The Alliance for Science & Technology Research in America

The Case for Increasing Federal R&D Spending in the Physical Sciences,

Engineering, and Mathematics

Prepared by ASTRA

for the

Council for Chemical ResearchJanuary 22, 2004

The Alliance for Science & Technology Research in America

1155 16th St., N.W. Washington, D.C. 202/872-6160

A S T R A

A S T R AAlliance for Science & Technology

Research in America

Our Story

1. Federal funding of basic research in the physical, mathematical and engineering sciences is in long-term decline

2. Under-funding creates imbalance in scientific research portfolio and disrupts academic training “pipeline” for S&T workers

3. Ripple effects spreading throughout economy, industry, academe & scientific research community


Research in America

Federal R&D As a Percentage of GDP Is in Long Term Decline ... and reached

an all-time low in 2000

Federal R&D As a Percentage of U.S. GDP

0.00%

0.50%

1.00%

1.50%

2.00%

2.50%

1953 1957 1961 1965 1969 1973 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997

Source: Science & Engineering Indicators 2002


Research in America

Why the Problem? The Federal Research Budget in Context

1. Persistent Under-funding since late 1980’s

2. Cold war “build down” left $ gap

3. Budget Deficits = no increases in R&D $

4. NIH Exception & “doubling” for some, but not all life science disciplines

5. Demographics, aging of S&T workforce


Research in America

The Impact on Society Workforce Impact

• Strong correlation between federal R&D funding and creation of technically trained workers

Innovation Impact

• 73% of the citations in U.S. industry patents are from research conducted

at federally supported institutions

Economic Growth Impact

• Approximately a dozen economic studies (including those of Nobel Laureate Robert Solow) show “technological progress” accounts for 50% of economic growth, for all time periods studied (various intervals from 1869-1979) …


Research in America

Percent Change in Federal Research Funding by Discipline 1993-1999

Source: National Research Council Trends in Federal Support of Research in Graduate Education, 2001

Note: Computer Sciences percentage growth attributable to

very small initial base


Research in America

Federal R&D Funding, by Budget Function FY’s 1980 - 2001



Research in America

QuickTime™ and aTIFF (Uncompressed) decompressorare needed to see this picture.

Source: Mayo, Bruggeman & Sargent (2002)

Student Choice of Scientific Discipline (B.S. Degrees) Follows Federal R&D Funding Patterns 1950-2000


Research in America

FY 2004: More Deficits, More Tax Cuts, But More Defense and Homeland

Security

• $1.5 trillion in tax cuts over the next decade (larger than $1.35 trillion 2001 tax cuts)

• Record budget deficits, with no return to surpluses in sight

• Budget doesn’t include all costs of war with Iraq

• $400 billion over 10 years for Medicare drug benefits

• Proposed increases for defense and homeland security

• Restraint for domestic discretionary spending


Research in America

500

550

600

650

700

750

800

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Request

Actual

Discretionary Spending FY 2000 - FY 2004, in billions of dollars

Source: Budget of the U.S. Government FY 2004. FY 2000-2003 levels are

enacted discretionary BA, including emergency appropriations. FY 2004 is President's proposal.

FEB. '03 REVISED © 2003 AAAS

DISCRETIONARY SPENDING: “Pushing on a String” for 4 years, and Now, Not Much Room for Growth,


Research in America

0

5

10

15

20

25

NIH+2.7%

DOD"S&T"

-8.3%

NASA +0.2%

DOE +4.0%

NSF +2.8%

USDA -10.3%

DHS +49.6%

FY 2002 FY 2003 FY 2004

R&D in the "Big Six" Agencies plus DHS, FY 2002 - FY 2004budget authority in billions of dollars

percentage changes '02-'04

Source: AAAS, based on OMB R&D Budget Data and agency estimates for FY 2004. DOD "S&T" = DOD R&D in "6.1" through "6.3" categories plus

medical research. FY 2003 = FY 2003 final (AAAS estimate).FEB. '03 REVISED © 2003 AAAS

Decline in R&D in the “Big Six”Agencies, FY 2002-FY 2004:

Only NIH Funding Exceeds Inflation Rate


Research in America

-20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10%

Commerce

USDA

DOD "S&T"

EPA

DOT

NASA

Interior

NIH

NSF

VA

DOE

DHS

FY 2004 R&D RequestPercent Change from FY 2003 FINAL

Source: AAAS, based on OMB R&D Budget Data and agency estimates for FY

2004. FY 2003 estimates based on final FY 2003 appropriations.DOD "S&T" = DOD R&D in "6.1" through "6.3" categories plus medical

research.FEB. '03 REVISED © 2003 AAAS

DHS =

+50%

Administration’s R&D Requests by Agency: How FY ‘04 Compares to FY ‘03


Research in America

Other FY ’04 R&D Highlights

• NIH – “Doubling” plan (almost) complete in FY ’03, FY ’04 budget of $27.9 bill. would slow growth down to 2.7%

• NSF – ‘Doubling’ authorized actual appropriation only 5.2%, growth to slow even more in ‘04

• DOE – Office of Science funding flat for four years (’01-’04) at $3.1 bill. R&D, continuing increases for defense-related R&D, mostly in the national labs

• NASA – Budget in flux because of Shuttle disaster, but declines in Space Station and aeronautics offset by large increase in Space Science and new launch technologies


Research in America

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

197619781980198219841986198819901992199419961998200020022004

NONDEF. R&D

Nondefense R&Dminus NIH

NIH

Selected Trends in Nondefense R&D, FY 1976-2004 in billions of constant FY 2003 dollars

Source: AAAS analyses of R&D in AAAS Reports VIII-

XXVIII. FY 2004 figures are President's request; FY 2003 figures are AAAS estimates of final FY 2003 appropriations.

FEB. '03 REVISED © 2003 AAAS

Big Picture: Federal Non-Defense R&D Flat in Constant Dollars Absent NIH Increases


Research in America

Dept. of Homeland Security• DHS began operations in January, consolidated existing

programs March 1• $669 million in R&D in FY ‘03, proposed to climb 50 percent

to $1.0 billion in FY ’04• In ’03, mostly transfers of existing DOD, DOE, DOT, and

USDA programs; development-oriented• Bioterrorism R&D portfolio stays in NIH; DHS will have

priority-setting role• New Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects

Agency (HSARPA) will be created in DHS on the DARPA model; funding priorities and levels unclear


Research in America

Federal R&D Funding by Discipline 1970-2003


Research in America

Imbalance in Federal Funding by Major Scientific Disciplines: 1980 - 2003


Research in America

Federal R&D Funding Health versus General Sciences 1990 - 2003


Research in America


Research in America

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

1953 1957 1961 1965 1969 1973 1977 1981 1985 1989 1993 1997 2001

Federal Government Private Industry Other

U.S. R&D Funding by Source, 1953-2002expenditures in billions of constant 2002 dollars

Source: NSF, Division of Science Resources Statistics. (Data for 2001 and 2002 are preliminary.)

FEB. '03 © 2003 AAAS

Another Part of the Problem: Industry “R&D” is Mostly “D”, Not Basic “R”


Research in America

U.S. Bachelor’s Degrees in Non-Life Sciences & Engineering Continue

Long Term Decline 1975-1998

-

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

1975 1979 1983 1987 1991 1994 1996 1998

Life SciencesIncrease of 21%Peak Year = 1998

Engineering Decrease of 21%Peak Year = 1985

Computer Sciences Decrease of 30%Peak Year = 1987

Physical andGeosciencesDecrease of 19%Peak Year = 1981

MathematicsDecrease of 34%Peak Year = 1975



Research in America

Global Context: Natural Sciences and Engineering Doctoral Degrees 1975-2000:

U.S. Stagnant, Europe and Asia Surge



Research in America

Total Degrees v. High-tech Degrees

1,781,956

1,828,486

1,927,504

1,982,030

2,033,402

2,130,162

2,170,961

2,209,382

211,556

204,698

202,556

206,470

206,237

204,853

200,763

207,056

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

High-Tech GraduatesTotal Graduates

While the number of degrees earned since 1990 has increased 24%,While the number of degrees earned since 1990 has increased 24%, the number of high tech degrees earned since 1990 has declined 2%the number of high tech degrees earned since 1990 has declined 2%

Source: U.S. Dept. of EducationNational Center for Education Statistics 1998


Research in America

Global Competitiveness: WorkforceU.S. Lags Other Nations in Share of 24-year-olds

With Natural Science, Engineering Degrees

SOURCE: National Science Foundation, Science and Engineering Indicators 2000


Research in America

The Asian Century Begins?


Research in America

Engineering & Science Degreesas a % of All Bachelor Degrees


Research in America


Research in America

Engineering Degree Production & Theorized U.S. Labor Demand through 2010


Research in America

Why ASTRA? The Alliance for Science & Technology

Research in America

Because It’s Time for an Advocacy & Research Organization for the Physical Sciences, Math and

Engineering Disciplines

A S T R AASTRA was Established in May, 2001 and is now tax exempt

under IRS Code 501(C)(3)


Research in America

Why CCR & ASTRA?

• Trend is Clear, if not us, WHO? …• Opportunity to Alter the Future• Working with small core of Key

Technology/S&T Companies• Need Aerospace Participation• Role on ASTRA Interim Board &

Future Advisory Committee


Research in America

ASTRA Industry Players

AgilentDuPontGeneral AtomicsGeneral ElectricGeneral MotorsIBM IntelLucentHewlett-PackardRockwell CollinsTexas Instruments


Research in America

ASTRA Key Accomplishments 2002 - 2004

• Creation of Cross-cutting, Cross-Organizational Entity which EMPOWERS OTHERS to make the case

• ASTRA = Collaboration, NOT a Bureaucracy• NSF Doubling Initiative 2002• DOE Office of Science “Doubling” Begins 2003• Mobilizing to save ATP Program a success 2003• Working with OSTP, PCAST, GUIRR and others to Get

Messages Across 2002• State R&D Sheets are harbinger of more targeted

research series 2001 …• Formation of Agency Budget Task Forces to determine

“how much & why” increases needed 2003• Industry-led group begins Aggressive Advocacy

Campaign for FY ’2004


Research in America

A New Sort of Collaboration Within the S&T Community

• Research & Advocacy• Shared Information, testimony, visits• Primary Policy Research• “Data Mining” of what already exists• Congressional & Administration Advocacy• Sign-on Letters & Mobilization• Educational Events & Seminars• Rapid communication within S&T groups• Coalition Participation and Coordination

ASTRA Initiatives Include:


Research in America

State R&D Fact Sheets


Research in America

DOE Office of Science State Fact Sheets

ASTRA supports new legislation —for example, the “Biggert Bill” or H.R. 238 — to “double” DOE Office of Science spending on engineering, mathematics and physical science research over 5 year period …


Research in America

Supplementing Activities of Others …

ASTRA Members like GE, Hewlett-Packard, IBM & Lucent paid for this ad in Roll Call, a newspaper focused on Congress.

ASTRA uses its network of “friends” to add a number of names to the sign-on letters (<24 hr. turnaround)


Research in America

ASTRA Advocacy: Collaborative Efforts Helped NSF “Doubling” Initiative Gain Momentum Through Effective Grassroots Advocacy & Policy Research in Congress …

Above: House Science Committee Chairman Sherwood L. Boehlert (R-NY) and bipartisan group hold press conference announcing NSF “Doubling” Initiative on May 7, 2002. ASTRA’s Dr. Mary Good, ASTRA Chairman and David Peyton, ASTRA Vice Chairman, flank Rep. Boehlert, Committee Members, and

representatives of key science organizations.


Research in America

ASTRA Advocacy: Collaborative Efforts Helped NSF “Doubling” Initiative Gain Momentum Through Effective Grassroots Advocacy & Policy Research in Congress

HOWEVER … “Authorization” is one thing, achieving “Appropriations” funding goals is another …

Consider: Looming budget deficits, economic uncertainty and international instability will make it very difficult to make headway in a climate of fiscal austerity in the foreseeable future ...

President Bush greets Rep. Nick Smith, Chairman of the House Science Committee’s Subcommittee on Research following December 19, 2002 White House signing ceremony for the NSF “Doubling” bill.


Research in America

Making a Case Within the Administration …

Example:

President’s Council of Advisors on Science & Technology (PCAST) Final Report recommends increased funding for engineering, physical sciences and mathematics over long term following several meetings in which ASTRA and member organizations presented persuasive testimony …

Important for OMB and FY2004 & 05 Budget Process


Research in America

ASTRA’s Testimony: Making Our Case Before Congress and The Administration

General Electric’s Sr. VP for Global Research, Scott Donnelly

Testifies on ASTRA’s behalf before the Research Subcommittee of the House Science Committee on March 13, 2002


Research in America

“Friends of ASTRA” List Serve

• List serves about 3,400 individuals + media

• Frequency is about 5-10 e-mails/month

• Covers topics of community interest. Examples are: – how to nominate someone for the National Medal of

Technology– where to send letters of support (or non-support) to

Senate Committees on behalf of nominees awaiting confirmation

– current status of federal R&D funding for the next fiscal year, and legislative status

– significant bills introduced (e.g., Tech Talent Bill) & status– new research & policy reports worth note– links to ASTRA & other Web Sites– clearinghouse for other coalitions


Research in America

ASTRA’s New Web Site is Linking the S&T Community with Policy Makers and Many More Individuals Throughout the World …

www.aboutastra.org


Research in America

Mark Your Calendar for the...

9th Annual SETCongressional Visits Day

March 3 - 4, 2004Core Message : Federally funded research promotes security,

prosperity and innovation.

To learn more about Congressional Visits Day 2003, visit the 2003 CVD home page.

What is Congressional Visits Day (CVD)? The CVD is a two-day annual event that brings scientists, engineers, researchers, educators, and technology executives to Washington to raise visibility and support for science, engineering, and technology. Uniquely multi-sector and multi-disciplinary, the CVD is coordinated by coalitions of companies, professional societies and educational institutions. It is open to all people who believe that science and technology comprise the cornerstone of our Nation's future. Objective .. . to underscore the long-term importance of science, engineering, and technology to the Nation through meetings with congressional decision-makers.Participants . . . members of the Science-Engineering-Technology Work Group and other colleagues in the science and technology enterprise. Organizers … The Science-Engineering-Technology Work Group is an information network comprising professional, scientific, and engineering societies, higher education associations, institutions of higher learning, and trade associations. The Work Group is concerned about the future vitality of the U.S. science, mathematics, and engineering enterprise. Contacts: Debbie Rudolph (Phone 202-530-8332, Fax 202-785-0835, E-Mail [email protected]) and Kevin Marvel (Phone 202-328-2010, Fax 202-235-2560, E-Mail [email protected]).


Research in America

ASTRA can assist in many ways: for example, helping with graphics and research for the 9th Annual Congressional Visits Day 2004 event.


Research in America

ASTRA can assist in many ways: for example, helping with graphics and research for the 8th Annual Congressional Visits Day 2003 event.

ASTRA has prepared 51 State R&D Fact Sheets as Hill Visit “leave behinds.”


Research in America

Conclusions1. If no effective advocacy, federal R&D will continue to be

INADEQUATE and DISPROPORTIONATE to the actual needs

2. If R&D funding from the government is lacking or mis-invested, the technology pool suffers

3. With less support going to the physical sciences,

mathematics and engineering, industry cannot leverage its own resources with universities

4. Combination of these factors above results in current threat to U.S. economic prosperity, competitiveness and the National Security


Research in America

Something to Ponder …

“If there are not enough trained people in the U.S., corporations will have to move R&D operations to where the trained people are. The pilot plant follows, because you need the R&D people nearby to help make it work. The manufacturing plant follows the pilot plant. Distribution, sales, and management follow the manufacturing. Once this process is started, it is not reversible.

Corporations may not like it but they will survive if there is no R&D in the U.S. They will just go overseas. The U.S. economy, however, will not recover from the loss of this business.”

– Quoted with permission from Bill Joyce, CEO of Hercules

and previously CEO of Union Carbide

Documents

The Alliance for Science & Technology Research in America