National Research Funding Levels

This volume explores the scientific frontiers and leading edges of research across the fields of anthropology, economics, political science, psychology, sociology, history, business, education, geography, law, and psychiatry, as well as the newer, more specialized areas of artificial intelligence, child development, cognitive science, communications, demography, linguistics, and management and decision science. It includes recommendations concerning new resources, facilities, and programs that may be needed over the next several years to ensure rapid progress and provide a high level of returns to basic research.

The past half-century has witnessed a dramatic increase in the scale and complexity of scientific research. The growing scale of science has been accompanied by a shift toward collaborative research, referred to as "team science." Scientific research is increasingly conducted by small teams and larger groups rather than individual investigators, but the challenges of collaboration can slow these teams' progress in achieving their scientific goals. How does a team-based approach work, and how can universities and research institutions support teams? Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science synthesizes and integrates the available research to provide guidance on assembling the science team; leadership, education and professional development for science teams and groups. It also examines institutional and organizational structures and policies to support science teams and identifies areas where further research is needed to help science teams and groups achieve their scientific and translational goals. This report offers major public policy recommendations for science research agencies and policymakers, as well as recommendations for individual scientists, disciplinary associations, and research universities. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Team Science will be of interest to university research administrators, team science leaders, science faculty, and graduate and postdoctoral students.

The Board on Science, Technology and Economic Policy updated its 1999 analysis (Appendix A, Securing America's Industrial Strength, 1999) of changes since 1990 in the distribution of federal research funding by field of science and engineering) by incorporating FY 1998 and FY 1999 obligations from the NSF Federal Funds survey, with particular attention to the trends in basic research support, changes in research fields' relative dependence on research-sponsoring agencies, and the relationship between changes in research support and changes in enrollment in graduate training in selected fields of research. The Board did not recommend funding levels for any discipline but addressed procedural aspects of R&D budgeting.

A rising median age at which PhD's receive their first research grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) is among the factors forcing academic biomedical researchers to spend longer periods of time before they can set their own research directions and establish there independence. The fear that promising prospective scientists will choose other career paths has raised concerns about the future of biomedical research in the United States. At the request of NIH, the National Academies conducted a study on ways to address these issues. The report recommends that NIH make fostering independence of biomedical researchers an agencywide goal, and that it take steps to provide postdocs and early-career investigators with more financial support for their own research, improve postdoc mentoring and establish programs for new investigators and staff scientists among other mechanisms.