Report on Results of the - 日本学術振興会...Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Astronomy, astrophysics and cosmology 39 2 The Astronomical Journal Astronomy,

Report on Results of the Questionnaire on the World Premier International

Research Center Initiative

(Summary Edition)

November 2009

Mitsubishi Research Institute, Inc.

Contents 1 Survey Objectives and Overview ...............................................................................................................1

1-1 Survey Objectives ........................................................................................................................2 1-2 Survey Implementation ................................................................................................................2

1-2-1 How the survey was administered ..............................................................................................2 1-2-2 Selection of survey participants ..................................................................................................2

2 Survey Results .......................................................................................................................................... 12 2-1 Respondent Attributes ................................................................................................................ 13 2-2 Advanced Institute for Materials Research (AIMR) .................................................................. 18

2-2-1 Main research area, nationality, and research countries of respondents ................................... 18 2-2-2 Awareness and knowledge of the WPI Center .......................................................................... 21 2-2-3 Evaluation of the WPI Center ................................................................................................... 25 2-2-4 Joint research with and participation in the WPI Center ........................................................... 26 2-2-5 Advice for the WPI Center ........................................................................................................ 30

2-3 Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe (IPMU) .......................................... 31 2-3-1 Main research area, nationality, and research countries of respondents ................................... 31 2-3-2 Awareness and knowledge of the WPI Center .......................................................................... 34 2-3-3 Evaluation of the WPI Center ................................................................................................... 38 2-3-4 Joint research with and participation in the WPI Center ........................................................... 39 2-3-5 Advice for the WPI Center ........................................................................................................ 43

2-4 Institute for Integrated Cell-Material Sciences (iCeMS) ........................................................... 44 2-4-1 Main research area, nationality, and research countries of respondents ................................... 44 2-4-2 Awareness and knowledge of the WPI Center .......................................................................... 47 2-4-3 Evaluation of the WPI Center ................................................................................................... 51 2-4-4 Joint research with and participation in the WPI Center ........................................................... 52 2-4-5 Advice for the WPI Center ........................................................................................................ 56

2-5 Immunology Frontier Research Center (IFReC) ....................................................................... 57 2-5-1 Main research area, nationality, and research countries of respondents ................................... 57 2-5-2 Awareness and knowledge of the WPI Center .......................................................................... 60 2-5-3 Evaluation of the WPI Center ................................................................................................... 64 2-5-4 Joint research with and participation in the WPI Center ........................................................... 65 2-5-5 Advice for the WPI Center ........................................................................................................ 69

2-6 International Center for Materials Nanoarchitectonics (MANA) .............................................. 70 2-6-1 Main research area, nationality, and research countries of respondents ................................... 70 2-6-2 Awareness and knowledge of the WPI Center .......................................................................... 73 2-6-3 Evaluation of the WPI Center ................................................................................................... 77 2-6-4 Joint research with and participation in the WPI Center ........................................................... 78 2-6-5 Advice for the WPI Center ........................................................................................................ 82

2-7 About the WPI Program ............................................................................................................. 83 2-7-1 Other attractive research institutes ............................................................................................ 83 2-7-2 Views of and advice for the WPI Program ............................................................................... 83

3 Conclusions .............................................................................................................................................. 84 3-1 Awareness and Knowledge of the WPI Center .......................................................................... 85 3-2 Evaluation of the WPI Center .................................................................................................... 85 3-3 Joint Research with and Participation in the WPI Center .......................................................... 85 3-4 Advice for the WPI Center ........................................................................................................ 85 3-5 Views of and Advice for the WPI Program ............................................................................... 86

Additional Data

Totals for Leading Scientists Only: Awareness and Knowledge

i

1 Survey Objectives and Overview

1

1-1 Survey Objectives

Research scientists in related fields of study were surveyed regarding each of the research centers in the World Premier International Research Center Initiative (WPI Program), for the purpose of determining whether each Center is becoming a “globally visible center” based on their awareness of it and other factors, and so that analysis of the survey results may help increase the visibility of the Centers.

1-2 Survey Implementation

1-2-1 How the survey was administered

Period: July 22, 2009, to September 24, 2009 Methods: Web-based questionnaire (in English) Requesting participation by postal mail and e-mail

Table 1-1 Response Rate

AIMR iCeMS IFReC IPMU MANA Total OverallSurvey requests 1,119 1,110 1,273 1,110 1,123 5,735 5,721Valid responses 406 274 337 433 405 1,855 1,851Response rate 36.3% 24.7% 26.5% 39.0% 36.1% 32.3% 32.4%

1-2-2 Selection of survey participants

1-2-2-1 Survey participants Scientists in research areas related to the five Centers below selected for the 2007 fiscal year (1) Tohoku University Advanced Institute for Materials Research (AIMR) (2) The University of Tokyo Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe (IPMU) (3) Kyoto University Institute for Integrated Cell-Material Sciences (iCeMS) (4) Osaka University Immunology Frontier Research Center (IFReC) (5) National Institute for Materials Science, International Center for Materials Nanoarchitectonics

(MANA)

1-2-2-2 Selection process Group (1): Leading scientists

• Scientists identified by the program officers based on lists of researchers highly experienced in operations at research centers recommended by working group members (around 30 persons per Center)

Group (2): Authors of papers published by internationally known journals in Center-related areas • Around 1,000 persons per Center

• Based on a list of journals recommended by working group members, the program officers decided the list of journals from which to select authors and the number of authors to be selected from each journal, in consultation with each Center. The selection was made based on these lists by the Japan Research Institute and Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.

• With some exceptions, general audience journals such as Nature and Science were excluded from the list of journals.

Excluded from selection list: • Scientists belonging to host institutions of the five Centers (Group (2) only)

• Principal investigators at the five Centers

• Program committee members

2

• Program director and program officers

• Working group members

• Stakeholders of the five Centers (advisory board members, etc.)

3

1-2-2-3 Lists of international journals from which selection was made and numbers selected Tohoku University Advanced Institute for Materials Research (AIMR)

Name of Journal Research Area Note Number Selected

0 Leading Scientists 35

1 Advanced Functional Materials Materials 31

2 Advanced Materials Materials 34

3 Angewandte ChemieInternational Edition

Chemistry 40

Nanoscale science and design 33

Device physics 33

Structural, mechanical,thermodynamic, and opticalproperties of condensed matter

30

Electronic transport andsemiconductors 33

Interdisciplinary and general physics 31

Total 160

5Journal of the AmericanChemical Society

Chemistry 32

6 Nature Materials Materials 30

7 Physical Review BCondensed matter

physics33

Condensed matter: electronicproperties, etc. 46

Condensed matter: structure, etc. 43

Total 89

9 Chemical Communications Chemistry 25

10 Nano Letters Nanoscience 34

11 Acta Materialia Physics 25

12 Chemistry of Materials Materials (general) 40

Structural, mechanical,thermodynamic, and opticalproperties of condensed matter

49


Magnetism and superconductivity 31

Total 114

14 Journal of Materials Chemistry 30

15 Inorganic Chemistry 32

4

8

13 Journal of Applied Physics

Applied Physics Letters

Physical Review Letters

4

16 Journal of Crystal Growth 30

17 Solid State Communications 30

18 Surface Science 32

19 Metallurgical and MaterialsTransactions A

31

Macromolecules, soft matter 32

Surfactants, membranes 39

Total 71

Semiconductors 7

Electrical properties of condensedmatter 11

Structure and mechanical andthermal properties of condensedmatter

7

Nano science and technologies 10

Total 35

Condensed matter: structural,mechanical and thermal properties 40

Condensed matter: electronicstructure, electrical, magnetic andoptical properties

41

Total 81

Condensed matter: structure andmechanical and thermal properties 14

Condensed matter: electronicstructure and electrical, magnetic,and optical properties

11

Total 25

1,119

22

23

20The Journal of PhysicalChemistry B

21

Journal of the Physical Societyof Japan

Europhysics Letters

Japanese Journal of AppliedPhysics

5

The University of Tokyo Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe (IPMU)


Leading Scientists 30

1Monthly Notices of the RoyalAstronomical Society

Astronomy, astrophysics andcosmology

39

2 The Astronomical JournalAstronomy, astrophysics andcosmology

44

3 Astronomy and AstrophysicsAstronomy, astrophysics andcosmology

44

4The Astrophysical JournalLetters

Astronomy, astrophysics andcosmology

55

5 The Astrophysical JournalAstronomy, astrophysics andcosmology

63

6 Physical Review LettersAstronomy, astrophysics andcosmology

Gravitation andastrophysics 57

7 Journal of High Energy Physics Particle physics 83

8 Nuclear Physics B Particle physics 85

9 Physical Review D Particle physics 86

10 Physics Letters B Particle physics 88

11 Physical Review Letters Particle physicsElementaryparticles and fields 80

12 Journal of Physics AMathematical and theoreticalphysics

40

13 Journal of Mathematical Physics Mathematical physics 28

14Communications inMathematical Physics

Mathematical physics 56

15Journal of Geometry andPhysics

Mathematical physics 27

16Annali Mathematica Pure edApplicata

Mathematics 58

17 Annals of Mathematics Mathematics 47

18Journal of AmericanMathematical Society

Mathematics 55

19 Inventiones mathematicae Mathematics 45

1,110

6

Kyoto University Institute for Integrated Cell-Material Sciences (iCeMS)


Leading Scientists 36

1 Biomacromolecules Materials sciences 53

2 Biomaterials Biomaterials 55

3 Biophysical Journal Biophysics 57

4 Cell Broad biomedical research 105

5 Cell Stem Cell Stem cell research 53

6 EMBO Journal Cell biology 52

7 Journal of Controlled Release Drug delivery 50

8Journal of The AmericanChemical Society

General chemistry 52

9 Nature Biotechnology Biotechnology 103

10 Nature Cell Biology Cell biology 108

11 Nature Chemical Biology Chemical biology 69

12 Nature Materials Material science 52

13 Nature Medicine Biomedical research 106

14 Nature Nanotechnology Nanotechnology 51

15 Small Chemistry 54

16 Stem Cells Stem cell 54

1,110

7

Osaka University Immunology Frontier Research Center (IFReC)



1 Blood 62

2 Cell Biology in general 16

3 Immunity Immunology 96

4 Journal of ExperimentalMedicine

Immunology 97

5 Journal of the AmericanChemical Society

Imaging biology andtechnology

21

6 Magnetic Resonance ImagingImaging biology andtechnology

25

7 Magnetic Resonance inMedicine

Imaging biology andtechnology

20

8 Moecular and CellularBiology

Moleucular and cell biology 52

9 Molecular Biology of the Cell Moleucular and cell biology 64

10 Nano LettersImaging biology andtechnology

15

11 Nature 40

12 Nature BiotechnologyImaging biology andtechnology

19

13 Nature Cell Biology Cell biology 103

14 Nature Immunology Immunology 100

15 Nature Medicine Mecdical science 54

16 Nature Reviews Immunology Immunology 56

17 NMR in BiomedicineImaging biology andtechnology

22

19 The Journal of Cell Biology Cell biology 60

20 The Journal of ClinicalInvestigation

54

21 The Journal of Immunology Immunology 200

22Proceedings of the NationalAcademy of Sciences of theUnited States of America

Immunology 42

1,273

8

National Institute for Materials Science International Center for Materials Nanoarchitectonics (MANA)



1 ACS Nano Nanoscience 29

2 Advanced MaterialsChemistry and physics ofmaterials (general)

25

3Applied Physics Express(APEX)

Applied physics (general) 17


Magnetism and superconductivity 5

Nanoscale science and design 17

Applied biophysics 5

Total 47

5 Applied Surface Science Surface science 30

6 Chemical Physics Letters General chemistry 20

7 Chemistry of Materials Materials (general) 20

Condensed matter: structural,mechanical and thermal properties

11

Condensed matter: electronicstructure, electrical, magnetic andoptical properties

4

Interdisciplinary physics and relatedareas of science and technology 7

Total 22

9 Inorganic ChemistryInorganic materials(general)

41

Superconductors 2

Magnetism 1

Optics and quantum electronics 3

Electrical properties of condensedmatter

13

Surfaces, interfaces, and films 1

Instrumentation, measurement,and fabrication technology

2

Applied bioscience 1

Nano science and technologies 10

Total 33

11 Journal of Crystal Growth Materials (general) 23

12 Journal of Magnetism andMagnetic Materials

Magnetism 20

8

4 Applied Physics Letters Applied physics (general)

Europhysics Letters Physics (general)

10Japanese Journal of AppliedPhysics

Applied physics (general)

9

13Journal of Physics andChemistry of Solids

Physical chemistry (general) 30

14 Journal of Physics CondensedMatter

Physics (general) 30

Condensed matter: structure andmechanical and thermal properties

14

Condensed matter: electronicstructure and electrical, magnetic,and optical properties

11

Cross-disciplinary physics andrelated areas of science andtechnology

5

Total 30

16Journal of Physical ChemistryC

Physical chemistry (general) 25

17Journal of the AmericanCeramic Society

Ceramic science 15

18Journal of The AmericanChemical Society

General chemistry 42

19Journal of Vacuum Scienceand Technology A

Vacuum related topics 10

20Journal of Vacuum Scienceand Technology B

Vacuum related topics 10

21 LangmuirSurface and interfacechemistry

38

22 Macromolecules Macromolecules, polymers 41

23 Nano Letters Nanoscience 54

24 Nanotechnology Nanotechnology general 50

25 Nature MaterialsMaterials science andtechnology (general) 20

26 Nature Nanotechnology Materials sciencenanotechnology

13

27 Physical Review B General physics 40

Condensed matter: structure, etc. 25

Condensed matter: electronicproperties, etc. 32

Soft matter, biological, andinterdisciplinary physics 7

Total 64

29 Physica Status Solidi (c) Physics 28

30 Solid State Communications Condensed matter science 20

31 Surface Science Surface science 23

Journal of the Physical Societyof Japan

General physics

Physical Review Letters General physics28

15

10

Macromolecules, soft matter 19

Biophysical chemistry 14

Total 33

33Angewante ChemieInternational Edition

Chemistry (general) 35

34 Journal of Materials ChemistryChemistry, materials(general) 30

35 Green Chemistry Green chemistry 32

36Journal of the ElectrochemicalSociety

Electrochemistry 27

37Enviromental Science &Technology

Enviromental science 27

1,123

32 The Journal of PhysicalChemistry B

Soft condensed matter

11

2 Survey Results

12

Aggregate results of the survey are shown below. Although in principle the questions were asked about each Center, questions for Respondent Attributes (2-1) and About the WPI Program (2-7) were asked of each respondent only one time, even those who were asked about multiple Centers; accordingly, only the overall answers are indicated.

2-1 Respondent Attributes

The attributes of respondents are as indicated below. Most commonly a respondent was a “principal investigator or group leader”; there were few post-doctoral or student respondents.

15.5%

14.8%

6.7%

20.8%

24.0%

15.3%

60.5%

56.7%

46.0%

74.8%

70.9%

61.2%

16.7%

18.7%

33.3%

17.8%

5.1%

6.2%

11.8%

3.6%

2.2% 1.5%

2.5%

1.2%

2.5%

1.8%

0.4%

2.5%

1.6%

0.7%

0.3%

0.4%

0.5%

1.2%

0.6%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Total

(N=1851)

AIMR

(N=406)

IPMU

(N=433)

iCeMS

(N=274)

IFReC

(N=337)

MANA

(N=405)

Head of organization or department Principal investigator or group leader

Researcher Postdoc

Graduate student Other

Figure 2-1 Your Position

13

Most of the respondents were tenured.

77.4%

78.1%

69.5%

81.0%

80.7%

79.8%

18.3%

17.7%

24.7%

15.7%

15.1%

16.5%

4.3%

4.2%

5.8%

3.7%

3.3%

4.2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Total

(N=1851)

AIMR

(N=406)

IPMU

(N=433)

iCeMS

(N=274)

IFReC

(N=337)

MANA

(N=405)

Tenured, permanent position Non-tenured, fixed-term position Other

Figure 2-2 Your Status

Most (three-fourths) of the respondents were affiliated with a university, followed by public research

institutes. Very few worked in private-sector corporations.

75.7%

74.9%

77.1%

79.6%

69.7%

77.0%

5.1%

11.3%

18.6%

22.4%

21.2%

3.5%

0.9%

1.5%

0.7%

16.9%

12.8%

17.5%

1.5%

1.5%

1.5%

2.0%

0.0%

2.7%

0.7%

0.0%

0.7%

1.1%

1.2%

0.6%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Total

(N=1851)

AIMR

(N=406)

IPMU

(N=433)

iCeMS

(N=274)

IFReC

(N=337)

MANA

(N=405)

University, etc. Nonprofit organization Public research institute

Private-sector corporation Other

Figure 2-3 Your Affiliation

14

Among their main research areas, the most common were material science, nanoscience, immunology, chemistry, theoretical particle/nuclear physics, and molecular and cellular biology.

2.3%

1.7%

1.8%

15.5%

12.0%

9.3%

0.2%

1.8%

0.7%

0.4%

0.7%

0.8%

2.5%

4.3%

6.9%

0.6%

1.4%

10.5%

1.2%

0.9%

1.9%

1.6%

3.2%

3.2%

4.5%

0.8%

8.5%

0.9%

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18%

Mathematics

Mathematical physics

Computational science

Experimental particle/nuclear physics

Theoretical particle/nuclear physics

Astronomy and Astrophysics

Cosmology

Other physics

Quantum physics

Material science

Nanoscience

Chemistry

Information communication

Electronics

Energy and Resources

Environmental science

Other material sciences

Developmental biology

Stem cell biology

Biochemistry and Biophysics

Molecular and cellular biology

Genome science

Imaging science

Immunology

Neuroscience

Clinical medicine

Other life sciences

Others

N=1851

Figure 2-4 Your Main Research Area

15

Among nationalities (multiple responses), American was most common at more than a fourth. Around 10 percent were Japanese.

Taiwan was most common of the “other” responses, while Argentina, Brazil, Finland, Greece, Poland, and Singapore were also among the represented nationalities.

2.1%

0.8%

0.9%

2.8%

0.8%

3.6%

8.2%

3.3%

0.6%

6.4%

9.5%

1.9%

8.5%

0.3%

3.1%

2.5%

3.1%

0.9%

1.2%

6.3%

27.6%

11.6%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Canada

Denmark

France

Germany

India

Israel

Italy

Japan

Netherlands

People’s Republic of China

Portugal

Republic of Korea

Russia

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States

Other

N=1851

Figure 2-5 Your Nationality

16

Of the countries where respondents performed research work, again the United States was most common at more than two-thirds, followed by Germany, the United Kingdom, and France. More than 20 percent indicated experience in Japan.

It should be noted, however, that these figures include the country of origin and countries where the scientist holds nationality.

In the “other” category Singapore and Taiwan had the most mentions, while Brazil, Chile, Finland, Greece, Ireland, and Poland were among the other countries cited.

6.6%

3.8%

4.4%

11.0%

3.5%

21.5%

29.8%

5.0%

4.8%

15.3%

21.0%

7.1%

9.5%

1.5%

4.2%

5.1%

7.9%

5.2%

12.7%

25.0%

67.4%

14.3%

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0%

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Canada

Denmark

France

Germany

India

Israel

Italy

Japan

Netherlands


Portugal

Republic of Korea

Russia

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States

Other

N=1851

Figure 2-6 Countries Where You Have Performed Research

17

6BAdvanced Institute for Materials Research (AIMR)

2-2 Advanced Institute for Materials Research (AIMR)

2-2-1 Main research area, nationality, and research countries of respondents

The main research areas of respondents, their nationalities, and countries where they have performed research are as indicated below.

35.7%

21.4%

18.5%

0.2%

3.9%

0.7%

0.5%

2.5%

2.0%

1.2%

1.0%

0.2%

0.5%

1.7%

0.2%

0.2%

3.7%

0.2%

3.9%

1.5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Mathematics



Cosmology

Other physics

Quantum physics

Material science

Nanoscience

Chemistry


Electronics






Imaging science

Clinical medicine

Other life sciences

Others

N=406


18


1.2%

0.2%

1.2%

1.5%

1.5%

2.5%

8.4%

4.7%

0.2%

5.4%

12.3%

1.7%

15.5%

0.0%

6.9%

2.2%

3.0%

1.5%

1.2%

5.7%

13.8%

12.3%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Canada

Denmark

France

Germany

India

Israel

Italy

Japan

Netherlands


Portugal

Republic of Korea

Russia

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States

Other

N=406


19


5.4%

2.2%

3.7%

8.9%

3.7%

21.2%

29.8%

5.4%

2.0%

11.8%

26.1%

7.4%

13.8%

1.2%

6.9%

3.9%

6.4%

4.9%

7.6%

19.5%

52.7%

12.8%

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0%

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Canada

Denmark

France

Germany

India

Israel

Italy

Japan

Netherlands


Portugal

Republic of Korea

Russia

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States

Other

N=406


20


2-2-2 Awareness and knowledge of the WPI Center

Nearly half of the respondents said they did not know about the Center. The most common items known were, in order, the name of the Center, the WPI Program, and the nature of the research. The director’s name was the least commonly known item.

30.3%

11.6%

22.9%

25.4%

47.8%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Name of the WPI

Center

Name of the WPI

Center Director

Research of the WPI

Center

That the Japanese

government was

implementing the WPI

Program

None of the above

N=406

Figure 2-10 Before receiving this questionnaire, which of the following did you know about the WPI

Center?

21


Responses by research areas for which there were 40 or more respondents were as follows.

38.6%

8.3%

29.7%

26.9%

43.4%

28.7%

11.5%

21.8%

27.6%

48.3%

25.3%

25.3%

13.3%

32.0%

45.3%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Name of the WPI Center


Director

Research of the WPI

Center

That the Japanese

government was


Program

None of the above

Material science(N=145)

Nanoscience (N=87)

Chemistry(N=75)


Center? (by main research area)

22


When those that knew about the Center were asked about the initial source of their knowledge, the results were as follows.

The most frequent response was “mentioned in academic paper or other publication; profiled in scientific journal.”

43.4%

17.0%

24.1%

22.6%

13.7%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

Mentioned in academic

paper or other

publication; profiled in

scientific journal

From a

website/pamphlet on

the WPI Program or

Center

From a staff member of

the WPI Center

From a scientist not

affiliated with the WPI

Center

Other

N=212

Figure 2-12 How did you first learn about the WPI Center?

23


Those that knew about the Center were asked about their involvement in the Center research, etc., with the following results.

Most said they had not had any involvement, even if they knew about the Center.

7.1%

2.4%

3.8%

87.7%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Visited the WPI Center

to gather information

(e.g., participated in a

symposium)

Stayed at the WPI

Center for research

work

Conducted joint

research with the WPI

Center

None of the above

N=212

Figure 2-13 What has been your involvement in the WPI Center?

24


2-2-3 Evaluation of the WPI Center

As overall trends in evaluations of this WPI Center, “outstanding” and “don’t know” were the two frequent responses while “average” and “poor” responses were relatively few.

“Level of research” and “research facilities and equipment” received many “outstanding” responses, while “international character and environment” received more “average” than “outstanding” responses.

33.7%

41.4%

34.5%

37.7%

21.4%

16.3%

12.3%

15.0%

7.6%

27.1%

48.5%

45.3%

49.0%

54.4%

49.0%

2.5%

0.2%

1.5%

1.0%

1.5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Work to pioneer new interdisciplinary

research fields by bringing together

various existing fields

Level of research

Research personnel

Research facilities and equipment

International character and environment

Outstanding Average Poor Don’t Know

N=406

Figure 2-14 Please evaluate the WPI Center in the following areas, as able. Please select one answer

for each area

25


2-2-4 Joint research with and participation in the WPI Center

“Sounds appealing” was the most frequent response to the question about joint research with the WPI Center, at nearly a third of the total responses. This was followed by “strongly interested” at 30 percent. Adding “interested” to these two responses accounts for around 80 percent of the total.

Strongly

Interested, 30.8%

Sounds

Appealing, 34.0%

Interested, 14.3%

Don’t Know,

15.8%

Not Interested,

5.2%

N=406

Figure 2-15 How do you view the WPI Center as a potential partner in joint research?


31.0%

39.1%

33.3%

36.6%

32.2%

30.7%

13.8%

12.6%

10.7%

5.5%

2.3%

9.3%

13.1%

13.8%

16.0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Material science

(N=145)

Nanoscience

(N=87)

Chemistry

(N=75)

Strongly Interested Sounds Appealing Interested Not Interested Don’t Know

Figure 2-16 How do you view the WPI Center as a potential partner in joint research? (by main

research area)

26


More than 60 percent responded either “strongly interested,” “sounds appealing,” or “interested” when asked about participation in WPI Center activities.

“Visit to collect information (e.g., participate in symposium)” was the most common activity the respondents desired for themselves or would recommend to others (students, colleagues, scientist acquaintances), followed by “stay at the Center for research work” and “be a member of the Center, including dual appointment.”

34.0%

21.9%

16.3%

31.5%

30.5%

19.5%

28.3%

30.5%

30.0%

29.6%

29.1%

28.6%

19.7%

20.0%

17.7%

22.2%

18.5%

21.4%

13.8%

18.5%

10.1%

13.8%

17.5%

11.3%

15.5%

21.9%

5.4%

8.6%

6.4%

7.9%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Visit to collect information

(e.g., participate in symposium)?

Stay at the Center

for research work?

Be a member of the Center,

including dual appointment?



Stay at the Center for

research work?




N=406

Would you

Would yourecommend toyour students,colleagues, andscientists youknow that they

Figure 2-17 How do you view participating in the activities of the WPI Center?

27


Respondents who chose “strongly interested,” “sounds appealing,” or “interested” for “stay at the Center for research work” or “be a member of the Center, including dual appointment,” as activities either for their own participation in WPI Center activities or for recommending to students, colleagues, or scientist acquaintances, were asked the reason for their choice, with the following results.

“Because the Center’s research is attractive,” “because the Center has excellent research facilities and equipment,” and “because the level of the Center’s research is outstanding” were the most common reasons given.

Research content and level were also given as write-in answers for “other.”

67.6%

40.5%

29.2%

47.0%

30.7%

13.4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Because the Center's

research is attractive

Because the level of the Center's

research is outstanding

Because the Center's research

staffs are outstanding

Because the Center has excellent

research facilities and equipment

Because the Center has an outstanding

international character and environment

Other

N=336

Figure 2-18 Why did you answer “strongly interested,” “sounds appealing,” or “interested” for “stay at

the Center for research work” or “be a member of the Center, including dual appointment”?

28


Respondents who chose “not interested” rather than “strongly interested,” “sounds appealing,” or “interested” for “stay at the Center for research work” or “be a member of the Center, including dual appointment,” as activities either for their own participation in WPI Center activities or for recommending to students, colleagues, or scientist acquaintances, were asked the reason for their choice, with the following results.1

The number of responses was small, but of these the most common were “because I don’t know about the above matters,” “because the Center’s research is not attractive,” and “because I (including my family) am concerned about living in Japan or in the area of the Center.”

Write-in answers under “other” included not being able to leave the present situation, and having a specialty outside the research areas of the Center.

17.9%

0.0%

0.0%

3.6%

17.9%

7.1%

42.9%

42.9%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%


research is not attractive


level of research is poor


facilities and equipment are poor

Because the Center's international

character is poor

Because I (including my family) am

concerned about living in Japan or in the

area of the Center

Because I am concerned about the

employment conditions at the WPI Center

and my career path after being at the WPI

Center

Because I don't know

about the above matters

Other

N=28

Figure 2-19 Why did you answer “not interested” for “stay at the Center for research work” or “be a

member of the Center, including dual appointment”?

1 Strictly speaking, respondents were asked the reason of their choice in cases other than the following two. (1) The respondent chose “strongly interested,” “sounds appealing,” or “interested” for “stay at the Center for research work” or “be a member of the Center, including dual appointment,” as activities either for his/her own participation in WPI Center activities or for recommending to students, colleagues, or scientist acquaintances. (2) The respondent chose “don’t know” for both “stay at the Center for research work” and “be a member of the Center, including dual appointment” as activities either for his/her own participation in WPI Center activities or for recommending to students, colleagues, or scientist acquaintances.

29


30

2-2-5 Advice for the WPI Center

In response to a request for advice on how to make the WPI Center a global research center, the main suggestions were along the following lines.2

- Plan symposiums and similar events. - Strengthen publicity, advertising, and information dissemination. - Promote globalization (e.g.: hold international conferences, invite/accept more foreign scientists,

send Japanese researchers overseas, conduct international exchanges, conduct international joint research, issue information in English).

- Support, train, and make use of outstanding young scientists. - Excellent results must be achieved and the specific details need to be announced.

2 This is a sampling of different ideas, drawn mainly from those given by multiple respondents.

7BInstitute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe (IPMU)

2-3 Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe (IPMU)



9.5%

0.2%

1.4%

0.2%

0.2%

0.2%

0.2%

0.5%

0.5%

13.6%

13.6%

19.4%

3.0%

36.5%

0.9%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Mathematics






Cosmology

Other physics

Quantum physics

Material science

Nanoscience



Other life sciences

Others

N=433


31


2.3%

1.4%

1.2%

3.0%

1.2%

4.2%

9.5%

3.5%

1.8%

12.9%

5.8%

1.2%

3.9%

0.7%

1.4%

5.3%

4.6%

0.7%

0.2%

6.9%

24.2%

12.9%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Canada

Denmark

France

Germany

India

Israel

Italy

Japan

Netherlands


Portugal

Republic of Korea

Russia

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States

Other

N=433


32


8.5%

8.5%

7.6%

20.1%

7.6%

34.4%

43.0%

7.2%

9.5%

35.8%

21.5%

8.3%

9.2%

3.2%

4.8%

10.2%

16.2%

6.2%

24.5%

37.4%

71.4%

18.9%

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0%

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Canada

Denmark

France

Germany

India

Israel

Italy

Japan

Netherlands


Portugal

Republic of Korea

Russia

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States

Other

N=433


33



Only around a third of respondents said they did not know about the Center. Around half said they knew the name of the Center and the nature of the research, while 40 percent or so knew about the WPI Program and the name of the Center director.

The degree of familiarity was seen to vary depending on the main research area of respondents.

56.6%

38.1%

47.8%

38.6%

34.4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Name of the WPI

Center

Name of the WPI

Center Director

Research of the WPI

Center

That the Japanese

government was


Program

None of the above

N=433


Center?

34



33.9%

6.8%

18.6%

11.9%

62.7%

61.0%

32.2%

47.5%

42.4%

30.5%

75.3%

65.8%

68.4%

55.1%

17.7%

31.0%

8.3%

26.2%

22.6%

56.0%

65.9%

43.9%

58.5%

46.3%

17.1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


Name of the WPI CenterDirector

Research of the WPICenter

That the Japanesegovernment was

implementing the WPIProgram

None of the above

Mathematics(N=59) Mathematical physics(N=59)

Theoretical particle/nuclear physics(N=158) Astronomy and Astrophysics(N=84)

Cosmology(N=41)



35



The most frequent responses were “from a staff member of the WPI Center” and “from a scientist not affiliated with the WPI Center.” This result is unique to IPMU.

25.4%

15.5%

32.7%

41.5%

9.9%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%


paper or other


scientific journal

From a

website/pamphlet on

the WPI Program or

Center


the WPI Center



Center

Other

N=284


36




8.8%

4.6%

4.6%

85.9%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%




symposium)

Stayed at the WPI

Center for research

work

Conducted joint


Center

None of the above

N=284


37




“Research personnel,” “level of research,” and “work to pioneer new interdisciplinary research fields by bringing together various existing fields” received relatively many “outstanding” responses.

35.6%

46.2%

53.6%

23.6%

33.5%

12.0%

12.5%

12.0%

6.9%

15.7%

52.0%

41.1%

34.2%

68.8%

49.2%

0.5%

0.2%

0.2%

0.7%

1.6%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%




Level of research

Research personnel




N=433


for each area

38



The largest number of respondents chose “sounds appealing” concerning joint research with the WPI Center, with this response and “strongly interested” together making up about 70 percent of the responses.

Strongly

Interested, 33.3%

Sounds

Appealing, 37.4%

Interested, 14.5%

Not Interested,

3.5%

Don’t Know,

11.3%

N=433



20.3%

44.1%

36.7%

23.7%

45.8%

43.0%

34.5%

36.6%

16.9%

6.8%

15.2%

20.2%

12.2%

11.9%

0.0%

1.3%

2.4%

0.0%

27.1%

3.4%

3.8%

19.0%

9.8%41.5%

23.8%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Mathematics

(N=59)


(N=59)


(N=158)


(N=84)

Cosmology

(N=41)



research area)

39



“Visit to collect information (e.g., participate in symposium)” was the most common activity the respondents desired for themselves or would recommend to others (students, colleagues, scientist acquaintances), followed by “stay at the Center for research work” and “be a member of the Center, including dual appointment.”

41.6%

38.3%

16.2%

40.4%

40.4%

27.5%

31.2%

27.3%

28.4%

32.8%

30.7%

30.7%

17.6%

17.1%

19.2%

18.5%

16.6%

18.5%

18.7%

5.8%

9.7%

17.6%

6.0%

9.7%

19.4%

3.9%

7.6%

2.3%

2.5%

3.9%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%



Stay at the Center

for research work?






research work?




Would you


N=433


40



“Because the Center’s research is attractive,” “because the Center’s research staffs are outstanding,” and “because the level of the Center’s research is outstanding” were the most common reasons given.

Interest in new research fields, and research level were also given as write-in answers for “other.”

76.1%

44.7%

54.8%

20.3%

35.5%

15.2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%











Other

N=389



41



The number of responses was small, but of these the most common were “because I don’t know about the above matters,” “because the Center’s research is not attractive,” and “because I (including my family) am concerned about living in Japan or in the area of the Center.”


8.7%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

26.1%

4.3%

43.5%

56.5%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%








character is poor



area of the Center




Center



Other

N=23



3 Strictly speaking, respondents were asked the reason for their choice in cases other than the following two. (1) The respondent chose “strongly interested,” “sounds appealing,” or “interested” for “stay at the Center for research work” or “be a member of the Center, including dual appointment” as activities either for his/her own participation in WPI Center activities or for recommending to students, colleagues, or scientist acquaintances. (2) The respondent chose “don’t know” for both “stay at the Center for research work” and “be a member of the Center, including dual appointment,” as activities either for his/her own participation in WPI Center activities or for recommending to students, colleagues, or scientist acquaintances.

42


43



- Plan symposiums and similar events. - Strengthen publicity, advertising, and information dissemination. - Implement programs from a medium- to long-range standpoint. - Boost ties with overseas research organizations. - Take a broader view of the research area, including pure mathematics. - Narrow down the research areas. - Increase the number of outstanding foreign scientists accepted (short/long-term, tenured). - The existence of the current director is important.


8BInstitute for Integrated Cell-Material Sciences (iCeMS)

2-4 Institute for Integrated Cell-Material Sciences (iCeMS)



0.0%

0.7%

2.9%

12.4%

15.7%

19.0%

2.2%

2.9%

3.6%

4.4%

2.2%

4.7%

1.5%

0.4%

0.4%

0.4%

9.5%

7.3%

9.9%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Other physics

Quantum physics

Material science

Nanoscience

Chemistry





Stem cell biology



Genome science

Imaging science

Immunology

Neuroscience

Clinical medicine

Other life sciences

Others

N=274


44


1.5%

1.1%

1.1%

5.1%

0.4%

3.6%

6.2%

1.8%

0.4%

4.0%

7.3%

1.8%

4.4%

0.4%

2.9%

1.5%

2.6%

1.1%

2.2%

9.1%

40.5%

9.5%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Canada

Denmark

France

Germany

India

Israel

Italy

Japan

Netherlands


Portugal

Republic of Korea

Russia

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States

Other

N=274


45


5.5%

2.6%

3.3%

8.4%

0.7%

15.0%

23.7%

2.9%

5.5%

8.0%

15.0%

7.3%

8.4%

1.5%

2.6%

2.2%

5.5%

3.3%

10.6%

25.2%

78.1%

13.1%

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0%

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Canada

Denmark

France

Germany

India

Israel

Italy

Japan

Netherlands


Portugal

Republic of Korea

Russia

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States

Other

N=274


46



Close to two-thirds of respondents said they did not know about the Center. The items known in order of familiarity were the WPI Program, name of the Center, nature of the research, and name of the director; but the percentages were small in each case.

18.6%

10.6%

15.7%

20.4%

65.7%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Name of the WPI

Center

Name of the WPI

Center Director

Research of the WPI

Center

That the Japanese

government was


Program

None of the above

N=274


Center?

47



7.0%

4.7%

9.3%

14.0%

79.1%

7.7%

5.8%

9.6%

15.4%

75.0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%



Director

Research of the WPI

Center

That the Japanese

government was


Program

None of the above

Biochemistry andBiophysics(N=43)

Molecular and cellularbiology(N=52)



48




38.3%

16.0%

18.1%

21.3%

16.0%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%


paper or other


scientific journal

From a

website/pamphlet on

the WPI Program or

Center


the WPI Center



Center

Other

N=94


49




6.4%

0.0%

7.4%

87.2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%




symposium)

Stayed at the WPI

Center for research

work

Conducted joint


Center

None of the above

N=94


50




“Work to pioneer new interdisciplinary research fields by bringing together various existing fields,” “research personnel,” and “level of research” received relatively many “outstanding” responses. For “international character and environment” the “average” responses outnumbered “outstanding.”

36.1%

35.0%

35.4%

28.1%

13.9%

8.8%

9.9%

8.4%

4.0%

18.2%

54.4%

54.7%

55.8%

67.5%

60.6%

7.3%

0.4%

0.4%

0.4%

0.7%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%




Level of research

Research personnel




N=274


for each area

51



“Sounds appealing” was the most frequent response to the question about joint research with the WPI Center, at nearly a third of the total responses. This was followed by “strongly interested” at almost 30 percent. Adding “interested” to these two responses accounts for nearly 70 percent of the total.

About a quarter of the respondents indicated “don’t know.”

Strongly

Interested, 27.0%

Sounds

Appealing, 31.0%

Don’t Know,

25.9%

Not Interested,

4.4%

Interested, 11.7%

N=274



18.6%

21.2%

37.2%

25.0%

14.0%

17.3%

0.0%

1.9%

30.2%

34.6%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Biochemistry and

Biophysics

(N=43)

Molecular and cellular

biology

(N=52)



research area)

52


More than half responded either “strongly interested,” “sounds appealing,” or “interested” when asked about participation in WPI Center activities.

“Visit to collect information (e.g., participate in symposium)” was the most common activity the respondents desired for themselves or would recommend to others (students, colleagues, scientist acquaintances), followed by “stay at the Center for research work” and “be a member of the Center, including dual appointment.” Among activities desired by the respondents themselves, there was little difference between “stay at the Center for research work” and “be a member of the Center, including dual appointment.”

34.7%

14.6%

14.6%

29.2%

25.2%

16.4%

28.8%

27.4%

25.5%

28.5%

27.4%

27.0%

16.1%

18.6%

17.5%

17.5%

16.8%

20.8%

16.4%

19.0%

15.7%

23.0%

23.4%

21.5%

25.9%

30.7%

4.7%

3.3%

4.7%

5.1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%



Stay at the Center

for research work?






research work?




Would you


N=274


53



“Because the Center’s research is attractive,” “because the level of the Center’s research is outstanding,” and “because the Center has excellent research facilities and equipment” were the most common reasons given.


73.6%

45.2%

35.1%

38.5%

19.2%

23.1%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%











Other

N=208



54



The number of responses was small, but of these the most common were “because I don’t know about the above matters” and “because I (including my family) am concerned about living in Japan or in the area of the Center.”


0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

15.8%

5.3%

31.6%

63.2%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%








character is poor



area of the Center




Center



Other

N=19




55


56



- Plan symposiums and similar events. - Strengthen publicity, advertising, and information dissemination. - Hire more young scientists and overseas scientists. - Take part in international conferences and dispatch researchers, etc., as an organization. - Set a clear vision and present it in readily understood terms. - Boost ties with overseas research organizations.


9BImmunology Frontier Research Center (IFReC)

2-5 Immunology Frontier Research Center (IFReC)



4.5%

19.6%

1.2%

3.3%

54.9%

3.0%

2.4%

2.4%

1.8%

0.6%

0.3%

4.2%

0.3%

1.2%

0.6%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%


Nanoscience

Chemistry



Stem cell biology

Biochemistry and

Biophysics


biology

Genome science

Imaging science

Immunology

Neuroscience

Clinical medicine

Other life sciences

Others

N=337


57


4.5%

0.6%

0.9%

2.4%

0.3%

3.6%

7.4%

1.8%

0.6%

5.0%

7.7%

2.7%

3.0%

0.6%

0.9%

1.2%

1.8%

0.6%

2.4%

9.5%

45.7%

4.7%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Canada

Denmark

France

Germany

India

Israel

Italy

Japan

Netherlands


Portugal

Republic of Korea

Russia

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States

Other

N=337


58


7.1%

1.2%

3.9%

7.1%

1.8%

11.3%

16.6%

2.4%

3.6%

6.5%

11.0%

4.2%

3.6%

0.6%

1.2%

2.7%

4.5%

4.2%

9.8%

24.3%

80.1%

7.7%

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0%

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Canada

Denmark

France

Germany

India

Israel

Italy

Japan

Netherlands


Portugal

Republic of Korea

Russia

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States

Other

N=337


59



Nearly half of the respondents said they did not know about the Center. The items known in order of familiarity were the director’s name, nature of the research, name of the Center, and the WPI Program. A large number of respondents knew the director’s name, and this is characteristic of this Center.

The degree of familiarity varied largely depending on the main research area of respondents.

25.8%

41.2%

31.2%

22.0%

44.2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Name of the WPI

Center

Name of the WPI

Center Director

Research of the WPI

Center

That the Japanese

government was


Program

None of the above

N=337


Center?

60



19.7%

22.7%

12.1%

10.6%

62.1%

31.9%

59.5%

44.3%

27.0%

27.0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%



Director

Research of the WPI

Center

That the Japanese

government was


Program

None of the above

Molecular and cellularbiology(N=66)

Immunology(N=185)



61




47.3%

15.4%

20.2%

12.8%

20.7%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%


paper or other


scientific journal

From a

website/pamphlet on

the WPI Program or

Center


the WPI Center



Center

Other

N=188


62




8.5%

0.0%

3.2%

88.8%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%




symposium)

Stayed at the WPI

Center for research

work

Conducted joint


Center

None of the above

N=188


63




“Level of research,” “research personnel,” and “work to pioneer new interdisciplinary research fields by bringing together various existing fields” received many “outstanding” responses.

47.2%

62.3%

58.8%

32.3%

22.8%

7.7%

3.3%

3.6%

2.1%

16.3%

44.2%

34.4%

37.7%

65.3%

56.1%

0.9%

0.0%

0.0%

0.3%

4.7%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%




Level of research

Research personnel




N=337


for each area

64



“Strongly interested” was the most frequent response to the question about joint research with the WPI Center, with that and “sounds appealing” accounting for two-thirds of the responses.

Around 20 percent of respondents indicated “don’t know.” Variation by major area of research of respondents was large.

Strongly

Interested, 36.8%

Sounds

Appealing, 30.0%

Interested, 8.9%

Not Interested,

4.5%

Don’t Know,

19.9%

N=337



18.2%

53.0%

34.8%

29.7%

10.6%

5.4%

7.6%

1.1%

28.8%

10.8%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%


biology

(N=66)

Immunology

(N=185)



research area)

65


More than half responded either “strongly interested,” “sounds appealing,” or “interested” when asked about participation in WPI Center activities.


46.9%

13.1%

13.9%

38.6%

26.7%

15.7%

27.0%

27.0%

23.1%

30.3%

31.8%

30.3%

11.3%

18.4%

19.0%

13.4%

15.1%

16.3%

22.6%

23.7%

10.1%

19.0%

20.2%

15.1%

21.7%

30.6%

4.7%

2.7%

4.7%

7.1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%



Stay at the Center

for research work?






research work?




Would you


N=337


66



“Because the level of the Center’s research is outstanding,” ”because the Center’s research is attractive,” and “because the Center’s research staffs are outstanding” were the most common reasons given.


68.6%

72.7%

56.5%

39.5%

19.9%

16.6%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%











Other

N=271



67



The number of responses was small, but of these “because I don’t know about the above matters” was the most common reason given.


3.4%

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

3.4%

0.0%

37.9%

79.3%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%








character is poor



area of the Center




Center



Other

N=29




68


69



- Plan symposiums and similar events. - Strengthen publicity, advertising, and information dissemination. - Hire more young scientists and overseas scientists. - Increase exchanges and ties with overseas research organizations and scientists. - Be active in giving presentations at international conferences and in publishing papers. - Make the research environment more global, such as by everyday use of English. - Organize information for more effective dissemination. - Even though there are individual scientists who are well known, the Center needs to become better

known as an institution.


10BInternational Center for Materials Nanoarchitectonics (MANA)

2-6 International Center for Materials Nanoarchitectonics (MANA)



18.8%

0.5%

4.2%

2.2%

1.0%

0.2%

0.5%

3.5%

0.7%

0.2%

0.5%

0.5%

2.5%

2.5%

0.2%

1.5%

26.4%

3.0%

27.9%

3.2%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%



Other physics

Quantum physics

Material science

Nanoscience

Chemistry


Electronics







Genome science

Imaging science

Clinical medicine

Other life sciences

Others

N=405


70


1.2%

0.7%

0.2%

2.7%

0.5%

4.2%

8.9%

4.2%

0.0%

3.0%

13.6%

2.2%

13.8%

0.0%

3.0%

1.7%

3.0%

0.7%

0.7%

1.7%

21.7%

16.5%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Canada

Denmark

France

Germany

India

Israel

Italy

Japan

Netherlands


Portugal

Republic of Korea

Russia

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States

Other

N=405


71


6.4%

3.5%

3.0%

8.1%

2.2%

20.7%

30.6%

5.9%

3.2%

9.1%

27.7%

7.7%

11.4%

0.7%

4.4%

4.9%

5.4%

6.7%

9.4%

17.3%

60.2%

17.0%

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0%

Australia

Austria

Belgium

Canada

Denmark

France

Germany

India

Israel

Italy

Japan

Netherlands


Portugal

Republic of Korea

Russia

Spain

Sweden

Switzerland

United Kingdom

United States

Other

N=405


72



More than half the respondents said they did not know about the Center. The most common items known were, in order, the WPI Program, the name of the Center, and the nature of the research. The director’s name was the least commonly known item.

22.5%

11.1%

16.0%

27.7%

55.3%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Name of the WPI

Center

Name of the WPI

Center Director

Research of the WPI

Center

That the Japanese

government was


Program

None of the above

N=405


Center?

73



25.7%

11.5%

22.1%

29.2%

52.2%

32.7%

18.7%

25.2%

29.0%

44.9%

11.8%

1.3%

3.9%

23.7%

68.4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%



Director

Research of the WPI

Center

That the Japanese

government was


Program

None of the above

Material science(N=113)

Nanoscience (N=107)

Chemistry(N=76)



74




33.1%

29.3%

18.8%

25.4%

14.4%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% 50%


paper or other


scientific journal

From a

website/pamphlet on

the WPI Program or

Center


the WPI Center



Center

Other

N=181


75




9.4%

0.6%

3.9%

87.8%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%




symposium)

Stayed at the WPI

Center for research

work

Conducted joint


Center

None of the above

N=181


76




“Research facilities and equipment,” “work to pioneer new interdisciplinary research fields by bringing together various existing fields,” and “level of research” received the most “outstanding” responses.

37.8%

35.1%

33.3%

41.7%

27.7%

12.8%

15.1%

15.3%

5.4%

19.8%

46.9%

49.4%

51.1%

52.8%

48.6%

4.0%

0.0%

0.2%

0.5%

2.5%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%




Level of research

Research personnel




N=405


for each area

77



“Sounds appealing” was the most frequent response to the question about joint research with the WPI Center, with that and “strongly interested” accounting for nearly two-thirds of the responses.

Strongly

Interested, 31.9%

Sounds

Appealing, 32.1%

Don’t Know,

13.1%

Not Interested,

5.7%

Interested, 17.3%

N=405



38.1%

38.3%

22.4%

34.5%

32.7%

27.6%

14.2%

17.8%

19.7%

4.4%

1.9%

10.5%

8.8%

9.3%

19.7%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Material science

(N=113)

Nanoscience

(N=107)

Chemistry

(N=76)



research area)

78




34.3%

20.7%

20.0%

32.6%

31.1%

23.2%

30.6%

29.4%

26.2%

29.1%

28.9%

29.4%

19.8%

22.0%

21.5%

21.5%

19.8%

20.0%

14.8%

17.3%

7.7%

13.1%

15.1%

11.6%

15.3%

19.8%

7.7%

5.2%

4.9%

7.7%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%



Stay at the Center

for research work?






research work?




Would you


N=405


79



“Because the Center’s research is attractive,” “because the Center has excellent research facilities and equipment,” and “because the level of the Center’s research is outstanding” were the most common reasons given.

Interest in new research fields was also indicated among the write-in answers for “other.”

69.8%

40.7%

29.7%

61.0%

31.4%

13.7%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%











Other

N=344



80


Respondents who chose “not interested” rather than “strongly interested,” “sounds appealing,” or “interested” for “stay at the center for research work” or “be a member of the Center, including dual appointment,” as activities either for their own participation in WPI Center activities or for recommending to students, colleagues, or scientist acquaintances, were asked the reason for their choice, with the following results.9

The number of responses was small, but of these “because I don’t know about the above matters” was the most common reason given.


20.7%

3.4%

0.0%

3.4%

13.8%

6.9%

41.4%

44.8%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%








character is poor



area of the Center




Center



Other

N=29




81


82



- Plan symposiums and similar events. - Strengthen publicity, advertising, and information dissemination. - Hire more young scientists and overseas scientists. - Actively participate in and give presentations at international conferences, and actively publish

papers. - Increase exchanges and ties with overseas research organizations. - Support and develop researchers by granting science awards, fellowships, etc. - Introduce uniqueness and originality into research content and directions. - Carry out long-term programs.


2-7 About the WPI Program

2-7-1 Other attractive research institutes

As an optional question, respondents were asked about other research institutes they find attractive besides the WPI Centers, and the reasons. The main opinions were as follows.11

Table 2-1 Other Attractive Research Institutes

Research Area Other Attractive Research Institutes Astronomy and Astrophysics ISAS, Max Planck Institute, The University of Tokyo, etc. Biochemistry and Biophysics RIKEN, Max Planck Institute, etc. Chemistry AIMR, AIST, Max Planck Institute, Institute for Molecular

Science, Scripps Research Institute, etc. Immunology EMBL, HHMI, La Jolla Institute for Allergy & Immunology,

RIKEN, etc. Material science NIMS, Max Planck Institute, etc. Mathematical physics CERN, KITP, Perimeter Institute, etc. Mathematics IAS, MSRI, etc. Molecular and cellular biology RIKEN, etc. Nanoscience AIST, Max Planck Institute, MIT, NIMS, RIKEN, etc. Theoretical particle/nuclear physics CERN, IAS, KEK, KITP, Perimeter Institute, Yukawa Institute,

etc.

2-7-2 Views of and advice for the WPI Program

As another optional question, respondents were asked to give their views of the WPI Program and any advice they might have. The main opinions were as follows.12

- Did not know much about the WPI Program. - More aggressive PR may be necessary. - Some excellent work going on. - Spending should be distributed to a wide range of institutions and research talent rather than being

concentrated on a few programs. - Devise ways of giving opportunities to (Japan’s) young researchers. - Proper, strict, and objective evaluation is needed. - Exchanges and ties with overseas institutions and scientists need to be expanded. - Make use of and develop young talent. - More diversity of research talent (use of female and foreign scientists, etc.) is needed. - Respect free and original thinking of researchers. - The program having just started, it is too early to evaluate. Need to wait for emergence of results

over a longer period. - Make more global, such as by using English and improving information dissemination. - Be active in giving presentations at international conferences.

11 A sampling mainly of those indicated 3 to 10 times or more (number varies depending on the research area). 12 Different views were extracted from those given by multiple respondents.

83

3 Conclusions

84

3-1 Awareness and Knowledge of the WPI Center

The number of “don’t know” responses about the WPI Centers varied from one Center to another, but was in the range of 34.4 to 65.7%. For some Centers, the name of the Center and nature of the research were better known than the director’s name, while the reverse was true for other Centers.

Knowledge of the Centers came most often from being mentioned in an academic paper or other publication, or profiled in a scientific journal. For one Center, however, “from a staff member of the WPI Center” and “from a scientist not affiliated with the WPI Center” were more common responses.

3-2 Evaluation of the WPI Center

In evaluating the WPI Centers, about half the respondents could not give an opinion, because of the large number who were not familiar with the Center itself.

Those who did give evaluations in many cases gave “outstanding” ratings. For some Centers, however, there were more “average” than “outstanding” ratings for international character and environment.

3-3 Joint Research with and Participation in the WPI Center

Regarding the desire for joint research with the WPI Center, “strongly interested” and “sounds appealing” were the most frequent responses, together making up from 69.7 to 85.2% of the total.

As for participation in WPI Center activities, “visit to collect information (e.g., participate in symposium)” was the most common activity the respondents desired for themselves or would recommend to others (students, colleagues, scientist acquaintances), followed by “stay at the Center for research work” and “be a member of the Center, including dual appointment.”

Of the activities the respondents themselves expressed a desire to participate in, the combined percentages for “strongly interested,” “sounds appealing,” and “interested” were 72.3 to 97.8% for “visit to collect information (e.g., participate in symposium),” 57.1 to 90.9% for “stay at the Center for research work,” and 54.6 to 71.5% for “be a member of the Center, including dual appointment.”

Among activities the respondents would recommend to others (students, colleagues, scientist acquaintances), the combined percentages for “strongly interested,” “sounds appealing,” and “interested” were 71.0 to 95.4% for “visit to collect information (e.g., participate in symposium),” 67.7 to 91.9% for “stay at the Center for research work,” and 59.1 to 79.6% for “be a member of the Center, including dual appointment.”

Of the reasons cited for choosing “strongly interested,” “sounds appealing,” or “interested,” the nature of the research was the most common reason for some Centers, while research level was the most common for other Centers.

Those not interested in participation gave such reasons as concern about living in Japan or in the area of the Center (including family), not being able to leave the present situation, and having a specialty outside the research areas of the Center.

3-4 Advice for the WPI Center

The following were most often given as advice on making the WPI Center a more global research center. Nearly the same kind of advice was given for all the Centers, pointing to the importance not only of research activities but of actively creating opportunities for outside exchange, disseminating information outside the Center, and developing the talents of young researchers.

- Plan symposiums and similar events. - Strengthen publicity, advertising, and information dissemination. - Promote globalization (e.g.: hold international conferences, invite and accept foreign scientists,

dispatch Japanese scientists overseas, promote international exchanges and international joint research projects, issue information in English).

- Accept, develop, and make use of outstanding young research talent.

85

86

- Increase exchanges and ties with outside research organizations and scientists, including those overseas.

3-5 Views of and Advice for the WPI Program

When asked to give their views of the WPI Program and advice, many respondents said they had not been aware of the program in the first place, while others praised the outstanding work being undertaken. In addition, much of the advice was similar to that offered for individual Centers, such as the need for more aggressive PR and for exchanges and ties with overseas institutions and scientists, and the importance of developing young research talent.

Another view offered was that research funds should be distributed to a wide range of institutions and research talent rather than being concentrated on a few programs.

Additional Data Totals for Leading Scientists Only: Awareness and Knowledge

0

Advanced Institute for Materials Research (AIMR)

83.3%

33.3%

58.3%

58.3%

8.3%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Name of the WPI

Center

Name of the WPI

Center Director

Research of the WPI

Center

That the Japanese

government was


Program

None of the above

N=12

Before receiving this questionnaire, which of the following did you know about the WPI Center?

1

Institute for the Physics and Mathematics of the Universe (IPMU)

100.0%

91.7%

100.0%

91.7%

0.0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Name of the WPI

Center

Name of the WPI

Center Director

Research of the WPI

Center

That the Japanese

government was


Program

None of the above

N=12


2

Institute for Integrated Cell-Material Sciences (iCeMS)

0.0%

0.0%

0.0%

16.7%

83.3%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Name of the WPI

Center

Name of the WPI

Center Director

Research of the WPI

Center

That the Japanese

government was


Program

None of the above

N=6


3

Immunology Frontier Research Center (IFReC)

65.0%

75.0%

55.0%

45.0%

15.0%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Name of the WPI

Center

Name of the WPI

Center Director

Research of the WPI

Center

That the Japanese

government was


Program

None of the above

N=20


4

5

International Center for Materials Nanoarchitectonics (MANA)

27.3%

18.2%

18.2%

63.6%

36.4%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

Name of the WPI

Center

Name of the WPI

Center Director

Research of the WPI

Center

That the Japanese

government was


Program

None of the above

N=11


Documents

Report on Results of the - 日本学術振興会...Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Astronomy, astrophysics and cosmology 39 2 The Astronomical Journal Astronomy,