45 



20 / IMPROVING THE ALLOCATION PROCESS 



RECOMMENDATION 7. FS&T funding should generally favor 

 academic institutions because of their flexibility and inherent 

 quality control, and because they directly link research to educa- 

 tion and training in science and engineering. 



A distinctive feature underlying the excellence of the U.S. research and devel- 

 opment system is the substantial reliance on university-based research (constituting 

 nearly one-third of the FS&T budget for 1994; see Supplement 2). Most of that 

 support is in the form of grants (or grant-like agreements) that support projects 

 initiated by academic researchers and are awarded according to highly competitive 

 merit review. Conducting FS&T at academic institutions has several major benefits: 



• It takes advantage of the originality and creativity that students — and their 

 faculr>' advisors — bring to research; 



• It produces exceptionally well prepared scientists and engineers who not 

 only will be the next generation of faculty, but also will work productively in, and 

 transfer technology' to, industry' and government; 



• It allows for easy adjustment of the funding levels in a field because the 

 funding commitment is for a specific project of limited duration; 



• It uses merit review to promote the highest quality of work regardless of 

 overall funding levels; 



• It draws on academia's own system of reward and recognition, which helps 

 ensure the high quality of the researchers applying for federal grants and keeps 

 them motivated; 



• It promotes rapid dissemination of new ideas through the tradition of open 

 publishing and interchange among scholars in academic research (although such 

 interchange is recognized as not being appropriate for classified research); 



• It makes research results and expertise widely available to many individuals 

 and private firms, but allows for retention of intellectual property rights to promote 

 commercialization;-"' and 



• It builds on well-established and successful collaborations between v.njversi- 

 ties and industry- and between universities and federal laboratories. 



The committee does not presume that academic research is always of higher 

 qualir\- than that conducted in industry, federal laboratories, or other nonacudemic 

 institutions. The committee believes, however, that for most federal science and 

 engineering projects, the distinctive features noted above support a general prefer- 

 ence for academic over nonacademic institutions. 



Although academic institutions offer many advantages, they can also benefit 

 from a strengthening of their abilities to respond to evolving research opportunities, 

 to maintain emphasis on their educational mission, and to reduce overall costs. For 

 example, the organization of most universities into disciplinary' departments can 

 make trul\' interdisciplinary work difficult to conduct and manage. Projects that 

 require collaboration across units within a university- — between organic chemists in 

 a chemistr>' department and pharmacologists in a medical school, for example— can 



