International Cooperation in Science Important for
US S&T Enterprise, Lawmakers Told
March 25, 1998
At the third in a series of hearings conducted by
the Science Committee's National Science Policy Study,
lawmakers examined international science collaborations.
Questions considered at the hearing included: why
the United States should participate in international
scientific collaborations, when such collaborations
are likely to be effective, and how to prevent them
from being manipulated to meet goals other than scientific
goals.
All witnesses agreed that international scientific
cooperation had numerous benefits to the US science
and engineering enterprise. Catherine Wagner of the
Critical Technologies Institute at RAND Corp. released
findings that showed the U.S. was leveraging dollars
in most international cooperation. The RAND study
noted that most international cooperation in S&T
was in the basic sciences and that international cooperation
in science "enhances the U.S. science base by increasing
scientific knowledge and access to resources and data."
One of the key conclusions of panel members (see below)
was that international cooperation in smaller science
projects supported agencies like NSF tended to work
very well, but the record of cooperation on large,
mega-science projects was not very good. The demise
of the Superconducting SuperCollider was held up as
an example of a mega-science project that failed in
part due to the lack of international cooperation.
Committee Vice Chairman Vern Ehlers noted that most
mega science projects would not happen in the future
without international cooperation and that it was
important that a more consistent strategy be developed
to enable greater international cooperation. Admiral
James Watkins - former DoE Secretary - noted that
it is critical to have early involvement of all domestic
stakeholders in science mega projects - Congress,
the administration, and the science community - during
any future international negotiations on big science
projects.
According to most panel witnesses, the lack of S&T
capability at the State Department is a major obstacle
to improving international S&T agreements on mega-science
projects. Dr. Tom Ratchford - OSTP staffer during
the Bush Administration - said that the science capability
at the Department of State is "broken" and that as
a result, S&T agencies like NSF have provided
the leadership for international S&T over the
years. This has worked well for smaller international
programs and agreements, Ratchford said, but that
larger projects tend to suffer without backing from
foreign policy agencies like State. He suggested that
agencies like NSF could play a role in improving the
S&T capability at State through exchanges of scientists
and engineers, possibly for stations overseas. Dr.
Bruce Alberts - President of the National Academy
of Sciences - also noted that the State Department
has recently asked NAS to undertake a study on the
contributions that S&T can make to foreign policy.
Witnesses:
Admiral James D. Watkins
President
Consortium for Oceanographic Research and Education
Washington, D.C.
Dr. Bruce Alberts
President
National Academy of Sciences
Washington, D.C.
Dr. J. Thomas Ratchford
Director
Center for Science, Trade and Technology Policy George
Mason University
Arlington, Virginia
Professor Homer Neal
Director
Michigan ATLAS Program
Department of Physics
University of Michigan
Ann Arbor, Michigan
Ms. Caroline Wagner
Senior Analyst
Critical Technologies Institute at RAND Washington,
D.C.
|
