There’s an interesting article by Sallie Baliunas at Tech Central Station today on research funding. The piece notes a recent Nature article that suggests scientific misbehavior might be linked to “perceptions of inequities in the [science] resource distribution process” and connects that with tendency among federal funding agencies to shift emphasis from basic to applied research.

Since 1970, total federal non-medical research spending as a fraction of Gross Domestic Product has declined by about one-third. No formal history has tracked research misbehavior, leaving it impossible to say if ongoing stresses on budget allocation systems would partly explain current misbehavior.
Continual budget pressures, though, are transforming U.S. research and development. Funding agencies now weigh more heavily a proposal’s aim toward practical applications, especially those with near-term payoff.

The rest of the article focuses on this trend, citing as an example PITAC’s 1999 report “Investing in our Future” that noted that federal funding in computing research was “excessively focused on near-term problems” (a problem that persists) and providing examples of the sort of serendipitous discovery that doesn’t occur in that environment.
Though I’m not sure what to make of the linkage between this change in focus and scientific misbehavior, the article’s point on the real cost of the push towards applied research is well-taken. “Questions of how funding is distributed are as critical as how much funding.”
Here’s the whole thing.

 

[Back from vacation. Blogging resumes...]
The Administration has released its annual guidance (pdf) to Federal agencies instructing them on the areas of research and development they should make priorities in their forthcoming FY 2007 budget requests to the White House. The memo, a joint production of the White House Office of Science and Technology and budget gatekeepers, the Office of Management and Budget, “provides general guidance for setting priorities among R&D programs, interagency R&D efforts that should receive special focus in agency budget requests, and reiteration of the R&D Investment Criteria that agencies should use to improve investment decisions for and management of their R&D programs.”
As it was last year, High End Computing and Networking R&D remains a priority for the Adminstration, even at the expense of other items within the Networking and Information Technology R&D portfolio. HEC joins Homeland Security R&D, the National Nanotechnology Initiative, Priorities in the Physical Sciences, Understanding Complex Biological Systems, and Energy and Environment as focal points in the Administration’s R&D portfolio. Here’s the relevant language from the computing section:

While the importance of each of the Networking and Information Technology R&D (NITRD) program areas continues, investments in high-end computing and cyber infrastructure R&D should be given higher relative priority due to their potential for broad impact. Agency plans in high-end computing must be consistent with the 2004 Federal Plan for High-End Computing and should aggressively focus on supercomputing capability, capacity and accessibility issues by emphasizing coordination, leveraging the efforts of all agencies and, where appropriate, use of coordinated multi-agency investments. Advanced networking research (including test-beds) on hardware and software for secure, reliable, distributed computing environments and tools that provide the communication, analysis and sharing of very large amounts of information will accelerate discovery and enable new technological advances. Agency requests should reflect these program priorities by reallocating funds from lower priority efforts. Agencies supporting R&D in these and all NITRD areas are expected to participate in interagency planning through the NSTC to guide future investments. Reflecting the importance of cyber security, agencies should continue to work through the NSTC to generate a detailed gap analysis of R&D funding in this area.

Even though the FY 2006 budget process is still unsettled, this memo gives a good peek at the Administration’s thinking for FY 2007. Not surprisingly, the memo implies that next year’s budget will likely be as flat as this year, noting that

Agencies may propose new, high-priority activities, but these requests should identify potential offsets by elimination or reductions in less effective or lower priority programs or programs where Federal involvement is no longer needed or appropriate.

So, it will again be critically important that the computing community work with agencies to make sure that the right priorities are struck in this zero-sum game….

 

CRA Bulletin Now a Blog

For several years now CRA has sent anyone who was interested an electronic bulletin containing links to items of interest to the computing research community. While the content was always useful, the desire to aggregate links and not bombard subscribers with e-mail after e-mail meant that we’d let the bulletin ripen until we’d accumulated enough entries to make it worthwhile to send out. This had the disadvantage of making things a little less-than-timely. So it was time to evolve the format.
Behold, the new CRA Bulletin, now a blog complete with RSS feed for easy subscribing. CRA’s Jay Vegso is the curator of the blog. Here’s his description for the blog’s function:

The focus of the bulletin will be student/faculty demographic, workforce, and R&D information. My intention is to create a source for reliable information, like footnotes, rather than ‘breaking news’ or editorials. Rather than deal with large reports in a single entry, individual graphs or issues will be given their own entries. For example, Science & Engineering Indicators might have 10 entries, viewable by clicking on the S&E Indicators ‘category’ in the right-side menu.

Expect frequent cross-links from here to there as Jay comes across more juicy morsels to post. There’s already plenty of good content there, like Growth Among Computer/Math Sciences Workforce in the late 1990s, NSF Reports on Academic R&D Expenditures for FY 2002, Close to 40% of Those Employed in Computer and Math Science Occupations Do Not Have a B.S. Degree, and a whole lot more.