The Gathering Storm

Fact: United States consumers spend significantly more on potato chips than the government devotes to energy R&D.

Fact: In 2000 the number of foreign students studying the physical sciences and engineering in United States graduate schools for the first time surpassed the number of United States students.

Fact: China is now second in the world in its publication of biomedical research articles, having recently surpassed Japan, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, France, Canada and Spain.

Fact: Sixty-nine percent of United States public school students in fifth through eighth grade are taught mathematics by a teacher without a degree or certificate in mathematics.

What is the state of science and engineering in the USA and what is its future? In 2005 a bipartisan committee was put together to examine America's competitiveness in the global marketplace. The original Gathering Storm report concluded that America was in jeopardy of losing its economic leadership and that its citizens would suffer a drop in their standard of living because of their inability to compete for jobs in the global marketplace. Four recommendations were made:

Move the United States K-12 education system in science and mathematics to a leading position by global standards.

Double the real federal investment in basic research in mathematics, the physical sciences, and engineering over the next seven years (while, at a minimum, maintaining the recently doubled real spending levels in the biosciences).

Encourage more United States citizens to pursue careers in mathematics, science, and engineering.

Rebuild the competitive ecosystem by introducing reforms in the nation’s tax, patent, immigration and litigation policies.

More recently, a report, called Rising Above The Gathering Storm Revisted by the National Academies examined the status of the recommendations and the efficacy of actions implemented since that 2005 report.

Here are some excerpts

Robert Solow received a Nobel Prize in economics in part for his work that indicated that well over half of the growth in United States output per hour during the first half of the twentieth century could be attributed to advancements in knowledge, particularly technology. This period was, of course, before the technology explosion that has been witnessed in recent decades. The National Academies Gathering Storm committee concluded that a primary driver of the future economy and concomitant creation of jobs will be innovation, largely derived from advances in science and engineering. While only four percent of the nation’s work force is composed of scientists and engineers, this group disproportionately creates jobs for the other 96 percent.

Thus, the Gathering Storm effort as viewed in the middle of 2010, although still enjoying strong support in the White House and in both parties in the Congress, finds itself at a tipping point. The issue at stake is whether funding to help assure that Americans can compete for quality jobs will be provided on a sustained basis. The budgetary pressures now faced by the nation make such investments extremely difficult; however, if not made the future consequences in terms of unemployment and related costs will likely be immense. In the judgment of the National Academies Gathering Storm committee, failure to support a strong competitiveness program will have dire consequences for the nation as a whole as well as for its individual citizens.

The two highest priority actions for the nation, in the view of the Gathering Storm committee, are to provide teachers in every classroom qualified to teach the subject they teach and to double the federal investment in research, the latter of which would be competitively awarded and largely conducted by the nation’s research universities as opposed to government facilities.

And their recommendations?

A.Increase America’s talent pool by vastly improving K–12 science and mathematics education.

B. Sustain and strengthen the nation’s traditional commitment to long-term basic research that has the potential to be transformational to maintain the flow of new ideas that fuel the economy, provide security, and enhance the quality of life.

C. Make the United States the most attractive setting in which to study and perform research so that we can develop, recruit, and retain the best and brightest students, scientists, and engineers from within the United States and throughout the world.

D. Make the United States the most attractive setting in which to study and perform research so that we can develop, recruit, and retain the best and brightest students, scientists, and engineers from within the United States and throughout the world.

D. Ensure that the United States is the premier place in the world to innovate; invest in downstream activities such as manufacturing and marketing; and create high-paying jobs based on innovation by such actions as modernizing the patent system, realigning tax policies to encourage innovation, and ensuring affordable broadband access.

Sound vaguely familiar? That's because their recommendations are virtually identical to the 2005 report's recommendations. Although the committee does offer some concrete ideas for Congress, I imagine so did the 2005 report. So if Obama doesn't act fast, I can't see a Palin presidency thinking that science is useful. Yes I do think it's entirely possible that she may become president. (Please please prove me wrong.)

Some of the more impressive recommendations included a 10% increase in investment over 7 years to research (with special attention to the physical sciences, math, and engineering). The establishment of new research grants of $500,000 each annually (for 5 years) to be awarded to 200 of the most outstanding early-career scientists. Federal research agencies should allocate at least 8% of a budget to funding high-risk, high-payoff research. An increased number and proportion of U.S. citizens who earn bachelor’s degrees and an increased number of U.S. citizens pursuing graduate study by funding 5,000 new graduate fellowships each year through NSF.

All well and good, but where do you think those graduate students will go after they get their PhDs? What's missing is a provision to increase money for postdoctoral fellows and money for universities to create new faculty positions. After all who is going to shoulder the burden of increased number of undergraduates and graduates?

In the end, I understand the importance of documentation and reports. But what we really need is action. Otherwise it just becomes another line on someone's CV.