Susan Morrissey

NSF'S CHEMICAL BONDING CENTERS: New centers fund collaborative work on largescale, high-risk chemical problems

THE TRADITIONAL PEER REVIEW system used by the National Science Foundation and other federal agencies to evaluate research grant proposals has proven to be a good way of ensuring that the best projects get funded. The more proof-of-concept experiments that a researcher can include in his or her proposal, the more likely it will be scored well in this system. As a result, more conservative, lower risk proposals are perceived to have an advantage. Some scientists worry that this characteristic of the peer review system could lead to missed opportunities to make big strides in science. This concern has not fallen on deaf ears at NSFs Division of Chemistry. The division has launched a new initiative called the Chemical Bonding Centers (CBC) program that is designed to target highly innovative research. The program encourages researchers to tackle large-scale, high-risk problems in chemistry through collaborative groups of scientists and engineers from around the ...

Obama Pledges Support For R&D

President Barack Obama last week released his fiscal 2014 federal budget request. The plan was nearly 10 weeks late and did not include budget numbers from fiscal 2013 for comparison—a handicap for the throngs of people who analyze each year’s numbers for Congress, advocacy groups, and other stakeholders. But the President’s request continues a commitment to strong investment in R&D at agencies that conduct and/or fund scientific research. For overall federal R&D, the request provides

Business’s Share Of Academic R&D

142.8 billion, a 1.3% increase from 2012, the year the Administration uses for a baseline. “If we want to keep rebuilding our economy on a stronger, more stable foundation, then we’ve got to get smarter about our priorities as a nation,” the President said on April 10 when announcing his budget proposal. “And that’s what the budget I’m sending to Congress today represents—a fiscally responsible blueprint for middle-class jobs and growth.” The President’s proposed budget ...

Science In The Election

Companies provided nearly 5% of the

Third Debate Strays Off Topic

65 billion spent on R&D activities by academia in academic fiscal 2011, according to data released by the National Science Foundation. This share of funding for academic R&D has been stable since the late 1970s. Of the 912 academic institutions covered by the Higher Education Research & Development Survey, two-thirds reported receiving some R&D money from the business sector. Nearly 40% said this support exceeded

Looming Federal Budget Cuts

1 million. Businesses made little distinction between public and private institutions: The share of business-funded academic R&D at public institutions was 4.7%, and at private ones it was 5.2%. Nearly 57,000 companies were estimated to have R&D activity in 2010, but only 18% of them funded academic efforts, according to another study, NSF’s 2010 Business R&D & Innovation Survey. The money directed by this group to academia represents less than 1% of their total company R&D spending, the survey ...

CONGRESS MOVES ON BUDGET: APPROPRIATIONS: First 2012 spending package contains funding for key science agencies

With the presidential election less than a month away, President Barack Obama and former Gov. Mitt Romney are each working hard to convince voters that they are the better choice to lead the country for the next four years. Live debates between the two candidates are already under way—the first on domestic policy took place last week (see page 10). And although two other debates are scheduled for later this month, it is unlikely that they will include any significant discussion of science policy issues. To help fill this gap, C&EN asked each candidate eight questions. Four responses from Obama and Romney—on research support, national security, open access, and scientific integrity—appear in this print story in their entirety so their responses are briefly discussed. The remaining four answers—on energy, climate change, innovation, and education—are summarized in more detail here. All eight questions and responses are available in their entirety at ...

PROMOTING GLOBAL SCIENCE: INITIATIVE: Partnerships for Enhanced Engagement in Research aims to build research capacity abroad

In what was supposed to be a presidential debate about foreign policy, President Barack Obama and his Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, repeatedly steered the conversation toward strengthening the U.S. economy and maintaining U.S. competitiveness. And although the candidates briefly revisited their plans for energy and education policy to accomplish these goals, support for basic science funding was also part of the mix. The President mentioned the importance of R&D funding to economic growth and global competitiveness at least four times during the 90-minute debate. For example, he said, “If we don’t continue to put money into research and technology that will allow us to create great businesses here in the U.S.,” the country will lose its competitive edge to nations such as China. Former Massachusetts governor Romney mentioned basic research funding once, but not as a means to foster competitiveness or economic prosperity. Instead, he brought it up to make ...

HONORS National engineering academy announces the election of new members

All federal R&D programs can expect a cut of 8.2%—or 9.4% for defense-related research—on Jan. 2, 2013, if Congress and the White House can’t develop an alternative plan to reduce the federal budget deficit. That’s the message of a congressionally mandated report from the White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) on the impact of the

PRESIDENT GIVES NASA A NEW COURSE: But many in Congress are raising serious questions about the agency’s human SPACE EXPLORATION PLANS

109.3 billion in automatic, across-the-board budget cuts, known as sequestration. “The report leaves no question that the sequestration would be deeply destructive to national security, domestic investments, and core government functions,” OMB writes in the report’s introduction. Sequestration, OMB adds, “is not the responsible way for our nation to achieve deficit reduction.” The Obama Administration is drawing fire from Congress for missing its deadline by a week and for not providing enough specifics of sequestration’s effects at the program, project, and activity levels. “This report claims that more time is needed to provide ...