25 



Vt/ PREFACE 



ments in research and development. By any measure, these investments have been 

 recouped many times over in contributing to a strong and globally competitive U.S. 

 economy, hastening the end of the Cold War, providing continuing national security' 

 against new enemies, advancing the fight against disease, improving our environ- 

 ment, and producing revelations about ourselves, our world, and our cosmos. 

 Change comes in acknowledging that the federal research and development enter- 

 prise must adapt to a new world. The Cold War is over. Global competition is both 

 economic and military, involving many more nations than did the past bipolar 

 confrontation of nuclear superpowers. These problems create opportunities. In- 

 deed, science and technolog>' will be even more important in the future than the}' 

 are today. Change is also reflected in the ver\' doing of science, as computers and 

 high-speed communication networks expand access to databases and facilities 

 throughout the world and enable daily collaboration among scientists and engineers 

 separated by great distances. 



Over time, institutions and programs have been created that no longer serve 

 us well. Even good programs and institutions must give way to successors that are 

 better and are more closely linked to new national needs. These are painful mes- 

 sages. Some of the committee's members have built their professional lives through 

 programs and institutions that may not survive application of the principles the 

 committee proposes for judging future expenditures. At the same time, the commit- 

 tee believes strongly that failure to make these choices will prove costly, serving 

 neither the nation nor the scientific communir>-. That said, the committee appreci- 

 ates that its principles for judging programs and institutions are, by necessity-, gen- 

 eral and must be given more specificity when applied to particular programs and 

 institutions. As a practical matter, the committee did not offer specific details for 

 implementing the judgments that must be made. The committee believes that those 

 who must make the decisions and execute them should be given the latitude to 

 apply these principles sensibly. 



The report is short, and deliberately so. Part 1 offers the committee's recom- 

 mendations, with sufficient elaboration to enable readers to understand them. The 

 four supplements included in Pan II give details underlying the recommendations. 

 These supplements are not mere appendixes, but provide background critical to 

 understanding this brief report. For example, Supplement 2 shows how the com- 

 mittee derived a new budget index it calls federal science and technology' (FS&T). 

 The committee believes that these federal funds best defme the public investment in 

 the science and technology base that is essential for maintaining U.S. health, pros- 

 perity, and security. 



In addition to the facts and analyses provided in the supplements, the commit- 

 tee relied on other means for arriving at its judgments, including more than 35 

 letters received from individuals in leadership positions in industr\', academia, and 

 scientific societies; a number of outreach meetings held around the country'; several 

 commissioned papers; communications through an Internet home page; briefings 

 by senior goverrunent officials whose agencies are collectively responsible for most 

 of the federal research and development budget; and discussions with many indi- 

 viduals in the Administration and Congress. The committee is grateful to all who 

 took the time to provide assistance and in doing so not only tutored us, but also 

 showed their concern for the future of the U.S. research and development enter- 



