their site here. (12/07)

House Passes Competitiveness Bills
On May 21, 2007, the House approved a massive competitiveness bill that combines 5 separate House bills that had already been approved. The 21st Century Competitiveness Act of 2007 (H.R. 2272) includes the National Science Foundation re-authorization bill (H.R. 1867), the National Institute of Standards and Technology re-authorization bill (H.R. 1868), the 10,000 Teachers bill (H.R. 362), the Sowing the Seeds Through Science and Engineering Research bill (H.R. 363) and the High Performance Computing Act re-authorization (H.R. 1068). The legislation can now proceed to a conference committee with the Senate, which passed a similar massive measure, the America COMPETES Act (S.761) last month.

H.R. 2272 includes many of the policy recommendations of a 2005 National Academies report entitled "Rising Above the Gathering Storm". The report encouraged policymakers to consider these recommendations to keep America competitive in the global marketplace through innovation and technological advances. The legislation includes a doubling of the NSF budget, funding for training of new and current science teachers, support for undergraduate education for science and engineering students to meet future workforce needs, expansion of early career grants for young investigators and better coordination of research and information technology between federal agencies. (06-18-07)

Senators Introduce Competitiveness Legislation
The Senate Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) introduced the America COMPETES Act. Also known as "America Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science Act," or S. 761, the bill calls for greater investments in education and innovation. The bill is similar to last year's Frist-Reid National Competitiveness Investment Act. The bill, which currently has 44 co-sponsors, will not be referred to committee, but has been placed directly on the Senate's legislative calendar. This means that leadership could take action on this bill, including considering amendments and a full Senate vote in the near future. (04-09-07)

House Approves Legislation Strengthening Science Education
The House is also working on competitiveness legislation that would provide more funding for science and math education. The House Committee on Science and Technology passed H.R. 362 with overwhelming support this month. Also known as the "10,000 Teachers, 10 Million Minds" Science and Math Scholarship Act, H.R. 362 is designed to better prepare U.S. math and science teachers to teach these subjects. The measure, sponsored by Chairman Bart Gordon (D-TN), was created in response to the National Academies' 2005 "Rising Above the Gathering Storm" report, which concluded that "America's footing as a global leader is slipping," according to Chairman Gordon. The report showed that the majority of U.S. grade school students receive math and science instruction from teachers without degrees or certifications in these areas.

H.R. 362 addresses these issues by increasing scholarships for undergraduate students majoring in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) fields, who are also committed to pursuing a teaching career. The measure establishes a teacher education program at the National Science Foundation to encourage education faculty to work with STEM faculty on ways to improve education for math and science teachers; provides in-service training to math and science teachers to improve content knowledge and teaching skills; and authorizes the development of master's degree programs for in-service math and science teachers. (04-09-07)

European Union Closing the Innovation Gap with the U.S.
In February, the European Union (EU) announced that the "innovation gap" between Europe and the United States continues to narrow for the fourth year in a row. For the past several years, Congress has considered the growing concern that the U.S. is losing its innovative and competitive edge in the global market. Government and non-government reports, as well as coalitions from industry, government and academic sectors, have called upon Congress to increase funding for physical science research and development (R&D) to ensure the nation's competitive edge in an increasingly technology-driven global economy. The EU and countries like China and India are committing record amounts of funding to R&D, while the U.S. has been decreasing funding for non-defense physical science R&D for many years.

As noted in the January 2007 Monthly Review, the Department of Energy has seen significant decreases in energy R&D at a time when the nation needs R&D to solve critical energy supply and demand issues. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on "Key Challenges Remain for Developing and Deploying Advanced Energy Technologies to Meet Future Needs" notes that "DOE's total budget authority for energy R&D dropped by over 85 percent (in real terms) from 1978 to 2005…"

The European Innovation Scoreboard 2006 (EIS), published in late February, reinforces concerns about U.S. competitiveness. According to the report, the innovation performance of a country's economy is based on a range of indicators, including education levels, expenditures in the information and communication technologies sector, investment in R&D, and the number of patents filed. America's innovation edge is primarily due to more early-stage venture capital, a larger fraction of the population with a tertiary education and a larger number of U.S. patents. According to the report, which presents a comparative analysis of the innovation performance of the EU, the U.S. and Japan, the innovation "leaders" are Sweden, Switzerland, Finland, Denmark, Germany and Japan. The innovation "followers" are the United Kingdom, Iceland, France, Netherlands, Belgium, Austria, Ireland, and the United States.

To see the full report, visit http://www.proinno-europe.eu/inno-metrics.html

More information about what Congress is considering related to innovation and competitiveness is available at AGI's Government Affairs web page. (03-06-07)

House Science and Technology Committee Approves Four Research Bills
On February 28, the House Science and Technology Committee passed four bills that would help the U.S. maintain a competitive advantage in science and technology. The "Sowing the Seeds Through Science and Engineering Research Act", (H.R. 363) would require the National Science Foundation (NSF) and the Office of Science within the Department of Energy (DOE) to award grants to scientists and engineers at the early stage of their careers at institutions of higher education and certain research organizations, such as museums, observatories, or research laboratories. NSF would be required to allocate 3.5% of its Research and Related Activities per year for the early career awards and 1.5% of its Research and Related Activities per year for graduate education and research traineeship awards. DOE would be authorized to receive as much as $25 million per year to pay for its early career grants. The programs would run for a 5 year period from 2008 to 2012. The measure also authorizes a National Coordination Office for Research Infrastructure to be organized by the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy to report on deficiencies and priorities in research facilities and major instrumentation at academic and national laboratories. The original bill had contained authorization for billions of dollars over 5 years for basic research in science, mathematics, computing and engineering at federal agencies, however, that language was removed from the bill to help ensure its passage through the committee and hopefully ease its passage through the full House and then the Senate.

The Energy Technology Transfer Act (H.R. 85) would amend the Energy Policy Act of 2005 to direct the Secretary of Energy to award grants for a five-year period to nonprofit institutions, state and local governments, cooperative extension services, or universities (or consortia thereof) to establish a geographically dispersed network of Advanced Energy Technology Transfer Centers, located in areas the Secretary determines have the greatest need of their services. The centers would encourage demonstration and commercial application of advanced energy methods and technologies.

House bill, H.R. 1068 would revise the High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 (Public Law 102-194) and require the Office of Science and Technology Policy to "draw a road map" for developing and deploying high-powered computing systems for the nation's research community.

House bill, H.R. 1126, would reauthorize the Steel and Aluminum Energy Conservation and Technology Competitiveness Act of 1988 (Public Law 100-680). The measure would authorize $12 million per year for five years to support advanced metals research. The federal funds, along with funds from the steel industry, would support metals research at U.S. universities. (03-06-07)

Maintaining U.S. competitiveness in the global economy through scientific and technological innovation has been a growing concern in Congress. Throughout the course of 2006, a multitude of legislation addressing American innovation was introduced in the House and the Senate. In January 2006, Senators Pete Domenici (R-NM), Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), Lamar Alexander (R-TN), and Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) introduced a package of three bills (S. 2197, S. 2198, S. 2199), collectively titled Protecting America's Competitive Edge (PACE). The bills, which are separated into energy, education, and finance components, implement the 20 recommendations detailed in the National Academies' report "Rising Above the Gathering Storm." On the same day, Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) introduced the Advanced Research Projects Energy (ARPA-E) Act (S.2196), which would support cutting-edge, high-payoff energy research by awarding individual prizes of up to $10 million.

Several days later, President Bush announced the American Competitiveness Initiative in his annual State of the Union address. Although the specifics of the initiative differ from the various bills that have been introduced in Congress, it covers a number of the same issues, focusing on boosting U.S. competitiveness by increasing federal science funding, improving K-12 science and math education, and encouraging private sector innovation. President Bush's plan would double the federal agency basic research budgets over 10 years as well as commit an additional $380 million to K-12 education.

Since January 2006, a blizzard of innovation bills from the House and the Senate has engulfed Capitol Hill. A number of bills support basic research funding (S. 2357) or provide early career support (H.R. 5356, H.R. 5357, H.R. 5358), some target education reform (S.2423, H.R. 5358), and others provide career incentives for students who become math, science, or engineering professions or teachers (H.R. 4845, H.R. 609).

On September 26, 2006, Senate leaders Bill Frist (R-TN) and Harry Reid (D-NV) introduced the bipartisan National Competitiveness Investment Act (NCIA) (S.3936). The new bill combines the American Innovation and Competitiveness bill (S. 2802), and the Protecting America's Competitive Edge (PACE) Energy Bill (S. 2197). If passed, the NCIA would promote research by authorizing the doubling of National Science Foundation (NSF) basic research funds over the next five years as well as increased funding for basic research at the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the Department of Energy's Office of Science and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). The bill would also provide early career research grants to young investigators and scholarships and additional training for teachers.

The publication of two new reports on innovation and competitiveness in November has propelled the issue into the 110th Congress. The Task Force on the Future of American Innovation released its report, "Measuring the Moment: Innovation, National Security, and Economic Competitiveness. Benchmarks of our Innovation Future II," on November 16, 2006. In a nutshell, the report requests greater funding for physical science research and development, greater incentives for students to pursue studies in the physical sciences and improvements in science teaching in grades K through 12. The report updates benchmarks, which measure U.S. innovation and competitiveness relative to other countries.

The second report, published by the National Conference of State Legislatures, was released on November 27, 2006. Titled "Transforming Higher Education: National Imperative - State Responsibility," the report declares that more Americans must graduate from college in order to maintain the required workforce and decries the high cost of tuition. Hearings are scheduled in the House and the Senate to address these issues in the coming months.

__________________________________________________

Sources: Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel, CNET News, House Committee on Science, House Committee on Science Democratic Caucus, Alliance for Science and Technology Research in America, National Academy of Sciences, Council on Competitiveness, Senate and House Press Releases.

Contributed by Laura Bochner, 2008 AGI/AIPG Summer Intern, Erin Gleeson, 2007 AGI/AAPG Spring Intern, and David McCormick, 2007 AGI/AIPG Summer Intern.

Please send any comments or requests for information to AGI Government Affairs Program.

Last updated on June 5, 2008.

© 2008 All rights reserved. American Geological Institute, 4220 King Street, Alexandria, VA 22302-1502.
Please send any comments or problems with this site to: webmaster@agiweb.org.
Privacy Policy