NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
TOKYO REGIONAL OFFICE
March 10, 2003
The National Science Foundation's Tokyo Regional Office periodically reports on developments in Japan that are related to the Foundation's mission. It also provides occasional reports on developments in other East Asian countries.
Tokyo Office Report Memoranda are intended to provide information for the use of NSF program officers and policy makers; they are not statements of NSF policy.
Report Memorandum #03-02
WORKSHOP ATTENDANCE REPORT
OECD GLOBAL SCIENCE FORUM WORKSHOP ON BEST PRACTICES
IN INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE COOPERATION
TOKYO, JAPAN; FEBRUARY 12-14, 2003
The following workshop attendance report was prepared by Dr. Christopher A. Loretz of the National Science Foundation’s Tokyo Regional Office. He can be reached at cloretz@nsf.gov.
The Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) hosted the OECD Global Science Forum Workshop on Best Practices in International Scientific Cooperation during February 12-14, 2003. The purpose of the Workshop was to extract lessons and best practices for planning and implementing new multinational scientific research projects. Four themes were identified by the organizers, and a series of case study sessions were built around these themes. The four themes were: (1) Review and comparison of existing studies that have focused on the sharing of major scientific tasks; (2) Designing, building and operating a large-scale facility; (3) Creating, linking and maintaining large databases; and (4) Other important issues in scientific cooperation. In addition to the roughly two dozen program presenters, there were forty-four registered attendees at the Workshop. This latter group included many from the Tokyo Science and Technology Diplomats Circle, of which the American Embassy Minister-Counselor for Environment, Science and Technology and the NSF/T Office Director have historically held seats. Overall, fifteen countries were represented.
Several broad themes from the individual sessions and participants’ comments from the general discussion are worthy of mention here:
1. International collaboration is important for several reasons: (a) International collaboration leads to tremendous scientific power (including the construction of major facilities and the assembly of great intellectual capital) and can avoid senseless competition; (b) Governments are recognizing that investment in scientific research is linked to economic growth and health, and to beneficial effects on citizens (e.g., improved health); (c) Major policy issues around the world demand consensus, and scientific collaboration can provide agreement on the facts and what the facts are saying; and (d) Scientific collaboration can promote economic growth and development in developing regions.
2. Discovery and innovation (as putting knowledge to work) can drive economic growth and competitiveness. Innovation was proposed as a “tool” for use in many areas (e.g., innovation in health care and environmental issues).
3. Training is an important component of international cooperation. Two specific points were made: (a) Training activities can “bring along” young researchers; and (b) Emphasis on developing countries can be increased through “twinning of researchers and programs,” wherein appropriate, specific couplings between scientists or research groups in developed and developing countries are identified and supported.
4. Policy makers and program planners must understand the reasons for different nations to join international collaborations. Specifically, they should know what will be the national benefit(s) enjoyed by the partners, and assure that excellent science will result from the investment.
5. Communication between scientists and policy makers should be improved and encouraged. Some examples were offered, such as the Canadian “Bacon and Eggheads” functions.
Session Highlights
Session 1: Review and comparison of existing studies that have focused on the sharing of major scientific tasks
o Geopolitical and cultural factors have strong influences, and can sometimes act as constraints, on scientific policy and development.
o Since consensus is needed for progression to the next “step” or “level” of collaboration, more and better outcomes may result through collaborations with a common geopolitical and cultural basis.
o Develop broader collaborative sharing through “virtual” institutes, and include mechanisms for participation by postdoctoral researchers, and by graduate and undergraduate students.
o Consciously include international scope in reports to policy makers to reduce “blind spots.”
o In order to fuel their development, include developing countries/regions in large collaborative projects.
o Maintain realistic expectations regarding the expected contributions from developing countries/regions, and about what is expected as returns.
o Developing countries/regions can begin project involvement individually through fellowships.
o Add a domestic return year to foreign training opportunities as an inducement to return.
o Investments in domestic research and scientific infrastructure (facilities, networking opportunities, for example) will promote return.
Session 2: Designing, building and operating a large-scale facility
o Building large, expensive facilities that a single nation cannot
o Assembling tremendous power (including intellectual capital)
o Promoting S&T breakthroughs (stimulating originality, and introduction of new methods, devices and instruments)
o Exchange of design information
o Overcoming barriers to disadvantaged communities
o Opening new markets and promoting technology transfer
o Establishing clear scientific goals
o Achieving cost savings by using existing infrastructure
o Developing contingency plans at start-up
o Building stable, long-term funding
o Allowing time for intergovernmental consultations
o Addressing asymmetries in resources for partnerships with developed and developing countries (equity works better than equality as partnership basis)
o Organizing strong political support can add a powerful boost to program initiation (organize effective meetings between scientists and policy makers)
o Open exchange of information is important at all stages, and should begin from the start
o Ensure fair treatment of all partners
o Design a clear management structure with an effective governing council or board
o Seek long-term commitment from major partners
o Accommodation of junior scientists (especially postdoctoral and graduate students) in large projects
o Strive to achieve an attractive, high profile
Session 3: Creating, linking and maintaining large databases
o Digital technologies are changing the way researchers work, and how data are collected and stored
o For different areas (neuroinformatics, biodiversity and social sciences, for example), databases are in different stages of development
o Flexible databases can offer self-indexing and visualization of connections
Session 4: Other important issues in scientific cooperation
In the closing session, there was discussion of a “handbook” of best practices for international cooperation. It was noted by the discussion panelists that this idea had been raised at an earlier Global Science Forum event, but had met strong hostility from the scientific community. It was argued at that time that scientific projects are too different from one another to be handled in this format, that a handbook would be seen as meddling by non-scientists (administrators and policy makers), and that it would be too proscriptive. The panelists at this forum agreed that a better approach would be the development of a “checklist” of issues to be considered during the development of international collaborative projects and programs.
The Workshop’s full report will be submitted to the OECD Global Science Forum and, with its concurrence, will be made available to the public.