Federal funding for academic science and engineering research and development failed to outpace inflation for the second year in a row, according to a report recently released by the National Science Foundation. As a result, the University is tapping into reserves to support research teams and turning toward other sources of potential funding.
According to a NSF press release, federal funding for research and development expenditures has declined 1.6 percent since 2006, once adjusted for inflation. This decline primarily affects the physical sciences, engineering and technology, and biosciences, said Thomas Skalak, University vice president for research.
About 80 percent of all research money at the University is dependent on federal research money from the National Institutes of Health, according to James Savage, University executive assistant for federal relations.
Though the decline will lead to greater competition for federal funds among universities, Skalak said he believes the University will continue to be competitive, citing highly ranked programs, excellent facilities and the “talent that we attract”.
To further increase its competitiveness, Skalak said the University is making an effort to feed funds into research in promising areas, such as the current collaborative effort among the electrical engineering, physics and chemistry departments to research alternative energy sources.
The University, led by President John T. Casteen, III, has been teaming up with other higher education institutions to convince members of Congress to increase federal funding and support NIH, Savage said. Additionally, because the decrease in funding disrupts research, the University has been tapping into reserves to float research teams.
The University also is relying on outside sources to fund scientific research. Skalak said the University is “highly committed” to acquiring private philanthropic resources and is also pursuing corporate collaborations, hoping to increase corporate funds from 10 percent of research funding up to 30 percent. He added that these partnerships are beneficial to corporations as well, because most have downsized or outsourced their internal research and development operations.
“They are looking to the nation’s universities to harness their basic research capability,” he said.
Skalak emphasized the importance of the physical sciences, engineering and technology and the biosciences, noting that many other areas of study that receive greater federal funds than the physical sciences are dependent on scientific research and development. As an example, he cited nanotechnology, the current focus of the Engineering School, and its potential to affect homeland and cyber security.
“Investment in basic technologies in physical science and engineering can pay dividends in more than one national area,” Skalak said.
Although the NSF would not comment on the data, according to the press release, the two-year decline in federal funding in constant dollars is unprecedented for the 35-year data series; however, Savage said 2009 “looks much better”, noting that Congress just passed a bill appropriating close to $300 million for the physical sciences and is looking to increase NIH’s budget.
Skalak added that with the promise of a new administration, the future of research and development is optimistic.
“We are hopeful that there will be an increase in recognition in the value of sciences to the nation’s competitiveness in a global economy,” he said.