30 



My written testimony provides specific examples to illustrate ad- 

 vances or potential in these areas. In the remainder of my oral 

 presentation I would like, though, to concentrate my remarks on 

 the efforts outside the United States and what the United States 

 needs to do to remain competitive. 



Few people would argue against the vast potential of marine bio- 

 technology. The opportunities that exist, though, will not be real- 

 ized if the field continues to be so woefully underfunded in the 

 United States. 



For example, biotechnology is by far the largest interagency ini- 

 tiative in the Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineer- 

 ing, and Technology process at more than $4 billion in the Presi- 

 dent's budget request for fiscal year 1994. However, marine bio- 

 technology is a neglected stepchild in this process. Only about 1 

 percent of this initiative is for marine biotechnology research at 

 universities and public research centers where the greatest ad- 

 vances are being made. 



Total funding has been virtually flat since 1988. The lack of at- 

 tention in the United States stands in sharp contrast with the high 

 level of interest being shown in other countries. Japan, in particu- 

 lar, has embarked on a forward looking investment strategy in 

 which industry and government have agreed to provide nearly !£200 

 million for marine biotechnology in a decade-long program under 

 the auspices of the Ministry of International Trade and Industry, 

 MITI. It is this commitment that serves as a particular example of 

 why we need to increase considerably U.S. efforts. 



I received in the mail several weeks ago a 130-page report from 

 the Marine Biotechnology Institute, the public-private enterprise 

 initiated by MITI that I have alluded to. This institute includes 

 two centers that have been built and equipped with an approxi- 

 mate startup cost of $50 million. Each center includes a 50,000- 

 square-foot building that is filled with the most advanced equip- 

 ment. The institute also has a 3,200-ton research vessel. 



Sixty scientists are working at the institute, most on loan from 

 the 24 investing companies in the institute. And who are these in- 

 vesting companies? They include familiar names like Asahi, 

 Fujitsu, Kawasaki, Kirin, Shisheido, and Suntory. The annual 

 budget — over $20 million to tackle projects that include discovering 

 chemicals from marine organisms to bioremediation. 



In addition to this one focused initiative, it is estimated that 

 Japan spends between $900 million and $1 billion per year in ma- 

 rine biotechnology. We are seeing similarly strong commitments 

 throughout the Pacific Rim, many of which are based on tech- 

 nologies pioneered in the United States. While the United States 

 is currently a world leader in marine biotechnology we will not re- 

 tain this lead for long if we fail to respond to the competitive chal- 

 lenge we face. The United States simply cannot expect to survive 

 in the global economy if we consistently allow foreign competitors 

 to capitalize on technologies that the U.S. taxpayer has funded. 



It is essential to promote mechanisms for technology transfer, to- 

 gether with partnerships between industry, academia, and the Gov- 

 ernment to enable U.S. firms to bring products to the marketplace 

 that are made possible through marine biotechnology. 



