u.s. technology strategy emerges

I News & Comment :iY - . . .,. -

U. S %..: . . . Technology . , r r. r.,7b?;ic G,.ns-~.L.7. ...-~-,bir -%c-,zg '.: Strategy . . ( Emerges . . . . 1 , i i : Pi . I ; , :.

--. , , , : . r,s < s -:, , ,: -<;- + . - :. ~+;~<t~gj~L~~~~,~.~~;<,~i ,~;;~G~ r ' . I . ' , ,; . . , . . , > ,, . ! - . . . , . . - .~. . , - " , ,

other words. What makes Sutherland's place particu-

larly unusual is that, in addition to receiving support from the state and more than 100 local companies, it gets help from the feds. During most of the 1980s, the Reagan Ad- ministration blocked attempts to use federal money to give U.S. industry a boost. The guiding philosophy was to fund basic research and shun applied research-or to put it another way, to leave product development entirely to the private sector. Indeed, the idea of pumping money into promising new technologies was tagged "industrial policy" and the idea was treated as anathema in the Executive Branch-something to be expected in Romania or Bulgaria but not in the American heartland. And this is why the decision by the U.S. Department of Com- merce to support George Sutherland's shop--and four other regional centers-is radically new.

Until very recently, the Bush Administra- tion toed the Reagan-hatched ideological line on supporting industrial technology. But of late there have been three signs that it is softening its stance. Those who read the tea leaves on federal research policy point to

After a decade of debate, the federal government has begun to invest in new civil_ian tech- .# " ' I nologies; skeptics say the gesture is just a "spit in the ocean" 4 , L- 1 .

8 * .-

RODOIS 10 the rescue. Does U.S. industry need Uncle Sam's help to compete in high technology?

government directly finance civil R&D projects, but says that "we are far from having a coherent technol-

. T - 1 : - - I . k I L

economy being developed by the White House Office of Science and Technology ' ' Policy (OSTP) at the urging of Congress. The list is expected to help guid? fu~ure government investments.

Yet these modest steps have been con;;-' 'I

versial within the Administration, and key, White House officials, including Chief of Staff John Sununu and budget director Ri- chard Darman, are said to be reluctant to see industrial research programs expand too rapidly. Moreover, some critics think that while the Administration is beginning to become more generous in supporting industrial technologies in civilian agencies, it is cutting back on the same kind of projects funded by the Pentagon (see box, p. 22). Throughout the Reagan era, the Pentagon was the only federal agency that invested directly in industry in this way. And even for those who believe they see a thaw in the rigid laissez-faire stance, the melting seems too slow. For example, Guyford Stever, former director of the National Science Foundation (NSF), would like to see the

ON 1 7 MAY GEORGE SUTH- hese recent developments as indica- erland plans to throw open tors that a new attitude is emerg- the doors of the Great Lakes ing from the Administration. The Manufacturing Technology first is a statement on technology Center in Cleveland to show policy quietly put out by the off the $5 million worth of robots White House last fall. On its face, and exotic metal-working ma- it seemed almost too subtle; but it chines he has acquired. Sutherland, had a section that many feel was a Ph.D. mechanical engineer, isn't the cleverly negotiated into the document

ogy policy in this country." Nevertheless, the Administration's

proud manager of a high-tech auto plant or a steel factory that will save Ohio. What he

center. It produces nothing tangible but, does operate is a nonprofit industrial research

rather, aims to educate small manufactur- ers-basically "people who make things out of metal," says Sutherland-in the use of advanced, computerized machine tools and efficient management techniques. The Great Lakes Center, located at an interstate cross- roads, has a national as well as a local rnis- sion. I t uses workshops, symposia, even site visits-and, of course, fancy machines-to help local companies turn themselves into 2lst-century operations. Its objective is to make U.S. industry more competitive, in

recent statements are prompting cau- tious optimism among some of the

by presidential science adviser D. Allan Bromley: In black and white, it says that the

neric industrial technologies. federal government should help develop ge-

The second signal of a sea change is that, afier more than 2 years of congressional pressure, the Administration is finally willing to put some money-albeit piddling amounts so far-into technology development programs in the Commerce Depart- ment-not only the five regional centers, but also directly into products being developed for the commercial market.

And third, there's a still nascent but promising new policy thrust: The development of a list of critical technologies for the

harshest critics of the previous do- nothiig approach. Robert White, president of the National Academy of Engineering (NAE), who in a widely quoted 1988 speech blasted ideological "hangups" that have prevented the establishment of a "workable technology structure in the federal government," now sees "good forward motion" in the Ad- ministration. "You've got to start someplace," he says, and recent policy statements represent "a beginning." Still, he adds, "I would not say we had reached a consensus" yet on the need for bold federal action. An- other advocate of federal interven- tion, Representative George Brown, Jr. (D-CA), gave an optimistic read- ing in a speech to the Semiconduc- tor Research Corporation on 26

2 0 SCIENCE, VOL. 252

IZ INBYVYV03 P SMBN I661 IMJV S

ue!1p!3 pJeMol put ( 1 2 8 ~ hTel!l!ur u ro~j KEME y!qs ,aA!s!Jap alour e,, mq ' p ~ s q3olg 'spoq~aur %u!m1~ejnueur Jauaq %ugouro~d uo ,rrels alqeJ!urpe, ue apeur seq uo!lea -s!u!urpv aqL .s11nsuo3 aq qs!q~ ~ o j dno~8 lyo~duou e ' ssauaa!~!~ad~o~ uo 1puno3

aq1 Kq pareda~d rroda~ e Jaqap 01 qs~ely 02 uo S S ~ J % U O ~ aJojaq pa~eadde aq uaqM Kqod aa!ssafi%e a ~ o w e pasJopua qsolg q3!J7J JO13aJ!p 3SN JauIJOd ,'aJnl3nJ1S asuajap aq1 jo ppqsdaa e aq ~aSuo1 ou ue3 luaurdola~ap Bolouq2al p!xaururoJ, leq1

'SuqLue n -uddeq oa lnoqe aou sy sryl des s u o h an8 . s p m p ~ ~ ~ s M) TOM @ F ~ U ~ S S ~ anq 'snarouqS ssal 'plo a! sln@au P wtp a101 qndod a! a! dn +MS 0s a u r o q ppo3 LSIN 3mp a~33ar03 no~1xm3 e p q 3 a aH .sans+ hlouqsaa no qmm Ow-S aSlCOH 31w 3UO dt?S 'ASIN 1E $ 0 ~ %I@&%

pa atp tpp dn pua plnoj ah,, 'aaaua3 1Zfdolomljaa pae s p m e a v uo s!seqdrna aqa qap 1rp qsp e s d e q s'asan -wa3uo3 s sasy leg p q ~ -monoj sqnszr i d amp uopwdxa aqa ;LSIN u a ~ @ s q d u ~ awurtr%pe m u aqa 1wqdt.q

.sxqtpern axmad uerp =w OOOI 03 001 snp=* prte =rcpjo e!q&g Z SUIJOH

p alqecb Awe pslCr> adLaoa~1d e p p q ot adoq s o l u a q aqt 5 ~ ~ 8 s m qa14 -spsAm a w q p o l o q d no draSeuq Mfp JO ,saSed, mep q u a a01s 01 rmeaq a@g pamaas I l p -parwap UE am p p o ~ q .roaom ou aqnba~ plnoh $asp& sya Can m m u q q p pue sadet 3y~auB~f1 a g a w n - m d a8e.103~ arp drenognloml e %uln43efnmm pa.wamiv ~ ~ u i m JO d e e a a e v 0 0 3 oa woG&z8$ uoa &&a& c ~ ~ o . d ~ o 3

o~adoqoq~drnrur ~ ~ ~ l t 3 d s ~ y l s s a u y ~ d 1 . v 11 a q ~ % m i q --PI= rn 3qt

=$ad 9 = P a w SPP* ~ " 0 4 b r o s y \ p e ~ p ~ o 0 ~ ~ ~

-*u! m x a e oa a ~ q n s b r p uaqa !Map21 au- p P e J SnOlaSu e a q m s lnm Slmgdde 3 m 'Isn~ . m o s j p g o d a 3 q o ~ m U I ~ ~ s s ; ~ -old m y a ~ Sw-aanp aauoqqa rn oa sl- s u o h (slauLp %upsaps p sams -d p~eq-qrod 10 @3pgOd p!MV 01

SPmq ;LSIN m 9 P a w UaqM a q p umm atp asooq3 01 10s

a& =w I-01-zz e ox -1 'm=r~~oszgrl~iuaanems

SdeS sud? -mws a d atp ' 9 ~ - o s f e ~ ~ d L v ~ ~ ~

*nd s l ~ ~ qe% aim aqa aqe.~

*'1! Jcy Pr(se UOP- 3V N O ? , 0661 u! -BUO=, 4 WFQJ~ WlW o ~ $ J o * P ~ ~ &V @F!" aWdes ~uoL'I

* lUXl ldO~~p fi1-33 ul q b = = d ~ l P?w SEY W P e Jo3 'Pw 3-3 papq atp 103 dals m u aLmmp8p .i! sq.lm €m@Old aqa 'lpxus @no= .qjreyy g uo pa~unorme axw 'pea a! u o p 6$ 'WE &LV '1- 3Q.L ' w p m WJ03 anleA P W

pappap K~~euy a ~ e q sJapea1 'p!es aq 'uo!s!s -apu! jo apwap e J a w .%u!%ueq2 s! apn~!ne leql MOU 1nq ,'Bolouqsa1 ~ o j aloJ papa j aql %upa~d~alu! u! h!@maur hpn3as leuo!1 -eu e q 1 ! ~ pamudur! uaaq aneq am,, s~eah 05 1sourle ~ o j leq1 p!es U M O J ~ .hetuqad

aaeq p s a q a q DM ieqa u~a@o~oq3aa 3yau&, uo 8 q i o f i s~a[CUd a3WUg dlay 01 8867 " PatEatl Sew dJ,V .(&LV) d a d f i l o u q ~ a ~ pa3ue~pv m u aqa a q q ' ( w s

%U!puy kwlaq-arp-ap!sq l n q e alqea%pq~om[ asuuaps d m 01 p) ssat8uq oa gugsa~a~ty aurm uaAa m spEfie pmur -earn S,LSIN in8 -1aqaoue a doqs xro ~ 0 4 pa-- aq Aew a u u m q muo-1a1erp 0s - sm%P-mpnqs pue'a1d- JoJ '=ow P p u ! ~W=O>-P%UP@- ptuwu! prndva a a~q!ssod a! a v m p a9ea~3q aqL ;aq 4FF=a, - -uty vw WP 3Mnarp 30 -A $1 J a v ~ l s p m ! ~ s g m s LSIN 01 j-J anroqamSupq p spp s h s STTOAT

Sqqnop m L - g e uo a! Suplnd 'aogp RPZS 0% U O W SIC$ m0-54 '2662 u! 963 1 u g ~ n q %L!$IN -mu! oa pasodad q! ' aph &pnq lse1 aqa q .lsaraaq w o q s saq uon - e z l s w p v q~ u a x .bmSe aqa aasw0 ol ' ( ~ N Q ) 3 ~ t p u v ~ WJ, aqmuasa;rdq Ilq p q q j 'ssauarppdolo~ p m Il%oloqxia uo aauynuolqns q a p a p l a a d a p m - w v fiau e pa~ea~:, UaA3 Sdq SROH 3u .9S!Wd pSJaAOqS aDdb h q t '=A sIrp

l o a ~ d q uo sSupeaq % q u y a v 01 spmar pnsn aqa apeur 'Bopnpaa JOJ axlawwo3 JO hsmszapun 'am u a q q 'ssoq s x pue uqol 'JOP;UFP s G s ~ uaqM 'ssarfsuq JO uoddns ~pqsnrpua aqa pue hsnpuljo sma atp q ~ o q sLo!ua d p l p ~ a d W O & U O ~ sl! u! qDY4 'BIN 3 SrlJ;

' p a p m d ~%UI[IOH -bssnpq tpw suual paoS uo Lpeaqe SEA q 3 ~ 'SPJ~,WSJO n w q puopqq aqa ae bznneamq paqqq~f1sa-n3~ arp oa uo!ss!m m u acp a w u a 01 raqaq aq ppom r! 3eqa p a d m aq '~eordde snognw arom e ~ U ! ~ O A B ~ 'Wp! 3-m I? ' ( 3 ~ ) s S ~ l [ r > ~ 3SXUs J01- 'aau-q a x a m = aqa jo treuqetp atp uafwl -mnop WIIF p 2 t p ~ q PA- 30 1 % ~ e q a ~ (Lvma ~ W P * e JOJ pauSpdum m a i s os - p o ~ y ue swpmndde h n ? l p -sassaso~d S-m pae 'wawl kIpp =andm02 p d s -ern s rtsn-W~- me$ =ah e uomq I$ lnqe

SPU* v m a ?119~ -(ZZ a s d 3x1 ~ F * W 103 %FOP uaaq peg (vma) b=@v + O J ~ v=w P=VV =adaa atp 8-UI?UJ m g p p JOJ op p p o a aeqa huaSe ne anam ot pa- ( ~0 -a ) uuaB uqol ~oaeuag Lq p q s a ~ S u q ) P SraqWwJ Ma3 V 'aFeJaP 4 dlued Ima%l a! ~ 0 % S I N

'JODS a32?~ud auf UI UOpmOUU! 3 1 e ~ n q s pae Bolouq3aa @a%npq uo bgod aaeupJoo2 oa : u o p p

'8861 U! UO!SS!Ul M U le pW aCWU MaU B 109 ( L S ~ ) BQ -1ouq33~ pne SP=PWS 30 awns01 FOPN atp 'SPPWS~O n- @UO!lEN Xjl S t 88 roJ U M O ~ p ~ b ~ n p u ! @3qag3 aqa 103 1x1- 12j1nq3aa e se 11a~asoq Appa~, jo huappard atp Sqmp 0% m.4 06 paaeaq .aqoqD 14- ue sumas alQJ a v JqJ P a w P - &uaSe 3q1 'a~ueg3 l s ~ y .~oa>as -P =P IqJ asod P-03 mx mau e wan ot pappap a! *%qxm -JW- 'Sfl UI ~%==P=IJo p"~mad t Apmu 01 3ue-p pm ( S!q %uymwos op oa LVM e 1% 3uqo01 s e ~ & v ~ u a q ~ b& wead - 'q

technology is needed. In reality, Bloch's audience had already

taken this advice to heart, for it was Con- gress that led the way in founding what is now being called the Administration's "technology policy." Congress's initial step, taken in 1988, was to pass the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act, giving the

Commerce Department authority over civilian technology and renaming its former Bureau of Standards the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). The same law gave NIST a new podolio: It was to oversee joint government-industry ven- tures in technology development and diffi- sion, including the establishment of educa-

tional centers like Sutherland's. The first hint that the Administration

might be willing to sign on to this congressional initiative came on 7 March 1990, when President Bush, in a speech to the American Electronics Association, said that

I his Administration would cooperate with 1 industry in converting new discoveries into

I Beating Swords Into. ..Chips? Officials in the Department of Defense

C don't like to talk about the Pentagon's extensive efforts to help U.S. companies remain competitive in high-tech civilian markets. They have good rea-

u son. Last year, the Bush Administra- tion removed physicist Craig Fields

gies likely to have both military and civilian applications. According to a re- fi.om the White House 066ce of Management and Budget in February, the &dad government now spends $1.3 billion on "advaaced ~~~~~&cturing and materials R&D," more than 40% of it in the d d b s c budget. The most prominent of these ddemc programs is Sematech, a pint indwq-government research center created in 1987 rn focus on man-g processes

from his post as dicector of the Defense I for computer chips, costing the government $100 d o n a year Advanced Research Projects Agency (see page 23). In addition, a department-wide program known as

(DARPA), reportedly for pushing DARPA too strongly into the Manufkturing Technology, or "Mantech," program has a civilian technology development. And, if that wasn't cause budget of $311.5 d o n this year to help improve technologies enough for defense o5cials to keep quiet, they now have another ranging &om machine tools to automatic machinery for making rationale: The Pentagon's civilian technology programs have military uniforms. Mantech's budget oscillated in the 1980s become caught in a tussle between

I between $130 million and around

Coneress. which has come to view " r

them as a vehicle for pork-barrel funding, and the Administration, which is trying to rein them in.

These trends have some old hands, such as former Pentagon R&D chief Robert Costello, con- cerned that research funds are being dissipated on projects that may not provide the most benefit for the military or the economy. Costello, now a fellow at the Hudson Institute in Indianapolis,

$200 million (see chart). Congress i; behind much of this

growth, in part because it has in- sisted on bankrolling specific projects. For example, members of Congress huddled with the Reagan Administration in the late 1980s and put a machine tool program called the National Center for Manufac- turing Saences into the Air Force Mantech budget. Soon other members began inserting targeted funding into the DARPA and Mantech

says he believes the military is "re- buhgets for such things as x-ray Li- treating into a cocoon," isolating itself from the commercial I thography, optoelectronics, and "pre-competitive research" on market and from attempts to use its budget as a means of stimulating new technology. If the Pentagon's efforts shrink and similar programs in the Department of Commerce do not expand accordingly (see accompanying article), the upshot could be a net loss in federal support for high-tech manufacturing.

Controversy over the Pentagon's role as a technology support agency is relatively new, although the military has been support-

unspecified manufacturing technologies. One military source says that it is difficult to spot these insertions, but "basically everybody who's got power" in Congress has a project.

This year, the Bush Administration has decided to attempt to reverse the trend. The president's 1992 budget proposal, says a congressional aide, has "gutted" DARPA and Mantech. The x-ray lithography projects, thc machine tool funding, and many other

ing "generic" technology for several decades. For example, high-technology initiatives have been stripped away. The total DARPA, which sprang to Life in 1958 as manager of space Mantech funding, for example, is supposed to drop &om the projects, evolved into a backer of all kinds of novel gadgetry, present level of $311.5 million to $96.9 million next year. especially electronics, in the 1970s. DAFWA's rationale was that While the White House hasn't specifically articulated its ratio- by betting its mad money shrewdly, it could speed the growth of critical new innovations, giving an edge to U.S. consumer and military goods and keeping costs down. In recent years, for example, DARPA has been bankrolling joint efforts in partner- ship with industry in areas such as high-definition displays-a critical element in the development of high-definition television systems-and by supporting the development of high-speed chip, specialized lasers, computer networks, and infrared sensors.

By the late 1980s, the Pentagon was also channeling hundreds of millions of dollars a year into generic manufacturing technolo-

nale for the moves, Pentagon officials have privately expressed resentment at the "earmarkingn of funds by Congress and regard the growing support for industrial projects as a form of pork- barrel politics that must be stopped, particularly at a time when the overall military budget is shrinking. However, these budget cuts, and the decision to remove Fields from office a year ago, has DARPAYs civilian fans-like Senator Jeff Eingaman (D-NM)- wondering how deep the Administration's commitment is to using the resources of the federal government to stimulate new technology. E.M.

SCIENCE, VOL. 25

5 APRIL 1991 NEWS & COMMENT 23

by an amendment to the defense authori- zation bill last fall. It will be run by a board chaired by Bromley and composed of other Cabinet representatives and leaders from industry and academia. According to William Phillips, associate director of OSTP, this institute will have $5 million to spend over the next 2 years as it prepares "road maps"-or investment strategies-for each technology identified in the April document.

These steps, bolder than any taken by the Reagan Administration, are still viewed by the technology activists on Capitol Hill as extremely modest. And now that Bromley's office and even the Office of Management and Budget have opened the gate just a crack, those who advocate stronger action are likely to pour in and clamor for more funds. They clearly are not satisfied with what has been appropriated to date.

Supporting a handful of regional technology centers and spending $36 million to help industry develop pathbreaking ideas, says Julie Fox Gorte, chief author of a 1990 study by the congressional Office of Tech- nology Assessment, is just a "spit in the ocean." Even if the Administration were to let these parts of the NIST budget grow to $100 million, she says, this would merely amount to "a pittance" in the context of what other nations are doing. Japanese efforts to promote industry are much better funded, she says, and the Europeans are now gearing up to support "hundreds" of technology development efforts under two schemes known as ESPRIT and EUREKA.

Fox Gorte's views have plenty of support- ers on Capitol Hill: Each year since the creation of NIST, Congress has tried to increase the budget rapidly and the Admin- istration has put on the brakes. The pattern is likely to continue as the Administration is expected to keep NIST's policy experiments on a short leash until they have proved their value. Nevertheless, Congress will keep pushing. Last year, for example, the House Science Committee tried to increase funding for NIST's technology awards program, authorizing $250 million for 1992. The bill didn't pass, but Representative Brown, the committee's chairman, recently promised to try again this year.

The negotiations have just begun on where and in what quantity to invest federal dollars, and they could well become a regular feature of the budget dance, like the biomedical funding waltz, in which the White House and Congress each year start at a distance and make their way to middle ground. But the important change in technology policy is that the Adminis- tration is no longer starting at zero. And that, according to the optimists, makes all the difference. m ELIOT MARSHALL

Calmer Waters at Primate Institute? Last fall New Mexico State University's (NMSU) unique primate research institute- one that could be crucial to the U.S. AIDS research effort-looked battered. I t had lost its director and a new, prestigious AIDS research team in a falling out with the university administration. Suddenly endangered was an AIDS research resource of 100 chimpanzees, as many as one quarter of all the chimps available for AIDS research in the United States.

Six months later, prospects for the institute are either a whole lot brighter or still fraught with danger-depending on whom you listen to. To a group ofresearchers from the National Cancer Institute (NCI), the Food and Drug Administration, and the Centers for Disease Control, the worst may be over. A team from those three organizations visited the institute late last year, prompted in part by an article in Science. After inspecting the facilities and being briefed by high-level NMSU officials, the group's head, John Donovan of the NCI, concluded in a special statement provided to Science that: "Considering the nature and extent of problems," a "formidable effort" was under way by the university administration and the institute's management to make the institute a "national research resource." But the team also agreed, said Donovan, that "the next 6 to 12 months would be a critical time period" for assessing the institute's "ability to progress to a stable and smoothly functioning organization."

Meanwhile, the stream ofresignations at the institute has continued. In January, Dave Rehnquist, a former NCI veterinarian who was universally respected at the institute, left his position as head of veterinary services. In February, Ron Couch, a toxicologist with some $1 million worth of research grants, resigned to work for White Sands Research Center, a private primate-research operation in Alarnogordo. And in April, Brenda Billhymer artd the rest of her eight-person clinical chemistry group, which provided support for the institute's contract research, will also move to White Sands.

The resignations aren't likely to help the institute's new director, Preston Marx. Marx came to the institute last summer from the University of California at Davis to replace former director Bill Hobson, who had hoped to make the primate facility into an AIDS basic research lab of national stature. It was Hobson who lured virologist Mika Popovic from Robert Gallo's lab at the National Cancer Institute, along with a bevy of top talent. When Hobson was abruptly dismissed in December 1989, Popovic, his research group, aqd most of the rest of the institute's total of 15 Ph.D.s left one by one.

In interviews with the local press, Marx has reiterated optimism concerning the institute, which he maintains has the potential to be a great research facility of the kind Hobson envisioned. Marx has been struggling to fill the institute's many vacancies and has been working with the university to clean up accounting procedures, which had been a bone of contention with Hobson. Sources say he was particularly cheered by the recent hiring ofAndrew Lachner, a pathologist and former colleague from the California Primate Research Center at UC Davis.

Marx also changed the institute's name from the Primate Research Institute to the New Mexico Regional Primate Research Laboratory (NMRPRL), a move he told the Alamogordo Daily News reflected the lab's position as a statewide resource-and had nothing to do with the bad press the lab got under its previous title. Marx himself is in Sierra Leone and could not be reached for comment. But many independent observers credit him with prodigious labors. Will they be sufficient?

The NCI team isn't the only one interested in the answer. Last week an advisory council appointed by the university administration met to review the institute's research activities. The council, chaired by Leonard Napolitano, dean of medicine at the University of New Mexico, includes Dani Bolognesi of Duke University Medical Center, Ronald Desrosiers of the New England Regional Primate Research Center, and Bill Goodwin, deputy director of the Southwest Foundation for Biomedical Research.

Napolitano told Science the advisory body thought "significant progress had been made in stabilizing the program." The institute seems to be "on its way to establishing programs in immunology and virology." But on the key question ofwhether PRL will ever house the kind of basic AIDS research group Bill Hobson intended, Napolitano responds: "I really can't answer that now."

In any event, Marx's efforts won't lack for scrutiny. The advisory council has become a permanent fixture, and, according to Donovan's statement, the NCI team will visit PRL within the next 6 to 12 months "to evaluate their progress.". KAREN WRIGHT

24 SCIENCE. VOL. 252

u.s. technology strategy emerges

Documents