The Returns to Publicly Funded R&D focuses on the returns to U.S. public-sector investments in R&D and the accompanying new empirical analysis relates specifically to the returns to public-sector R&D expenditures in U.S. Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs). One motivation for studying the rates of return to public-sector R&D is the paucity of existing literature on the topic. However, there are two other important motivations for studying the rates of returns to public-sector R&D: a public accountability motivation and a mandated public policy motivation. Although the analysis of investments in R&D in FFRDCs presented herein is econometrics based, there is however a frequently overlooked program evaluation literature that also offers insight into the rates of returns to public-sector R&D. Examples of the program evaluation literature is presented in Section 3 for completeness as well as to illustrate a broader rate of return concept than that presented in the econometrics-based literature. U.S. legislative actions to increase publicly funded R&D in support of private-sector R&D are discussed in Section 4. For the purpose of providing context, a brief history of FFRDCs in the United States is presented in Section 5. FFRDCs have surprisingly been an overlooked element of the public-sector ecosystem that supports public-sector research. An empirical analysis of U.S. public-sector R&D expenditures in FFRDCs, and the associated scientific publications, is presented and discussed in Section 6. Concluding observations about the themes discussed throughout this monograph are offered in Section 7.

The Defense Science Board FFRDC & UARC Independent Advisory Task Force was established in November 1995 to provide advice on DoD's management of its 11 Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDC) and 6 University Affiliated Research Centers (UARC).' The Task Force is charged with reviewing and advising the Department on: the objectives and guidelines for appropriate scope of work, organizational structure, and size of the FFRDCs and UARCs; compliance with the annual DoD Management Plan; the sponsor's management processes; the level and appropriateness of non-DoD work; and the thoroughness of the FFRDC five-year review process. The Task Force will also periodically review selected FFRDC and UARC programs and conduct an independent semi-annual review of progress against recommendations. This report is limited to FFRDCs. The UARC review will be conducted in the fall of 1996 and the report published in the first half of 1997. This is the initial report of the Task Force. The findings and recommendations in this report are the unanimous conclusions of the Members of the Task Force.

National Patterns of R&D Resources is an annual report issued by the National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics (NCSES) of the National Science Foundation, which provides a national view of current 'patterns' in funding of R&D activities in government, industry, academia, federally funded research and development centers, and non-profits. Total R&D funds are broken out at the national level by type of provider, type of recipient, and whether the R&D is basic, applied, or developmental. These patterns are compared both longitudinally versus historical R&D amounts, and internationally. This report series, which is based on input from several censuses and surveys, is used to formulate policies that, e.g., might increase incentives to support different types, sources, or recipients of R&D than is currently the case. To communicate these R&D patterns, each report is composed of a set of tabulations of national R&D disaggregated by type of donor, type of recipient, and type of R&D. While this satisfies many key user groups, the question was whether some modifications of the report could attract a wider user community and at the same time provide more useful information for current users. National Patterns of R&D Resources: Future Directions for Content and Methods addresses the following questions: (1) what additional topics and tabulations could be presented without modifying the current portfolio of R&D censuses and surveys, (2) what additional topics and tabulations might be presented by expanding these current data collections, (3) what could be done to enhance international comparability of the tabulations, (4) since much of the information on non-profit R&D providers and recipients is estimated from 15 year-old data, what impact might this be having on the quality of the associated National Patterns tabulations, (5) what statistical models could be used to support the issuance R&D estimates at state-level and geographic regions below the national level, (6) what use could be made from the recent development of administrative sources of R&D information, and finally, (7) what graphical tools could be added to the current tabulations to enhance the communication of R&D patterns to the users of this series of publications.