The United States faces a new challengeâ€"maintaining the vitality of its system for supporting science and technology despite fiscal stringency during the next several years. To address this change, the Senate Appropriations Committee requested a report from the National Academies of Sciences and Engineering and the Institute of Medicine to address "the criteria that should be used in judging the appropriate allocation of funds to research and development activities; to examine the appropriate balance among different types of institutions that conduct such research; and to look at the means of assuring continued objectivity in the allocation process." In this eagerly-awaited book, a committee of experts selected by the National Academies and the Institute responds with 13 recommendations that propose a new budgeting process and formulates a series of questions to address during that process. The committee also makes corollary recommendations about merit review, government oversight, linking research and development to government missions, the synergy between research and education, and other topics. The recommendations are aimed at rooting out obsolete and inadequate activities to free resources from good programs for even better ones, in the belief that "science and technology will be at least as important in the future as they have been in the past in dealing with problems that confront the nation." The authoring committee of this book was chaired by Frank Press, former President of the National Academy of Sciences (1981-1993) and Presidential Science and Technology Advisor (1977-1981).

The internationally recognised methodology for collecting and using R&D statistics, the OECD's Frascati Manual is an essential tool for statisticians and science and innovation policy makers worldwide. It includes definitions of basic concepts, data collection guidelines, and classifications ...

The past 50 years have witnessed a revolution in computing and related communications technologies. The contributions of industry and university researchers to this revolution are manifest; less widely recognized is the major role the federal government played in launching the computing revolution and sustaining its momentum. Funding a Revolution examines the history of computing since World War II to elucidate the federal government's role in funding computing research, supporting the education of computer scientists and engineers, and equipping university research labs. It reviews the economic rationale for government support of research, characterizes federal support for computing research, and summarizes key historical advances in which government-sponsored research played an important role. Funding a Revolution contains a series of case studies in relational databases, the Internet, theoretical computer science, artificial intelligence, and virtual reality that demonstrate the complex interactions among government, universities, and industry that have driven the field. It offers a series of lessons that identify factors contributing to the success of the nation's computing enterprise and the government's role within it.

Perceptions that the pace of new-drug development has slowed and that the pharmaceutical industry is highly profitable have sparked concerns that significant problems loom for future drug development. This Congressional Budget Office (CBO) study-prepared at the request of the Senate Majority Leader-reviews basic facts about the drug industry's recent spending on research and development (R&D) and its output of new drugs. The study also examines issues relating to the costs of R&D, the federal government's role in pharmaceutical research, the performance of the pharmaceutical industry in developing innovative drugs, and the role of expected profits in private firms' decisions about investing in drug R&D. In keeping with CBO's mandate to provide objective, impartial analysis, the study makes no recommendations. David H. Austin prepared this report under the supervision of Joseph Kile and David Moore. Colin Baker provided valuable consultation...

The science and engineering enterprise has continued to evolve, responding over the last decade to increased economic globalization, a post-cold war military, federal budget fluctuations, and structural changes in the way science and engineering are conducted and innovations are adopted. This report suggests ways to revise the data collection activities of the Science Resources Studies Division (SRS) of the National Science Foundation to better capture the current realities of R&D funding and S&E human resources. The report's recommendations would improve the relevance of the data on graduate education, the labor market for scientists and engineers, and the funding and conduct of research and development, and thus better meet the data needs of policymakers, managers, and researchers.