Scientific research needs our continued support and cooperation

In my country, President Clinton and Vice President Gore know that science and technology will enable our nation to compete aggressively in the global marketplace, protect our environment, and improve the health and wellbeing of our people. Even as they have brought the budget into balance, turning the deficits into surpluses, they have increased the investment in science and technology. All of us, but especially our children and our grandchildren, will reap the rewards of that wise decision!

So much of what we have already been able to accomplish and enjoy today has resulted from R&D investments we made decades ago. I would like to illustrate that assertion with three main points.

First, far-sighted investments in research and development during the past half century have enriched our lives and strengthened Science and Technology (S&T) and our economy in unforeseen ways. So we see continued investment as the "wellspring of prosperity" in the 21^st century.

Second, successful R&D requires investments in people. The need for a strong S&T workforce calls for investing in education and training for all levels of workers in an increasingly high-tech world, and for encouraging a greater diversity of students to pursue careers in science and engineering.

Third, close cooperation with our international partners is crucial to the success of our S&T ventures. Scientific breakthroughs occur without regard for national borders.

Research Pays Economic Dividends

The first thing to say about how R&D impacts our economy is that experience has taught us to expect the unexpected. For the most part, of the contributions of science and technology could not have been foreseen, when the research was being done, and would not have been available without vigilance and patience in R&D funding.

Only by supporting research, particularly basic research, where the returns are not guaranteed, can we ensure the steady progress that underpins the breakthroughs and front-page news stories that accompany each new success. Top economists have concluded that over the past 50 years technological innovation has been responsible for as much as half of my nation's growth in productivity. Taking a risk on open-ended research, whose cost-effectiveness can be difficult, even impossible to guarantee, often generates the greatest economic returns. I’d like to talk about three examples:

• Information Technology;
• The Global Positioning System; and
• Biomedicine.

First, Information Technology.

Americans are now so accustomed to computers in our daily lives that we are amazed to discover that early computer experts did not foresee much demand for these specialized machines. For example, the chairman of IBM, Thomas Watson, stated in the 1940s, "There is a world market for maybe five computers." Since then, the U. S. Government has been a major force in launching and nurturing the computer age in my country. Federal dollars have funded about 70 per cent of university research in computer science and electrical engineering since 1976. The Federal funding in basic research has directly contributed not only to development of computer manufacturing and hardware, but also to advances in computer graphics, artificial intelligence, computer architecture, and of course, the Internet.

The Internet emerged from the joint effort by Federal agencies and universities to advance networking technology primarily as a research tool. Starting in 1969, the Department of Defense opened its experimental nation-wide computer network through the Advanced Research Projects Agency. The National Science Foundation extended this network to civilian academic researchers in 1987. Usage continued to expand then exploded in the late 1990s when email and websites took over, and companies began to see how to do business differently.

Today, the Information Age is bringing changes to our society that are only beginning to unfold. Six years ago, "Internet" was still a word known mostly to those in S&T. In the United States the Internet economy grew at a compounded annual rate of more than 174 per cent between 1995 and 1998, as compared with 2.8 percent for the U.S. economy as a whole.

My second example: the Global Positioning System.

GPS technology grew out of pure physics research on coherent aspects of light, starting in the 1930s. By the 1950s, this research had developed extremely accurate atomic clocks, which were used to test Einstein’s Theory of Relativity. Then, the advent of space satellites, with the Soviet Union’s launch of Sputnik I in 1957, allowed scientists and engineers to envision a system of navigation that would rely on satellite signals keyed to precise timekeeping. By 1973, the Department of Defense had approved the navigational concept and Rockwell International began building the GPS satellites, each the size of a large automobile and weighing slightly less than a ton. In 1983, the first GPS receivers cost more than $150,000 and weighed more than 100 pounds. Today, a handheld GPS receiver weighing less than a pound can be purchased for less than $100. GPS receivers and transmitters may soon be smaller than credit cards – and cheap enough for use in almost any vehicle, cell phone, or pocket.

My third example: Biomedical Breakthroughs.

Long-term R&D investments have led not only to greater prosperity, but also have allowed us to enjoy better living conditions and greater life expectancy – and this also yields economic benefits. The United States has seen amazing changes in biomedical technologies over the past 100 years. We have come from the family doctor’s signature black bag in the first half of the century to the powerful scanning and imaging equipment of the modern medical center; from surgical saws to lasers, from X-Ray to MRI, and from an average life expectancy of about 49 years to our present expectancy of 75 years.

Just as biomedical technologies have made enormous contributions to Americans’ health and well-being in this century, the health-care industry generates roughly $1 trillion in economic activity, high-wage jobs, and trade. Another measure of economic importance of supporting biomedical R&D is the amount of money it saves: for example, improved treatment of acute lymphocytic leukemia has saved the U.S. more than $1 billion in restored lifetime earnings, and lithium treatment for manic-depressive illness has saved about $7 billion per year since its introduction in 1970.

The rapid progress in medicine has not only come from supporting the life sciences – such as biology, biochemistry and genetics – but also from physics, math, chemistry and many other fields of science and engineering. For example, over the past 25 years physicists have developed revolutionary imaging technologies that have allowed us to see deeper and deeper into the materials and processes of life itself. Much of today’s imaging technology relies on new developments in micro-processors and software. Much of tomorrow’s medical technology is likely to come from miniaturization of smart devices that will be made possible by advances in nanotechnology.

Progress against disease demands that the physical, mathematical, behavioral, and engineering sciences continue to advance in tandem with the life sciences. I cannot emphasize this point strongly enough – continued medical breakthroughs depend on strong support for R&D activities across a broad range of scientific and engineering disciplines.

Ensuring Our Future S&T Workforce

So with these three examples, let me take the license to simply assert that future progress will demand advances in science and technology.

But we can’t do any kind of science, technology or engineering without well trained people, from technicians to Ph.D. research scientists and engineers. In the U.S., economic and demographic trends are putting pressure on science and math education at all levels.

High-tech jobs are among the fastest growing of any job sector in the U.S. economy, to the point that demand for workers has outstripped supply. Unemployment in science and engineering occupations is about 2 percent – about half the rate for the entire U.S. workforce, which itself is at historic low levels. However, if current trends persist, our nation may not have all of the talent it will need to enable the innovation process that has provided such a strong economy and high quality of life. There is already evidence that worker shortages are limiting economic growth, and this shortage could have devastating consequences for the future.

Last April, the National Science and Technology Council released a report entitled "Ensuring a Strong U.S. Scientific, Technical, and Engineering Workforce in the 21st Century." It reached two fundamental conclusions about our science, technology, and engineering workforce:

First, these workers are essential to both the private and public sectors. In the private sector, they help propel the economy and provide valuable services. In the public sector, ST&E workers support important Federal missions – health, environmental protection, national security, and others.

Second, it is in the national interest to vigorously pursue the development of domestic science, technology, and engineering workers, women and men, from all ethnic groups.

We cannot fill future S&T workforce needs unless we encourage a greater diversity of students to pursue science and technology careers. Unfortunately, we in America are still unable to attract a sufficiently diverse group of individuals to our own science and technology workforce. Despite their gains in other professions, women, minorities, and persons with disabilities remain underrepresented in science and engineering fields.

And that brings me to my third and last point. No country’s scientists and engineers can go it alone. Being world-class requires global involvement. The fundamental workings of nature – the function of a gene, the quantum behavior of matter and energy, the health of our oceans and sealife, the chemistry of the atmosphere – are not the sole province of any one nation.

Cooperation with International Partners

The increasing international movement of people and ideas in science and technology advances discovery, strengthens the global economy, improves the quality of life, and enhances the ability to address issues of common global concern – poverty, disease, environmental degradation, and sustainable energy production. To help Americans understand the benefits our nation receives through international scientific collaboration, President Clinton proclaimed May 7-13, 2000 as Global Science and Technology Week. He particularly hoped that the week would help young students foster an appreciation for "the international nature of science," along with international perspectives that will better prepare them to participate in the world’s interdependent high-tech economy and the global scientific community.

The internationalisation of science has expanded rapidly around the globe. The percentage of scientific papers with authors from more than one country has steadily grown – increasing by more than 115 per cent over the past decade. By 1997, international collaboration already accounted for almost one third of all co-authored articles. We have also seen a steady global spread of the research enterprise, with new countries and new competitors joining world technological leaders in their investments in science and innovation.

There are many ways for scientists to strengthen the international scientific community. For example, acting on the recommendations of the OECD Global Science Forum, representatives of 25 nations are now meeting to form the Global Biodiversity Information Facility. This network will connect biodiversity databases throughout the world, allowing anyone with Internet access – scientists, policy makers and managers anywhere on our planet – to tap the world’s inventory of biodiversity information. By the way, Australia and the United States championed this effort throughout the OECD process and beyond. So thank you Australia, for that partnership.

By engaging in collaborative efforts under bilateral science and technology "umbrella" agreements, scientists and engineers advance their own research programs while also contributing to the infrastructure of international cooperation.

And it is my great pleasure to announce that I will be discussing with your Minister of Industry, Science, and Resources, Senator Nick Minchin, the options for developing a new science and technology agreement between Australia and the United States. In doing so, I hope to recognize the long history of scientific cooperation our two countries have enjoyed, and underscore the commitment on the part of the United States to reinforcing this partnership going forward. On behalf of the U.S. Government, I wish to thank Senator Minchin and the Government of Australia for the commitments to strengthen the bilateral scientific and technological relationship between our two nations.

Science and technology are "about the future" and to me the future looks brighter the harder one looks at it – and that’s especially true if we look together.