ERROR 1
ERROR 1
ERROR 2
ERROR 2
ERROR 2
ERROR 2
ERROR 2
Password and Confirm password must match.
If you have an ACS member number, please enter it here so we can link this account to your membership. (optional)
ERROR 2
ACS values your privacy. By submitting your information, you are gaining access to C&EN and subscribing to our weekly newsletter. We use the information you provide to make your reading experience better, and we will never sell your data to third party members.
International research collaborations between scientists and engineers are a benefit to both the science community and society at large, but these relationships can be complicated by government policies developed during very different sociopolitical times. To study how these policies might be impacting collaborations, the National Science Board (NSB), the governing body of the National Science Foundation, has set up a Task Force on International Science.
The task force held its first meeting on May 11 in Washington, D.C. The daylong hearing and roundtable discussion included representatives from federal agencies, nongovernmental organizations, non-U.S. science organizations, and other groups that have experience with international science partnerships. The goal of the meeting was to reach a better understanding of the role that the U.S. government can play in fostering—or hampering—such partnerships.
Currently, each federal agency handles international partnerships in its own way, the agency representatives noted. For example, Al Condes, deputy assistant administrator for external relations at the National Aeronautics & Space Administration, told the task force that his agency typically sets up collaborative agreements on a "no exchange of funds" basis.
Other agencies, however, such as the National Institutes of Health, can award research grants directly to foreign scientists performing research outside the U.S., according to Sharon Hrynkow, acting director of the Fogarty International Center at NIH.
International partnerships can also be set up through nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Representatives from several NGOs noted that because they are not part of the government, they have less red tape to deal with and are often an attractive alternative for foreign partners who may not want to deal with the U.S. government for political or other reasons.
Without the necessary financial support, however, these partnerships cannot succeed, participants agreed. Not having dedicated funding for science and technology internationally is a huge problem for building science partnerships, noted Norman Neureiter, director of the Center for Science, Technology & Security Policy at the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS).
Not unique to the U.S., the funding issue was raised by representatives from non-U.S. groups, too. "There is a disconnect between the goals set out in our policies and the tools we give ourselves to implement them," explained Alessandro Damiani, head of the Office of Science, Technology & Education of the European Commission in Washington, D.C. "We say collaborations are important, but we don't put the money there," he said.
An important issue raised at the meeting is the role the U.S. has taken in many past partnerships, where the U.S. has tended to carry the lion's share of responsibility for the entire collaboration. Policymakers, as a result, may be wary of partnerships because of the one-sided U.S. support. Damiani noted, however, that both countries in a partnership should provide the resources to support their part and that the support typically ends up staying in the home country.
Hratch G. Semerjian, deputy director at the National Institute of Standards & Technology, cautioned that partnerships should not be viewed as cutting into the U.S.'s competitiveness. Instead, he explained, helping other economies through science partnerships will increase our competitiveness because "building those economies means new markets for the U.S. in the long run."
In addition to discussing logistics, the task force heard about the nonscience benefits of these partnerships. For example, AAAS's Neureiter said that scientific partnerships are a "tremendous instrument for foreign policy." He added that it is important to ensure that these partnerships are recognized as diplomatic tools by policymakers.
Kristin M. Lord, special adviser to the undersecretary for democracy and global affairs at the State Department, underscored Neureiter's point that scientific partnerships have diplomacy value by citing the recent launch of the Iraqi Virtual Library (C&EN, May 8, page 12). Lord and other meeting participants noted that the Iraqi program is a partnership among State, the Department of Defense, AAAS's fellowship program, and the National Academies. The partnership played an important diplomatic role, she explained, because the library cost only a small amount to start up but yielded invaluable press coverage across the Middle East.
Several meeting participants also pointed out that as the number of international partnerships increases and they become more complex, there is a need for an overarching U.S. policy on collaborations to help the science community.
John P. Boright, executive director of the Office of International Affairs at the National Academy of Sciences, explained that science policy is needed to deal with issues such as data ownership and intellectual property protections stemming from international collaborations. He added that NSF is in a great position to play a key role in setting this type of policy.
NSB plans to hold additional meetings on partnership policies in Europe and Asia within the next 12 months to gather more information. A final report on the subject will build on a 2001 NSB report on the same topic (C&EN, Nov. 26, 2001, page 8) and is expected within the next year and a half.
Join the conversation
Contact the reporter
Submit a Letter to the Editor for publication
Engage with us on Twitter