 
|
SYMPOSIA
 |
•••As of February 1, 2002
|
|
|
|
| Governing Science and Science in Government |
Inroads to Scientific Reform and Cooperation with Russia
Friday, February 15, 2002 2:30 p.m. - 5:30 p.m. |
|
| Elizabeth J. Kirk, AAAS; Gerson Sher, US Civilian Research and Development Foundation |
| In the ten years since the demise of the Soviet Union, the atmosphere for scientific cooperation between the United States and Russia has undergone dramatic changes. From early fears of the total collapse of Russian science, to unprecedented international rescue efforts and the limited introduction of competitive grantmaking, to the establishment of a measure of financial stability but at a drastically reduced level, Russian researchers and their Western colleagues have contended with wildly fluctuating conditions. The political changes of the 1990s also resulted in unprecedented access to Russian researchers, institutions, and territories, opening vistas of scientific cooperation that were unthinkable just a few years before. More recently, there have been indications of a more traditional, security-conscious approach to international scientific cooperation in Russia. Was the openness (but chaos) of the 1990s just a flash in the pan of U.S.-Russian scientific cooperation, or did the decade result in strong, lasting reforms that will allow Russian scientists to participate fully in the world scientific community? |
| 1 | What More Needs to Be Done to Foster Scientific Cooperation with Russia? | James Collins (Speaker), Former US Ambassador to Russia |
| 2 | No Title Available | Boris G. Saltykov (Discussant), Russian House for International Scientific and Technological Cooperation, Russia |
| 3 | Trends and Transitions in Russian Science | Irina Dezhina (Speaker), Institute for the Economy in Transition |
| 4 | No Title Available | Manfred Horvat (Discussant), Bureau for International Research and Technology Cooperation |
| 5 | Russia’s Contribution to Polymer Chemistry: Innovations and Potential Breakthroughs | Nikolai A. Plate (Speaker), Russian Academy of Sciences |
| 6 | Non-Proliferation and US-Russian Scientific Cooperation | Rose Gottemoeller (Speaker), Carnegie Endowment for International Peace |
| 7 | Russian Contributions to Energy Technology Development: Forging Cooperative Relationships | Victor Alessi (Speaker), U.S. Industry Coalition, Inc. |
| 8 | Will the Next Generation of Computing Come from Russia? | Terry Heng (Speaker), Motorola Corporation |
|
Low Dose Radiation: Science, Ethics and Communication Shaping Public Policy
Friday, February 15, 2002 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon |
|
| Sharon M. Friedman, Lehigh University; Antone Brooks, Washington State University-Tri-Cities; JoAnn M. Valenti, Brigham Young University |
| Uncertainties over health risks from exposures to low doses of radiation continue to be a concern to both federal regulators and the general public. New scientific capabilities may now help resolve many of these long-standing uncertainties. Such resolution would affect ongoing debates over future uses of nuclear power and waste cleanup. Health effects from high levels of radiation are well documented, but little scientific information exists on the actual effects of radiation doses at and well below the current annual occupational exposure limit of 5 rads. Recent developments in technology, genomics, and molecular biology now make it possible to directly study the biological effects of exposure to low doses of radiation. For example, some cells can suffer adverse effects of radiation without even being irradiated if their neighbors are irradiated; cells can be made "resistant" to some effects of radiation following a prior low dose exposure; or cells may exhibit biological effects many generations after exposure. Genetic differences among people can also affect individual sensitivity to, and therefore risk from, radiation. This session reviews some of these new scientific advances, which are part of the Low Dose Radiation Research Program sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy. In particular, it highlights discussion of the bystander effect and genetic instability. The session also focuses on public perceptions, understanding and communication of low dose radiation risk, ethical issues associated with potential exposures of different populations to radiation, and community response to and public policy implications of low dose radiation research. |
| 1 | No Title Available | Sharon M. Friedman (Moderator), Lehigh University |
| 2 | New Science from the Low Dose Radiation Research Program | Antone Brooks (Speaker), Washington State University-Tri-Cities |
| 3 | The Intercellular Matrix and Radiation Induced Cancer | Mary Helen Barcellos-Hoff (Speaker), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory |
| 4 | Radiation Induced Genomic Instability and Cancer | William F. Morgan (Speaker), University of Maryland |
| 5 | Public Perceptions of Low Dose Radiation Risks | Paul Slovic (Speaker), Decision Research, Inc., University of Oregon |
| 6 | Ethical and Policy Issues in Workers' Exposure to Ionizing Radiation | Kristin Shrader-Frechette (Speaker), University of Notre Dame |
| 7 | Radiation-Related Decision Making Based on Community Participation and Science | Seth Tuler (Speaker), Social and Environmental Research Institute |
|
Stewardship of Digital Scientific Information: Challenge and Opportunity
Sunday, February 17, 2002 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon |
|
| Clifford A. Lynch, Coalition for Networked Information |
| Three major changes are taking place in scientific communication. The scientific journal is migrating to digital form; while many still publish both in paper and on the net, printed versions of many journals will vanish in the next few years, and in some cases the electronic versions are already considered to be the definitive ones. Many disciplines are now using large digital databases as an integral part of scientific communication and the development of scientific knowledge; this is true in areas as diverse as physics, astronomy and planetary science, and the life sciences. And finally, the databases and the journal literature are becoming interlinked and interdependent in complex ways. Technical approaches and organizational and policy arrangements to ensure the long-term availability of this collection of digital information are of compelling concern to scientists in all disciplines, as well as to policy makers. Librarians are concerned with organizing and managing this content, and computer and information scientists are developing techniques to maintain digital information over time. The purpose of this symposium is to inform scientists in all disciplines about the current state of the art in stewardship of digital information, both at a technical and an organizational, policy and economic level, and to provide insights into how different disciplines are addressing the challenges of the digital environment. |
| 1 | Overview of Digital Archiving Issues and Technologies | Clifford A. Lynch (Speaker), Coalition for Networked Information |
| 2 | Models and Frameworks for Digital Archiving | Don Sawyer (Speaker), NASA Goddard Space Flight Center |
| 3 | Scholarly Society Perspectives: Physics | Stewart C. Loken (Speaker), Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, American Physics Society |
| 4 | A View from the Library World | Dale Flecker (Speaker), Harvard University |
| 5 | The Role of the National Supercomputer Centers | Sidney Karin (Speaker), University of California-San Diego |
|
Coping with Complexity: Managing the Academic Research Enterprise
Saturday, February 16, 2002 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon |
|
| J. Scott Hauger, AAAS; Edward Derrick, AAAS |
| Academic research has become a big business by any standard. Total academic R&D in 2000 exceeded 0 billion, more than a twenty-fold increase in half a century. More than 90 American universities manage research portfolios larger than 00 million per year. Academic research has also become a very competitive business. Only one-third of proposals to National Science Foundation receive an award. Researchers and their institutions must plan strategically to capture the resources necessary to sustain and expand their research enterprise. Research competitiveness requires the management of complex research teams and centers many of which exceed the maximum size for a small business firm ( million in annual revenues). Such growth in complexity has led to the gradual development of new institutions and new practices in research management that have become an integral part of the research community. Both universities and research sponsors have created new professional positions, new kinds of research organizations, and new approaches to the definition of research problems in response. This symposium seeks to explore the ways in which the research community has evolved new practices in research management and administration to cope with the growing complexity of the research enterprise. The session will work to articulate a set of questions, problems, and issues for research in the history and sociology of science concerned with the practice of research management and the relationships between administrative institutions and the content of research. |
| 1 | Old Cultures and New Organizations | Irwin Feller (Speaker), Pennsylvania State University |
| 2 | The Contemporary Role of the Research Vice President: Issues, Opportunities and Problems | Lydia Villa-Komaroff (Speaker), Northwestern University |
| 3 | University as Workplace: Coping with Complexity and Diversity | Daryl Chubin (Speaker), National Action Council for Minorities in Engineering, Inc. |
| 4 | Integrative Science: Research Management for Consortia of Independent Investigators | James C. Paulson (Speaker), The Scripps Research Institute |
| 5 | INRA: A New Model for University Collaboration | Gautam Pillay (Speaker), Inland Northwest Research Alliance |
|
Good Performance Indicators Do Not Grow on Trees
Sunday, February 17, 2002 9:00 a.m. - 12:00 noon |
|
| Susan E. Cozzens, Georgia Institute of Technology |
| Measuring the returns from research activities is a perennial problem of science policy. New accountability frameworks have placed a premium on developing indicators of the outcomes of research, yet few completely new methods are available to apply to this task. Over the last year, research evaluators have been reviewing the state of the art in measuring performance in research programs and setting directions for future research. The dialogue involves users of research assessment, from Congress and the research agencies, as well as academic evaluation experts, from the U.S. and abroad. A major issue is the relationship between performance indicators, like those required under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA), and broader systems of strategic assessment and evaluation. Presenters at the symposium will be asked to give their perspective on the most fruitful avenues for the development of research assessment practice, in light of claims like the following made at a recent workshop: Extending performance indicator systems to individual level kills creativity. An over-emphasis on performance indicators crowds out program evaluation, and prevents managers from understanding the full effects of their programs. Evaluation users tend to live in the silos of their programs and agencies, and need more opportunities to think more broadly about the innovation system. The research base for assessment should include fundamental exploration of dynamics such as interdisciplinarity, networks of innovation, human capital development, and distributional effects. Without this research, program managers will not know a good performance indicator when they see one. |
| 1 | The Good, the Indifferent, and the Less than Attractive in GPRA Implementation | Irwin Feller (Speaker), Pennsylvania State University |
| 2 | No Title Available | Diane B. Raynes (Discussant), U.S. General Accounting Office |
| 3 | Outcome Measurement in the United States: State of the Art | David Roessner (Speaker), SRI International |
| 4 | No Title Available | Norine E. Noonan (Discussant), National Space Science and Technology Center |
| 5 | Outcome Measurement in Europe: State of the Art | Terttu Luukkonen (Speaker), Technical Research Center of Finland (VTT) |
| 6 | No Title Available | Mel Mark (Discussant), Pennsylvania State University |
|
Intellectual Property, Pharmaceuticals, and Human Rights
Monday, February 18, 2002 9:30 a.m. - 12:30 p.m. |
|
| Audrey R. Chapman, AAAS; M. Gregg Bloche, Georgetown University |
| This symposium explores the extent to which it is possible to harmonize intellectual property protections, the realization of national and global health policies, and the protection of the status of health as a human right. Tensions between government health policies and world trading rules have been building for the past decade. Recently, intellectual property protections for pharmaceuticals, particularly in the case of drugs for HIV/AIDS, have been the subject of considerable legal and political controversy. Disagreements related to the interpretation of the World Trade Organization Trade Related Intellectual Property (TRIPS) Agreement's approach to the manufacture and pricing of life-saving drug treatments have been a major factor. At its 2000 and 2001 sessions, the United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights adopted resolutions identifying actual or potential conflicts between the implementation of the TRIPS Agreement and the realization of a range of economic, social and cultural rights, including the right to health. Important questions have also been raised regarding the patenting of genetic information. Several critics claim that the present patent system risks becoming a barrier to medical progress. Speakers delineate these issues and seek to provide a conceptual foundation for overcoming these problems. |
| 1 | World Trade, Development, and International Health | M. Gregg Bloche (Speaker), Georgetown University |
| 2 | Intellectual Property and the Economics of Pharmaceutical Development | Henry Grabowsky (Speaker), Duke University |
| 3 | Patents in a Genetic Age | Sandy Thomas (Speaker), Nuffield Council on Bioethics |
| 4 | Intellectual Property and Access to Medicines and Health Care | James Packard Love (Speaker), Consumer Project on Technology |
| 5 | Human Rights Implications of Intellectual Property Protection | Audrey R. Chapman (Speaker), AAAS |
|
Patenting, Science and the Public Interest
Monday, February 18, 2002 3:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. |
|
| Carolyn Deere, The Rockefeller Foundation; Audrey R. Chapman, AAAS |
| This symposium will explore the range of public interest issues that arise with respect to patenting. The expanding scope and length of patents in the life sciences has sparked strong public debate about the impact of patents on innovation, research trends, and the broad and rapid dissemination of new technologies, particularly those desperately needed to meet the health and agricultural needs of the poor in developing countries. As they consider their policies on patents and licensing, universities and funding agencies face a series of trade-offs between the goals of stimulating scientific progress, commercializing and disseminating new innovations, and ensuring adequate returns and accountability to the public for taxpayer sponsored research. From a commercial perspective, innovative new approaches to intellectual property are emerging in several sectors to overcome barriers to the information sharing that is vital to scientific progress. And in developing countries, there is strong debate about the desirability and utility of patenting in terms of its impacts on the ability of their scientists to access recent research results, tools and innovations and the misappropriation of their genetic resources and traditional knowledge. In addition to questions about the desirability of a 'one size fits all' approach to patent policies around the world, concerns have also been raised about the costs to developing countries of establishing, maintaining and enforcing effective patent systems. Speakers will delineate these quandaries and seek to provide a conceptual foundation for responding to them. |
| 1 | The Private and Public Domain in Genomic Research | Rebecca Eisenberg (Speaker), University of Michigan Law School |
| 2 | IPR Challenges to the Scientific Endeavor | Jon Merz (Speaker), University of Pennsylvania |
| 3 | Patents, Licenses and Public Financing of Research | Maria Freire (Speaker), The Global Alliance for TB Drug Development |
| 4 | Patents and Innovation: How Strong Is the Link? | Joshua Lerner (Speaker), Harvard University Business School |
| 5 | Private Sector IPR Lessons: New Approaches to Scientific Innovation | Alfred Roach (Speaker), American Biogenetic Sciences |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
