Report suggests that global `yardstick' be the key to framing funding policy questions that are more answerable in practice
Among other concerns, some scientists question the report's emphasis on maintaining the U.S.'s standing in international research, instead of keeping primary focus on advancing national objectives.
"I don't have any problem with them emphasizing this as a very important criterion," says Arden Albee, dean of graduate studies at the California Institute of Technology. "After all, this is government funding. But if it was worded in terms of national interest, so that this is one of the criteria to judge national interest, that would be a more sensible way to state it. You judge national interest first."
Others have greeted the report as a substantial contribution to the process of rethinking U.S. support of basic science in the post-Cold War era, and to moving beyond the still-influential policy framework fashioned by President ...
