ࡱ> pro5@ Abjbj22 (\XXw9)JJJJJJJP   8P l LPJD L!&!&!&!&!&!&!39595959=r9IAIJ$KRNl(JJ2&!&!22(JJJ&!&!=J5552"J&!J&!395239556s8hJJ8&! ` G 289SJ0J8N4N 8^^JJJJNJ8&!Tz&5H* T-&!&!&!(J(JPPD5PPResearch & Development Policy 16:833:535 (11675) David H. Guston Associate Professor of Public Policy Bloustein School of Planning & Public Policy Civic Square, room 281 732-932-2499 x707  HYPERLINK mailto:guston@rci.rutgers.edu guston@rci.rutgers.edu Monday 1:10 -3:50 Civic Square room 168 The US federal government spends in excess of $100 billion annually on scientific research and development (R&D). Although the Department of Defense and the National Institutes of Health dominate R&D spending, there are large R&D programs in almost every federal agency and in pursuit of almost every national goal, from housing to counter-terrorism, education to environment, energy to space. This class is an advanced introduction to the processes and institutions of R&D policy in the United States. It assumes no prior scientific or technical knowledge, but it does assume some prior understanding of the American political system appropriate to beginning graduate work. The course is organized around the concept that the government pursues R&D for particular purposes. The government thus delegates in regular ways the conduct of R&D to particular performers (agents), and in doing so it faces regular problems, including: the selection of appropriate agents; the assurance of the integrity of the delegation; and the assurance of the productivity of the delegation. The syllabus is organized around these problems and their solutions. The syllabus also includes hot topics, which will likely include R&D in New Jersey, the R&D response to terrorism, and other issues. The class is conducted as a seminar, and students are expected to do all of the reading assigned prior to class. Students have a choice of writing one of three major assignments (papers) and of completing five of seven minor assignments (homework). The major assignment will be worth 40% of the class grade and is due 18 December. The five minor assignments together will be worth 30% of the grade and are due as indicated on the syllabus (additional minor assignments can be submitted for replacement grades or extra credit). Class participation will be worth the remaining 30%. Students should clear their major assignment with me by 7 October. They do not need to clear their minor assignments. Unexcused late work for the major assignment will result in a penalty of a half-grade per day (e.g., A to B+; B+ to B, etc.). Unexcused late work in minor assignments will not be accepted. Students are expected to follow university policies and guidelines for academic integrity on all assignments. Students should purchase the following books: Branscomb, Lewis M. and Keller, James, eds. 1998. Investing in Innovation: Creating a Research and Innovation Policy That Works. Cambridge: MIT Press. Guston, David H. 2000. Between Politics and Science. New York: Cambridge U. Press. There will be additional weekly readings available on reserve in the Public Policy suite. Underscored articles available electronically. 9 Sep (#1): History and Scope of R&D in the US James L. Penick, Jr., et al. The Politics of American Science, 1939 to the Present (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1972), part one, A Historical Overview. Bruce L.R. Smith. American Science Policy Since World War II (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution, 1990), chap. 5: The Reagan Era: A New Consensus? Daniel Sarewitz. Frontiers of Illusion: Science, Technology and the Politics of Progress (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1996), chap. 1: The End of the Age of Physics. Michael Crow and Barry Bozeman, Limited by Design (New York, Columbia U. Press, 1998), chap. 1: The Sixteen Thousand 16 Sep: Yom Kippur No Class 23 Sep (#2): The Public Role in R&D Branscomb & Keller, chap. 5: From Science Policy to Research Policy Ammon J. Salter and Ben R. Martin. The Economic Benefits of Publicly Funded Basic Research: A Critical Review. Research Policy 30:509-32 (2001). G. Steven McMillan, Francis Narin, and David L. Deeds. An Analysis of the Critical Role of Public Science in Innovation: The Case of Biotechnology. Research Policy 29:1-8 (2000). 30 Sep (#3): The Structure of Science Policy (minor assignment 1 due) Guston: Intro, Making Space for Science Policy Chap. 1, Science Policy: Structure and Boundaries Chap. 2, Understanding the Social Contract for Science Chap. 3, Challenging the Social Contract for Science 7 Oct (#4): Agents, I: Government -- Science for Public Missions Lewis M. Branscomb. National Laboratories: The Search for New Missions and New Structures. Pp. 103-134 in Lewis M. Branscomb, ed. Empowering Technology (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1993). Crow & Bozeman: Chap. 5, Federal Laboratories and the NIS Chap. 6, Federal Labs and their Performance in the NIS Chap. 8, Strategic Analysis & Design Recommendations 14 Oct (#5): Agents, II: Universities -- A New Kind of Federalism (minor assignment 2 due) Jonathan R. Cole, Elinor G. Barber, and Stephen R. Graubard, eds. The Research University in a Time of Discontent (Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994): Chap. 7, The Mission of the Research University, by N. O. Keohane Chap. 13, Current Criticisms of Research Universities, by H. Brooks Chap. 19, The Research University: Notes Toward a New History, by S. Graubard Michael M. Crow and Christopher Tucker. The American Research University as Americas de facto Technology Policy. Science and Public Policy 28(1):1-9. Eugene B. Skolnikoff. Research in U.S. Universities in a Technologically Competitive World. Pp. 194-223 in David H. Guston and Kenneth Keniston, eds. The Fragile Contract: University Science and the Federal Government (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1994). 21 Oct (#6): Agents, III: Industry -- R&D for Profit Branscomb & Keller: Chap. 6, The Advanced Technology Program Chap. 7, Dual Use and Technology Reinvestment Chap. 8, Rethinking the Small Business Innovation Research Program Office of Technology Assessment. The Effectiveness of Research and Experimentation Tax Credits (Washington, DC: US GPO, 1995). David M. Hart. Anti-trust and Technological Innovation in the US: Ideas, Institutions, Decisions, and Impacts, 1890-2000. Research Policy 30:923-36 (2001). 28 Oct (#7): The Integrity of Research, I: Peer Review (minor assignment 3 due) Daryl E. Chubin and Edward J. Hackett. Peerless Science: Peer Review and U.S. Science Policy (Albany: SUNY Press, 1990): Chap. 1, The Centrality of Peer Review Chap. 2, Peer Review in Theory and Practice Chap. 7, Peer Review and Unauthorized Science Policy James D. Savage, Wheres the Pork? Issues in Science and Technology 10:3 (Spring 1993):21-24. David H. Guston. In press. 2003. "The Expanding Role of Peer Review Processes in the United States." In P. Shapira and S. Kuhlmann, eds., Learning from Science and Technology Policy Evaluation: Experiences from the United States and Europe. Northampton, MA: Edward Elgar Publishing. 4 Nov (#8): The Integrity of Research, II: Misconduct and Public Trust Guston, chap. 4: Assuring the Integrity of Research David Hull, Scientists Behaving Badly, The New York Review of Books (3 December 1998), pp 24-30. Patricia Woolf, Integrity and Accountability in Research. Pp. 82-100 in David H. Guston and Kenneth Keniston, eds. The Fragile Contract: University Science and the Federal Government (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1994). Daniel S. Greenberg, Science, Money, and Politics: Political Triumph and Ethical Erosion (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2002): Chap. 12, The Sciences Way of Politicking Chap. 22, The Ethical Erosion of Science 11 Nov (#9): The Productivity of Research, I: Technology Transfer (minor assignment 4 due) Branscomb & Keller, chap. 9: Technology Transferat NIH Guston, chap. 5: Assuring the Productivity of Science David C. Mowery, et al. The Growth of Patenting and Licensing by US Universities: An Assessment of the Effects of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980. Research Policy 30:99-119 (2001). 18 Nov (#10): The Productivity of Research, II: Innovation Policy Branscomb & Keller: Chap. 1, Challenges to Technology Policy Chap. 2, Tech Policy & Economic Growth Chap. 18, Towards a Research and Innovation Policy Adam B. Jaffe. The US Patent System in Transition: Policy Innovation and the Innovation Process. Research Policy 29:531-557 (2000). (22-23 Nov: Field Trip to DC for Research Symposium With the Next Generation of Leaders in Science and Technology Policy) 25 Nov (#11): Hot Topic, I: R&D and States (minor assignment 5 due) David H. Guston, New Technology Role for States, Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy 11:3 (Fall, 1996), pp. 38-44. Donna Fossum et al. Federal Research and Development in New Jersey. Pp. 359-70 in Discovery and Innovation: Federal Research and Development Activities in the Fifty States, District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico (Washington, DC: RAND, 2000). Branscomb & Keller Chap. 10, Manufacturing Extension Chap. 16, State Governments: Partners in Innovation 2 Dec (#12): Hot Topic, II: University-Industry Relations (minor assignment 6 due) Branscomb & Keller, chap. 14: University-Industry Relations Henry Etzkowitz, Andrew Webster, Christiane Gebhardt, and Branca Regina Cantisano Terra. The Future of the University and the University of the Future: Evolution of the Ivory Tower to Entrepreneurial Paradigm. Research Policy 29:313-30 (2000). Irwin Feller, Catherine P. Ailes, and J. David Roessner. Impacts of Research Universities on Technological Innovation in Industry: Evidence from Engineering Research Centers. Research Policy 31:457-74 (2002). David H. Guston. CRIs in the Wilderness: Toward University-based Center s for Responsible Innovation. To appear in Donald Stein, ed. The Commercialized Academy. 9 Dec (#13): Hot Topic, III: R&D and Counter-Terrorism John H. Marburger III. 2002. Science and Technology for Countering Terrorism, National Academy of Sciences Annual Meeting, 30 April, at  HYPERLINK http://www.ostp.gov/html/02_5_2.html http://www.ostp.gov/html/02_5_2.html Albert H. Teich, Stephen D. Nelson, and Stephen J. Lita, eds. Science and Technology in a Vulnerable World (Washington, DC: AAAS, 2002), at  HYPERLINK "http://www.aaas.org/spp/yearbook/2003/yrbk03.htm" http://www.aaas.org/spp/yearbook/2003/yrbk03.htm Special Analysis of R&D in the Homeland Security Department, at  HYPERLINK "http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/dhs0621.htm" http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/dhs0621.htm Ad Hoc Faculty Committee on Access to and Disclosure of Scientific Information. In the Public Interest (Cambridge, MIT, 2002). TBA Dec (#14): Wrap-Up: Research and the Public Good (minor assignment 7 due) Guston, chap. 6: Between Politics and Science Susan E. Cozzens, Quality of Life Returns from Basic Research. Pp. 184-209 in Bruce L.R. Smith and Claude E. Barfield, eds. Technology, R&D, and the Economy (Washington, DC: Brookings Institution and American Enterprise Institute, 1996). Sarewitz, chap. 9: Toward a New Mythology. Assignments Each student will be required to fulfill one major assignment and one minor assignment from the following options. Major Assignments (choose one of three) Option 1: R&D Agency Portfolio Choose a federal agency that supports R&D and write a 15-20 pp paper discussing the following four issues: 1) when and how the agencys R&D programs were created, how have they changed, their budgetary history, and their current priorities, etc.; 2) the intramural and extramural components of your agency's R&D programs and particular kinds of programs for particular kinds of agents (universities, small businesses, non-profits, etc.); 3) how your agency makes use of peer review and how it assures itself (and Congress) that its R&D programs minimize the threat of misconduct; and 4) what kind of technology transfer activities does your agency engage in, and how does it assures itself that its programs are productive ? Option 2: NJ R&D Portfolio Write a report (15-20 pp) analyzing the status of R&D in the state New Jersey. It should include discussion of the federal support for R&D in NJ, state support of R&D, industrial R&D in NJ, the climate for innovation in the state (e.g., colleges and universities, venture capital, etc.). Part of the paper should update the RAND chapter on NJ using RANDs Radius as well as other data sources. Option 3: Research Paper Write a traditional research paper (15-20 pp) on a relevant topic of your choice. You should clear a topic with me by 7 October. Minor Assignments (choose five of seven) Answer the following questions for the FY03 federal R&D budget: What is the total R&D budget? What is the percent civilian and defense? What percentage of the domestic discretionary budget is civilian R&D? Which six agencies spend the largest shares of civilian R&D? How much was spent for social science research? Identify any complications or challenges you confronted in documenting these answers. 2. ID the following acronyms and write one sentence each on their role in R&D policy: AAAS; AAU; ATP; CSSP; (D)ARPA; EPSCoR; FFRDC; IOM; MEP; NAS; NASULGC; NAE; NASA; NCI; NDRC; NIST; NSB; NSF; NSTC; ONR; OSRD; OSTP; OTA; PCAST; SSTI. Answer the following questions for the most recent year available: How much did private industry spend on R&D? How much of what private industry spent was basic research? How much of what private industry spent went to fund research in universities? How much of what the federal government spent in that year was performed by industry? Name and describe three ways in addition to direct funding that the federal government encourages private sector R&D. Which three industries perform the most R&D? Answer the following questions: What is the federal definition of research misconduct? Describe the size and scope of research misconduct at either NIH or NSF with respect to the number of allegations, number of investigations, number of findings, and contextualize to the amount of R&D spending, number of grants, expectations of honesty, etc. Do you believe research misconduct is a problem? Why or why not? What is single blind review? What is double blind review? How much R&D spending did Congress earmark in the most recent FY available? Write a one-page (250-400 words) brief on the following topic: What is the role of the research university in research for the economy, and what should it be? Write two pages of substantive observations about the Research Symposium in DC. Write a one-page (250-400 words) brief on an issue that arises from your understanding of one of the hot topics GUSTON DRAFT R&DP SYLLABUS  PAGE 1 1  O;SuRa *+YL*<6>SlSqra\ k ~ 0!"#">""-#Y#[##$!$$$,%o%%;&&Z'i'|'~''b( hPn6>* hPn>* hPn6 hPn0JjhPnUjhPnUhPn hPn5P12Bg    + , 12$%ST@A!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !! !!!!!!!!! h^h`$a$$a$wAA*STUstut*+,Z[tu}JK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!` 0^`0KLIY;<UVDxrst!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!`^ 0^`0a~  M!w!!!>"Y#Z#[####@$%%%%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!^ 0^`0 ^`%%%<&=&V&W&&&|'}'~''''(-(b((((d)e)f)))))!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!` 0^`0b(((((d)f))) *!,,---r.......R/S///////08090w0x0y00000!1"1#1I1J1K111122k3w3335464d9|9wAAAAAﰦjhPnCJU hPnCJj!hPnUjhPnU hPn0JjhPnUjhPnU hPn6 hPn5hPn hPn6>* hPn>*?)**+0+T++++++++!,--...../0K111!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ! !0^`0` 0^`012222L2=3j3w3x3y333445464 7 7'7(78888Q9!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!`  !` !0^`0 !Q9R9S9|9}999:K:::;;;;?<k<<<L====>!!!!!!0!0!0!0!0!؈!!!!!0!0!0!؈!؈!0!! & F h^ & F & F h^ & F>G>??@@@@AAuAvAwAAAAA!0!| !0!0!!!!!!!!! & F ^` & F & F h^AAAAhPnjhPnCJUhPnCJmHnHu& 00P/ =!"#$%DyK guston@rci.rutgers.eduyK <mailto:guston@rci.rutgers.edu DyK %http://www.ostp.gov/html/02_5_2.htmlyK Jhttp://www.ostp.gov/html/02_5_2.html9DyK 1http://www.aaas.org/spp/yearbook/2003/yrbk03.htmyK bhttp://www.aaas.org/spp/yearbook/2003/yrbk03.htmDyK 'http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/dhs0621.htmyK Nhttp://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/dhs0621.htmD@D NormalCJOJQJ_HmH sH tH 8@8 Heading 1$@&5H@H Heading 2$0@&^`05DA@D Default Paragraph FontVi@V  Table Normal :V 44 la (k@(No List 4 @4 Footer  !LC@L Body Text Indent^`44 Header  !PR@"P Body Text Indent 20^`00U@10 Hyperlink>*B*PS@BP Body Text Indent 3h^h`9\ zzzzzzzz zT Y*"=+k+39/- 12Bg+,12$ % S T @ A * STUstut*+,Z[tu}JKLIY;<UVDxrsta~Mw>YZ[@<=VW|}~ - b d!e!f!!!!!*"#0#T########!$%%&&&&&'(K)))****L*=+j+w+x+y+++,,5,6, / /'/(/0000Q1R1S1|1}1112K2223333?4k444L55556G677888899u9v9w9999000000000000000000000000000000000000000u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u0u000#0#0#0#0#0#0#0#0#00&0&0&0&0&0&0&0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)0)00S1 0S1 0S1 0S1 0S1 0S1 0S1 0S10S10S10S1 0S1 0S1 0S1 0S1 0S1 0S1 0S10S1 0S1 0S1 0S1 0S1 0S10S1 0S10S1 0S10S1 0S1M90M90O90M90M90w99M90M90(((+b(AA!(-K%)1Q9>A"$%&')*+,A#R'''8(x(((")I)9XXXX#%+!aA4485"76,n788#948:#;d"<*8=7>4?B@4BDC\M4I3JKLd 8MD#NdOP4"Q9RS7T4Ut"Vt8WXD4Y 1Z7[h1\d]|^-_`\ablw3c7dTeDf"g"h7DD1it1jԨ3kDllE*7mlnodpLq8r<6s|tTutQ5vFL0wD#x,%yD3zĮ#{Ď|D}<G~d@3"8"& #"5_3A81H_"t1<7,"1|<#2ggq 00 " " , , 6 &  ,,>'//<  #qqzzv v !c"c"""""""## ##b$b$%(($())k/k/n009      !#"$&%'*()+,-./0123456789;:<=>?@ABDCEFGHIJLKMNOPRQSTUVWYXZ[\]^_`Apww!!22$$ * * 5 8 8 %00''33!!!!M""-:>>2xxx x !m"m""""""" ####h$h$%"(&(&())u/u/r009  !#"$&%')*(+,-./0123456789;:<=>?@ABDCEFGHIJLKMNOPRQSTUVWYXZ[\]^_` :]*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsStreet9R*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsState=`*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceName=_*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PlaceType8K*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsCityBW*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagscountry-region9a*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsplace>T*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags PersonName;^*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsaddress8\*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagstime8*urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttagsdate  101213151998350DayHourMinuteMonthYearTa`_^]\ \ ^]aWaWaRaKaRa`_aWaKaKa`_aKa`_a`_a``_aWaWTaWaWTaaWaaKRaR  TaKa_`aWTaRa`_aRaaKRaaKTaKRaKaRaav9w9999T  ! Rst\aH=B(5 a\}OX@{>C!"!!!""##!$y$$%%O%%%%Q&n&p&r&&K))))***<+w99:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::IY_Z*">"p"&&''(*=+33356w999w99 dave guston dave guston dave guston dave guston dave guston dave guston dave guston dave guston David GustonSZehr     hh^h`o(. hh^h`OJQJo(hh^h`o(. hh^h`OJQJo( hh^h`OJQJo(Pn899@hp deskjet 5550 seriesLPT1:winspoolhp deskjet 5550 serieshp deskjet 5550 series!@m߀lOdtBe@RLdArial8Beںں\\LAPCSZEHR2\hp deskjet 5550 series,LocalOnly,DrvConverthp deskjet 5550 series!@m߀lOdtBe@RLdArial8Beںں\\LAPCSZEHR2\hp deskjet 5550 series,LocalOnly,DrvConvert9P@UnknownGz Times New Roman5Symbol3& z Arial9New YorkSTimesTimes New Roman"[w[w"Ji&0 h0 h;>dZ9Z93q;H(?Pn stpp syllabusDavid H. GustonSZehr      Oh+'0|  , 8 D P\dltstpp syllabusotppDavid H. Gustonavi syllabusF02SZehrus2ehMicrosoft Word 10.0@F#@TX@ޜG@ޜG 0՜.+,D՜.+,H hp  Rutgers UniversityhZ9A stpp syllabus TitleX 8@ _PID_HLINKSA$v 'http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/dhs0621.htm1http://www.aaas.org/spp/yearbook/2003/yrbk03.htmX@%http://www.ostp.gov/html/02_5_2.htmlK>mailto:guston@rci.rutgers.edu  !"#$%&'()*+,-.012345689:;<=>?@ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ[\]^`abcdefhijklmnqRoot Entry FP GsData /1Table7NWordDocument(\SummaryInformation(_DocumentSummaryInformation8gCompObjj  FMicrosoft Word Document MSWordDocWord.Document.89q