Uncertain future for academic research Talking to C&EN early this month, the National Science Foundation's acting director, Richard C. Atkinson, expressed his concern that U.S. universities over the next 20 years might not remain the vital centers of basic scientific research that they have been in the past (C&EN, Nov. 8, page 18). More recently, he expanded on that theme in a speech delivered at Iowa State University. The problem of maintaining quality graduate research at colleges and universities is an extremely important one, Dr. Atkinson says, pointing out that 55% of the U.S.'s basic scientific research is done at these institutions. In chemistry, he says, more than half of the research reports come from doctoral candidates. Three factors combine to make the next 20 years uncertain ones for university research, he says. Most often mentioned is the level of funding for such research, particularly from the federal government. But also important are demographic trends that seem certain to reduce the number of undergraduates studying science and engineering at universities and a lack of flexibility among faculties. This latter condition comes in large extent from the increasing percentage of science faculties that are at mid-career and tenured, leaving little room at universities for younger scientists to find places for themselves. Examining financial support for basic research in universities since the early sixties, Atkinson finds a sixfold increase in support through 1975 when that level reached $2.4 billion. The federal share of that support, about 70% in 1960, rose to 76% by 1968, and by 1975 had dropped back to 71% or $1.7 billion. Since 1970, however, increases in money for research have been outpaced by inflation. This situation is particularly true of federal support of basic research, which declined 5% from 1968 to 1975 in constant-dollar terms. "I believe the end of growth in the sixties was inevitable and that it reflected a perception that we had overbuilt our educational plant in the sciences, that we were producing too many scientists and engineers for the available careers in these
disciplines, and that continued growth at the heady rate of the earlier 1960's could no longer be justified in terms of national security needs," Atkinson explains. The drop in federal support in real terms, however, seems to be about over. The budget request for the 1977 fiscal year, which began last September, includes $2.5 billion from all federal agencies to support basic research in science and engineering, an increase in current dollars of 7.4% over 1976, according to Atkinson. Inflation probably won't eat up all of that gain, he says. However, for the second factor contributing to university R&D's uncertain outlook, decreasing undergraduate enrollments, the worst seems yet to come. The population of 18-year-olds—the potential "market" for undergraduate education—is expected to peak in 1979 at 4.3 million, a 60% increase over 1960. By 1990, however, there will be fewer than 3.5 million in this age group. NSF predicts graduate enrollments in science and engineering will total about 210,000 in 1985, a drop of 15% from the peak enrollment in 1970. And future enrollments in the physical sciences in particular look even worse; graduate enrollments peaked earlier and are falling off faster than for science as a whole. NSF estimates put peak enrollment in 1968 at 41,000. By 1973, levels already had fallen 12%, and by 1985 they are expected to be 55% below the 1968 level. Both decreasing enrollments and reduced financial support are having their effect on university science faculties, Atkinson says. NSF forecasts a probable faculty level of about 230,000 in science and engineering by 1985, a drop of 7% from the 1972 level. Again, the physical sciences are the worst case with a drop of 25% expected. It is this decrease in faculty size that is in large part responsible for the third problem facing basic science research at universities, the lack of flexibility of faculties. The number of faculty members who have earned their doctoral degree within the past seven years dropped from 42% to 27% from 1968 to 1975, Atkinson says. And by 1974 the portion of science and engineering faculty holding tenure had reached 70%. For chemical engineering faculty, one of the highest cases, this level had reached 81%. These tenured
Decreasing student enrollment is one problem confronting universities
Atkinson: drop in federal support faculty members are still far from retirement age, however. Data from 1973 in the physical sciences show 80% of the doctoral faculty under age 50 and 95% under 60. "The age distribution in university faculty," Atkinson says, "is such that we're not going to have significant numbers of retirements over the next 20 years. That, compounded with a possible reduction of faculty size, means that we're not going to have a flow of young people into the universities. If there aren't young people in the universities, can they still continue to be vital centers for research? I doubt it." Can anything be done to improve this outlook? Possibly, says Atkinson. He sees a number of possible roles for the federal government in the matter. For instance, mid-career facility members could be encouraged to enter second careers, freeing their faculty positions for younger scientists. Incentives for such a move could include the government's picking up at least a portion of the retirement benefits that faculty members lose when they make such shifts. Or the government might set up a program of senior research scientist grants that would pay about half of a scientist's regular salary for him or her to devote full time to research, with the requirement that the scientist's teaching load be picked up by a younger faculty member. Atkinson suggests initially that such awards might range up to $25,000 annually for a five-year period, with the possibility of a one-time renewal of five years. Another way to employ mid- career scientists usefully and at the same time free faculty positions for younger scientists might be to increase the role of private industry in supporting basic research done by "academics." Atkinson suggests setting up research institutes supported in part by industry but under university auspices. Scientists working in these institutes would be full-time researchers. Tax incentives would be helpful in getting industry support for such institutes, he suggests. So would a suggested new NSF policy to expand support of such joint industry-university projects. D Nov. 29, 1976 C&EN
25
