Symposium Focuses on Engineering R&D

by George F. McClure

The role R&D plays in laying the groundwork for future products and manufacturing technology is well known. But while federal funding for life sciences has doubled in the past five years, engineering and the physical sciences have not been as lucky. Aside from defense R&D, funding for these sectors in constant dollars has increased only 20 percent in the last decade. And when we look at the funding change as a percentage of gross domestic production, these sectors have actually experienced a steady decline.

On 3-4 March 2003, IEEE-USA and five other engineering societies sponsored a two-day symposium on engineering R&D. The symposium served two purposes: to review plans and program budgets for agencies with significant R&D, and to carry a message to Congress about the need for better engineering R&D funding. 

President’s FY2004 Budget Request Moves to Congress

The symposium's timing was good, in that the President’s Fiscal Year 2004 budget had gone to Congress, and work on the 13 budget appropriations bills that actually fund the government each year was just getting under way on Capitol Hill. The President’s FY2004 budget request for R&D is $123 billion — slightly more than the other G-8 governments spend in aggregate on R&D. Agencies with increases greater than five percent over 2003 budget requests include Homeland Security (+32 percent), the National Science Foundation (+10 percent), Defense (+9 percent) and Energy (+6 percent). By comparison, the expected cost for a prescription drug plan for Medicare is $400 billion over 10 years, and interest on the national debt in 2002 was $178 billion.

Georgia Tech President Gives Keynote Address

In his keynote address, Dr. Wayne Clough, president of Georgia Institute of Technology and a member of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST), noted that 13 congressional committees affect R&D, and that this funding affects the future workforce significantly. Much of the R&D performed at colleges and universities is federally funded, he said.  Funding supports graduate student stipends and projects.

At one time, government and industry each funded about half of the R&D performed in the United States. Today, industry funds 70 percent of this work. In addition, federal funding generally goes to areas with more long-term payoffs. Industry, on the other hand, ties its investments more closely to near-term returns — and therefore product development — rather than to basic research.

PCAST Makes Basic Research Recommendations

Clough discussed several PCAST recommendations to increase government support for basic research. The Council recommends doubling federal research investments in the physical sciences and four major engineering fields (electrical, mechanical, chemical and metallurgy & materials) between FY2002 and FY2004. PCAST’s timeframe has aroused some controversy, given the other goals that are competing for the relatively small share of federal discretionary funds. (See http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/ for a good presentation of federal R&D budgets.)

PCAST's second recommendation calls for establishing a major fellowship program to attract and support U.S. citizens’ advanced graduate studies in science and engineering fields that support critical national needs. Both private industry and the federal research establishment have noted the pending retirement of a generation of physical scientists and engineers, with few options for replacing them. Over the past 20 years, we have become dependent on an influx of foreign students for more than half of our country’s graduate science and technology enrollments. But as overseas technological and industrial infrastructures build, these students will find more opportunities at home and will likely leave the United States.

PCAST also recommends developing ways to assess the adequacy of federal R&D investments in light of national interests, international competition and human resource needs. This recommendatoin includes developing a classification system linked to such considerations as economic impact, societal improvement, anti-terrorism, knowledge generation, and workforce development; monitoring other nations’ research investments to provide recommendations on U.S. global competitiveness; and assessing the adequacy of our anticipated science and engineering workforce in light of shifting national priorities.

Symposium Includes Congressional Visits

Symposium planners reserved the second day for congressional visits. IEEE members Paul Hazan and Saj Durrani visited with one of Sen. Barbara Mikulski’s (D-Md.) aides. They acknowledged Mikulski’s continued support of science and engineering and conveyed the symposium's message about the need for greater federal support for R&D programs. 

Department of State Wants Engineering Advice

Durrani and several others also visited the Department of State, where they met with Dr. Andrew Reynolds, Deputy to the Science Adviser to the Secretary of State, and with Dr. George Atkinson, a AAAS Fellow with the State Department. Reynolds and Atkinson emphasized that U.S. embassies need science and engineering advice desperately. Few embassies have science officers, they said, and embassy officials and staff simply don’t have expertise in all areas.

Currently, the State Department relies on the assistance it receives from the 27 Science and Engineering Fellows who serve the department each year. The department is also working to establish a “Jefferson Fellows” program. With support from several foundations and universities, this program will allow a senior faculty member to spend a year in Washington, D.C., to study and advise department officials on issues of interest to specific countries or world regions. Reynolds and Atkinson said the program should be launched within the next few months. As for further support, they said the State Department would welcome any and all assistance professional societies can provide.

NSF Wants to Work Cooperatively With Societies

Meanwhile, Hazan and another delegation visited with Dr. Priscilla Nelson, Director of the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Civil and Mechanical Systems Division. Nelson indicated that she wants to work cooperatively with professional societies on a number of issues, including workforce diversity, K-12 and continuing education, public outreach and technology transfer. She suggested that one way professional societies can work with NSF is to sponsor workshops.

NASA and DOD Visits Focus On Funding Shortfalls and National Aerospace Initiative

American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) President Sue Skemp and IEEE members Martin M. Sokoloski and Paul Kostek discussed aeronautics with Terry Hertz, NASA’s Director of Aeronautics Technology. The group gave Hertz the latest version of the Aviation Coalition’s statement on redressing deficiencies in aeronautical R&D (see www.asme.org/gric/Noontime/faxinviteAero_050503.pdf).

Finally, delegation members who visited Alan Shaffer, Director of Plans and Programs in the Defense Department's Defense Research & Engineering office, learned about the department’s priorities. Further, Schaffer and participants explored Defense's participation in the National Aerospace Initiative, a program with aims that include hypersonic flight, access to space, and space technology. The Defense Department’s budget request for science and technology is $10.2 billion, or about 2.69 percent of the 2004 budget. Shaffer noted that the department request falls short of its three percent goal.

---

George F. McClure is IEEE-USA’s Technology Policy Editor.