How Healthy Is Science in the United States?
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
HOW HEALTHY IS SCIENCE IN THE UNITED STATES? A Speech by Ralph J. Cicerone, President National Academy of Sciences Prepared for presentation at the Academy’s 146th Annual Meeting April 25–28, 2009 Events of 2009 President Barack Obama graciously accepted Th e new President of the United States, my invitation to address the members of the Barack Obama, has made some very strong National Academy of Sciences at our 146th positive statements on science. In his Annual Meeting. Because the visit of Presi- Inaugural address he said: “For everywhere we dent Obama (page 2, Figure 1) occurred in the look, there is work to be done. Th e state of our time scheduled for my annual address, I did economy calls for action, bold and swift . And not deliver this speech at the NAS meeting. we will act, not only to create new jobs, but to I want to recognize our 2009 Public lay a new foundation for growth. We will build Welfare Medalist, Dr. Neal Lane, for his distin- the roads and bridges, the electric grids and guished contributions to the advancement of digital lines that feed our commerce and bind science and the use of science in advancing us together. We’ll restore science to its rightful society. Truly, as Director of the National place, and wield Science Foundation and Presidential Science technology’s wonders Advisor, he has shown us how to develop to raise health care’s policy for science and science for policy. quality and lower its cost. We will harness As you know, we are planning a restora- the sun and the tion of this historic building on Constitution winds and the soil to Avenue, our permanent home since 1924. We fuel our cars and run must revitalize our home to meet the current our factories. And we and future needs of the NAS and to reaffi rm will transform our our national commitment to science. At schools and colleges tomorrow’s business meeting, I will discuss and universities to the status and potential schedule of our plans. meet the demands of Th ere is a new feature inside the NAS a new age. All this Building, a bust of Charles Darwin (page 3, we can do. All this Figure 2), as a tribute to his lasting contribu- we will do.” tions to science. When you view the bust in Ralph J. Cicerone, President, the Rotunda at the west end of the fi rst fl oor, National Academy of Sciences please read the plaque that describes it. On March 9, 2009, in his remarks on in which he mentions NAS can be viewed at signing an Executive Order regarding research www.nasonline.org/obama-education. involving human embryonic stem cells, he President Obama’s administration already said: “But let’s be clear: promoting science isn’t includes more NAS members than at any just about providing resources — it is also previous time in memory, perhaps ever about protecting free and open inquiry. It is — Steve Chu as Secretary of Energy, John about letting scientists like those here today do Holdren as Science Advisor and Director their jobs, free from manipulations or coercion, of the White House Offi ce of Science and and listening to what they tell us, even when Technology Policy, Jane Lubchenco as it’s inconvenient — especially when it’s inconve- Administrator of the National Oceanic and nient. It is about ensuring that scientifi c data is Atmospheric Administration, and Larry never distorted or concealed to serve a political Summers as Director of the White House agenda — and that we make scientifi c decisions National Economic Council. In addition, based on facts, not ideology.” Nina Fedoroff is the Science and Technology He has also spoken of the need to ensure Advisor to the Secretary of State, and Eric scientifi c integrity in government decision Lander and Harold Varmus will co-chair (with making and federal advisory committees, Holdren) the President’s Council of Advisors about education, and about the founding of on Science and Technology. Several more the National Academy of Sciences. A fi lm clip outstanding appointments are pending. Already, we have seen budgets for Fiscal Year 2009 increased by 14% at NSF and 19% for DOE’s science programs over FY 2008 although the NIH budget was held constant. Extra funds were also provided under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the economic stimulus package), $10 billion for NIH, $3 billion for NSF and $1.6 billion for DOE’s Offi ce of Science. Th e Health of Science in the United States Today, I will focus on the health of the science enterprise in our country, how to evaluate it, and what we can do to improve it. President Obama’s statements about science, his excellent appointments to related federal posts and advisory committees and the recent budget increases of federal support for Figure 1 President Obama speaking at the science are very good news and they lay the National Academy of Sciences on groundwork for the reinvigoration of science April 27, 2009. Photograph by in the United States. We must join in this Lois Finley, Event Digital. cause. 2 How to Take Stock of Science Nonetheless, there are constructive reasons in the United States for us to focus on our country. Our impact Are we entering a new golden age of science? at home can be large. Sadly, our nation has What is the current status of science in the fallen behind in work on scientifi c discovery United States? Gauging the health of science in some fi elds, and the education of scientists requires us to assess the level of support for at every level — from the youngest school the conduct of science, how well science is children to our most advanced postdoctoral being used for policy, how well the general students — must be strengthened. Further- public is being engaged by science, and the more as long as we use a valid framework, status of science education. Th ese broad ask appropriate questions and adopt high questions arise because our goals for science standards, science assessment, like science are similarly large: to advance science itself; itself, has no national boundaries. to foster science to create technologies and to To this end, I have in mind a new project grow economies; and to provide the scientifi c for us: let us annually assess the health of the basis for advancements in health and suste- science enterprise in the United States. What nance of the environment. should be our criteria? Must all of our answers What is the health of American science? consist of statistical data? Th is is an important question and although diffi cult to answer, it is a fair one. It is also Measures and Indicators fair to address this question to the National A healthy science enterprise depends on Academy of Sciences, because it relates adequate funding for science, public goodwill directly to our mission and to that of the toward science and scientists, and opportuni- National Research Council. We have been ties for talented individuals through educa- charged by the nation to maintain a clear tion. and informed vantage point and to form judgments about science when and where necessary. To ask this question only about “American science” might sound as if we are being provincial because in important ways, science is international or even anational, to coin a term. An illustration of this point is the presence here of two of our closest colleagues on international communication and collaboration in science: Martin Rees, President of the Royal Society and Jules Hoff mann, immediate past-president of the French Academy of Sciences. Indeed, there are approximately 35 of our Foreign Associates here today. Figure 2 Bust of Charles Darwin on display at the National Academy of Sciences. Photo by JD Talasek. 3 Federal Funding for Research federal research and development spending Th e United States government funds research depends on clear defi nitions, insightful in universities, government and national planning and careful allocations (1). In laboratories and elsewhere, through various addition, national R&D investments are much federal agencies. Two of the most important larger when corporate spending is included agencies are the National Institutes of Health as they are in international comparisons such (NIH) and the National Science Foundation as those compiled by the Organization for (NSF). Th e funding increases for Fiscal Year Economic Cooperation and Development 09 which I mentioned were most welcome (OECD). because the fraction of successful proposals in In any given year, federal science spending 2008 were at discouragingly low levels, only is a prime factor, but the health of science is 22% at NIH and 25% at NSF. Average grant also governed by other factors, for example sizes were $379,000 and $100,000 at NIH the quality of people in leading federal posts and NSF, respectively. Rigorous, competitive is critical. President Obama’s early appoint- peer review characterizes both of these grants ments are exemplary, and we look forward programs, and many nations are attempting to to similarly strong people being named to replicate their processes. When success rates the important posts that remain and to many are so low, however, some investigators (new advisory bodies. and continuing) cease to submit proposals, Federal spending for science can rise and and peer reviewers seem to become ever fall quickly, refl ecting some confl icting views. more cautious, tending to support proposals Concern over rising federal budget defi cits whose goals are incremental rather than can lead to reducing expenditures even in pathbreaking. Are these two federal agencies, the face of evidence of economic growth due which have been so fundamental to the to scientifi c research.