The State of Research Infrastructure at U.S. Universities
Opening Statement By Chairman Daniel Lipinski
Good afternoon and welcome to this Research and Science Education Subcommittee hearing on the state of our universities’ infrastructure for research AND research training. This is one in a series of hearings and roundtables that we are holding as this Subcommittee works on the bill reauthorizing the National Science Foundation and the Committee works on the reauthorization of the America COMPETES Act. Our focus on this legislation is a direct acknowledgement of the fact that America’s science and technology enterprise underpins the long-term economic competitiveness of our country.
Over the past 60 years, a great number of societal and economic benefits have come out of the highly successful partnership between the federal government and our nation’s colleges and universities. Not only do these institutions train the workforce needed in a modern economy, but they also conduct the research that generates new knowledge and technologies. It is a testament to the productivity of this arrangement that eighty percent of the National Science Foundation’s research dollars go to academic institutions.
But successful R&D takes more than intellectual freedom and grant funding. You also need state-of-the-art lab space, networks, instruments, and computing facilities, and I have heard some concerns from the academic community that this infrastructure is being neglected. Public institutions especially are suffering as the recession has eroded state support. I am worried that unless we actively modernize our R&D facilities that we could not only be spending federal research dollars inefficiently, but that we could lose our position as scientific leaders, finding it harder to attract top scientists and engineers.
Our competitors are investing in all aspects of their R&D ecosystems. Only a decade ago, if you asked an exceptional Chinese graduate student in science or engineering whether they would rather return home or stay and become an American citizen, nearly all of them would have chosen the latter. But that is no longer the case, with the best students increasingly being lured back home. At least part of the reason for this is the new availability of cutting-edge facilities and support they need to succeed as researchers.
Today we want to examine the state of our universities’ research infrastructure and to consider the federal role in supporting this infrastructure, in particular the appropriate balance between investing in the research itself and investing in the infrastructure that underlies and supports both research activities and workforce training.
Currently, universities maintain and upgrade their own campus-based facilities with funding from a variety of sources. Federal agencies such as the NSF directly or indirectly support some of this infrastructure, but their primary mission is to support research and multi-user facilities that benefit the scientific enterprise and society broadly. Historically, however, the NSF has at times funded merit-based academic research infrastructure. For example, in the 1960’s and 70’s the NSF ran a laboratory development program, an institutional science grant program, and a development program for university centers of excellence.
In the mid-80’s, this Committee systematically examined the issue, beginning by requiring the NSF to prepare biannual reports on the research facilities needs of universities, and ultimately passing the Academic Research Facilities Modernization Act. This Act led to both the NSF’s Major Research Instrumentation Program and the Academic Research Infrastructure Program.
But, apart from one-time funding in the stimulus bill last year, federal programs to modernize scientific infrastructure have languished in recent years. Perhaps as a result, the 2005 Survey of Science and Engineering Research facilities found that academic institutions were deferring $3.5 billion in needed renovation projects.
During today’s hearing, I want to hear our witnesses thoughts on whether they think the NSF should once again directly invest in research infrastructure for universities. Obviously, even with increases in NSF funding, trade-offs will have to be made. I also hope to learn about how academic institutions are currently leveraging federal investments to improve the research capacity of their institutions. I would also like to hear our witnesses’ ideas on how best to ensure that our research infrastructure keeps up with both the frontiers of the science and our international competitors. Finally, I am interested in learning about the opportunities to expand our research and educational capabilities through growing our cyber infrastructure.
I want to thank the witnesses for their flexibility in the rescheduling of today’s hearing. The Committee already had a very full calendar over the next few weeks, and with hearings postponed by this month’s record snowfall some changes had to be made. I thank the witnesses for being here this afternoon and I look forward to your testimony.
Witnesses
Panel
1 - Dr. Leslie Tolbert
Vice President for Research Graduate Studies and Economic Development University of Arizona Graduate Studies and Economic Development University of Arizona
Download the Witness Testimony
3 - Dr. John R. Raymond
Vice President for Academic Affairs and Provost Medical University of South Carolina; Chair, State of South Carolina EPSCoR Committee Medical University of Sout
Download the Witness Testimony
4 - Dr. Thom Dunning
Director of the National Center for Supercomputing Applications University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Download the Witness Testimony
2 - Mr. Albert Horvath
Senior Vice President for Finance and Business Pennsylvania State University Pennsylvania State University
Download the Witness Testimony