美国两种科技统计工作

联邦政府Ｒ＆Ｄ经费投入普查 １．概述 该调查可以说是联邦科技投入方面最基本的调查，可提供有关联邦政府研究开发（Ｒ＆Ｄ）投入的基础数据。其结果对联邦政府及立法机构制定政策有重大价值，对研究机构管理层、企业研究开发主管和科研人员也有重要参考意义。该调查覆盖的对象是各联邦政府机构和其下属机构。 主要调查变量包括： ·研究性质（基础、应用和开发研究）； ·涉及的联邦机构； ·所涉联邦机构的研究开发经费种类； ·所涉联邦机构的应付经费； ·所涉联邦机构的实付经费； ·联邦政府资助的研究开发中心； ·科研领域（标准的…     

美国联邦政府基础研究经费配置及对我国的启示

一直以来,美国联邦政府高度重视基础研究。正是联邦政府对基础研究的持续稳定投入,为其科技发展长期处于世界领先地位奠定了重要基础。本文基于最新数据,分析研究美国联邦政府对基础研究的资助规模、资助对象以及资助领域等,为在建设创新型国家和世界科技强国大背景下,进一步完善我国基础研究资助体系提供参考和借鉴。     

美国联邦政府科研项目经费管理概况

本文对美国联邦政府科研项目经费的分配、经费支持的科目及项目执行过程中经费管理等情况进行了研究。联邦政府所属研究机构从事的研究项目,一般为非竞争性项目,由联邦政府直接拨款,实行预算管理。对于联邦政府的竞争性项目,则一般要经过同行评议,择优支持。美国《信息公开法》规定,经政府批准的科研经费预算执行情况,在不违背国家利益的情况下,必须向社会公众公布,接受公众的监督。     

美国联邦政府资助的基础研究

美国国力强大的因素之一是其雄厚的基础研究.联邦政府是经费投入主体,大学是研究主体,美国政府在推动基础研究中发挥重要作用,多年保持基础研究投入的稳定增长,成为基础研究的主渠道；立法保障重点基础研究机构翻番的目标,加大重点领域的投入；通过基础研究投入增强了创新实力,改善了生活质量,促进了经济发展.     

美国大学研究成果商业化

据美国国家科学基金会《科学与工程指标2006》统计资料,按执行部分划分,2003年全美研究与开发经费为2775亿美元,联邦政府部门为218亿美元,联邦资助的研发中心为121亿美元,工业部门为1982亿美元,大学与学院（以下简称大学）为399亿美元,其他非盈利机构为53亿美元。从这组数据可以看出,大学是除工业部门外最重要的研发系统;按资金来源划分,2003年大学研发经费有247亿源于联邦政府,26亿源于地方政府,各级政府对大学研发的资助占近70％。     

美国卫生研究院2004至2005年度预算趋势分析

美国国家卫生研究院(NIH)在联邦政府研发经费中的份额仅次于国防部，2004年度研发预算高达272．2亿美元。其主要使命是促进生物医学研究，并支持其它各种促进医学进步的基础研究。它是迄今为止对大学基础研究和应用研究及技术开发资助力度最大的联邦机构，在生物医学、生命科     

美国国立卫生研究院系列调研(一)——基本概况

美国国立卫生研究院(The National Institutes of Health,NIH)隶属于美国卫生与公众服务部,是美国开展和资助医学研究最主要的联邦政府机构.多年来,NIH支持各个领域的科学家们自由探索科学问题,取得了辉煌的成就,极大地促进了人类的健康和生存状况.本系列调研旨在全面介绍NIH的有关情况.本篇主要介绍NIH的基本概况,包括NIH的发展历史、组织结构和经费预算等有关情况.     

澳大利亚新材料研究开发及产业化

澳大利亚的新材料研究比较分散，并没有统一的政府行业发展政策，这一点与能源领域有着明显的不同。澳新材料研究主要集中在联邦政府研究机构，即联邦科工组织，其对％的经费来自政府，体现了政府的支持。此外，联邦政府的研究开发启动计划也对具有商业化前景的新材料研究项目给予资助。下面介绍几个1999年比较突出的新材料领域的研究开发及其产业化的情况。1．纳米碳管材料技术及其产业化澳大利亚科学工业研究组织分子科学研究所的两位年轻的华裔科学家最近开发成功了纳米碳管技术，为生产新一代的电视和计算机平板式屏幕铺平了道路。纳米…     

联邦德国的科技统计

联邦德国拥有雄厚的科技实力和一整套完整、有效地促进科技发展的体制。为保持产品的先进性和价格的竞争性,联邦政府、州政府和企业在科研和技术开发方面投入了极大的人力和财力,1997年用于科研和技术开发的经费投入就达1092亿马克。为确保经费投入具有数量上的适度性、领域上的正确性和战略上的前瞻性,真实地反映国家的综合技术能力、国民经济的国际竞争能力和企业的创新能力,对经费和人力投入加以科学统计是重要手段之一。在这一方面,德国的科技统计体系起到了极为重要的监测和预测作用。本文全面地介绍了德国科技统计体系的总体情况…     

美国生物医学研究概况

美国国立卫生研究院（NIH）专司是美国唯一一家国家级公立生物医学研究机构，负责生物医学领域的研究和管理。在关联邦机构中，NIH掌管的研发经费仅次于国防部。本文对NIH的科研投入情况、资助计划和发展方向进行介绍和分析，旨在从宏观上把握美国生物医学的总体发展水平和重点方向。     

美国纳米计划管理预算及发展战略

布什政府把国家纳米计划（NNI）指定为多联邦机构参与研发的计划，旨在通过各机构间的经费、研发以及基础设施等方面的协调，使联邦政府对纳米的研发投入回报最大化。自布什2001年进驻白宫以来，美国联邦政府给国家纳米计划的投入从2001财年的4．534G美元增至2008财年11．674G美元（以2001年美元值计算），增长了158％。     

DOES FEDERAL FUNDING “CROWD IN” PRIVATE FUNDING OF SCIENCE?

Proposed cutbacks in government science funding have caused many to expect that the rate of scientific progress will significantly decline. Before the magnitude of the decline can be estimated, a preliminary question must be answered: what is the extent to which private funding of science may be expected to fill the gap left by the declining government funding? Using data on government and private funding of science, preliminary estimation indicates that past government funding of science has not “crowded out” private funding of science. If this finding is supported by further research, it would indicate that private funding could not be expected to replace lost federal funding of science. (JEL H4, HI, 03, D6, L3)     

Bringing science to market: commercializing from NIH SBIR awards

We offer empirical information on the correlates of commercialization activity for research projects funded through the US National Institutes of Health's (NIH's) Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) award program. Based on this analysis we suggest possible recommendations for improving this aspect of the performance of NIH's SBIR program. Specifically, we estimate a model of the probability of commercialization as a function of the project's ability to attract additional developmental funding, along with other control variables. We find that additional developmental funding from non-SBIR federal sources and from own internal sources are important predictors of commercialization success, relatively more so than additional developmental funding from venture capitalists. We also find, among other things, that university involvement in the underlying research increases the probability of commercialization. Thus, these factors should be considered by NIH when making awards, if increased commercialization is an objective.     

The endogenous formation of scientific research coalitions

The paper develops a formal model of coalition-building ("network" formation) among research units that seek competitive funding from a supra-regional program, while also drawing support from their respective regional funding agencies. This analysis is motivated by the absence of frameworks of analysis applicable to problems of design of public R&D funding arrangements in the European Union, and in other regional systems were independent programs of "federal and state" support for research co-exists. The model assumes a fixed finite population of research units and an associated distribution of reputed quality, or scientific reputation, which may be modified as a consequence of research results. Non-cooperative games of coalition formation developed by Bloch (1995), and Ray and Vohra (1999), provides a useful single-period framework for this part of the analysis. Collaborations are formed in the expectation of attracting incremental research funding, given the selection criteria of the agency that offers funding for "networks". Invitations to join proposals for networks are initiated and acted upon following a specific ordering procedure. This gives rise to a repeated non-cooperative game of coalition (or collaboration) formation, in which the distribution of payoffs within the collaboration is governed by a fixed rule. Following Keely (2002), this type of game is applied to a multi-period setting in which a distribution of coalitions is tracked, along with the levels of funding received. The latter are determined according to a rule comparing the distribution of reputations within proposed collaborations, and the effects upon the distribution of reputations in the entire population are analysed. Alternative possible external funding rules are evaluated with the help of a numerical example, to determine how their impacts upon collaboration formation, and the resulting evolution of the reputation distribution (as that will be affected by the allocation of funding).     

Academic Medicine Under Economic Stress: A Case Study of the Institutional Change Transforming American Health Care

American Academic medicine--the system of education and research that trains the coming generations of physicians, produces new basic and clinical bio-medical research and provides the medical safety net in many U.S. urban areas--is in a funding crisis. This essay lays out an historical and analytical account of the institutions, functions and funding mechanisms of this enterprise. The objective is to interpret the forces that led to the current impasse in which the medical education establishment now finds itself, and what the future is likely to hold as the forces of budgetary stringency and market competition continue to accelerate. A comprehensive review of the cross-subsidy system, its intricate relationship to the federal financing of health care and its origin in the Vannevar-Bush-inspired post-war research establishment is offered. The standpoint of economic theory is then taken to suggest that the intertwined functions of academic medicine be viewed from two perspectives. One, it can be viewed as a financially unnecessary mix of public and private goods. Two, it is an institutional framework for joint production that evolved under the post-Flexner, post-Bush era reforms of scientific medicine, but which now may be in need of modifications to its mission.     

美国国家创新体系构成特点分析

美国作为全球头号经济强国,在技术创新与研发方面长期保持着世界领先的优势地位,形成了自己独特的创新体系。通过介绍美国国家创新体系的形成过程,分析了其特点,主要有:以企业为主体,由市场驱动;广纳全球创新人才;联邦政府发挥关键作用;引进民间资本参与;严格研发经费管理;与整体经济发展密切相关。美国国家创新体系在未来发展中,将进一步解决创新源泉和传播机制的问题,国防研发将继续发挥火车头的作用,创新能力将会继续居世界领先地位,当然,也面临诸多挑战,如,削减研发经费,研发成本越来越高,创新能力明显下降等。借鉴美国的经验,我国在创新体系建设中,应鼓励创新的减免税收优惠政策法规对所有企业一视同仁,加大对国防研发和基础研究的投入,统筹人才培养与引进政策等。     

Public funding for ocean energy: A comparison of the UK and U.S.

This paper presents a detailed analysis of the activities in which ocean energy public funding in the UK and the U.S. has been spent. It conducts a direct comparison of funding from the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE) with that from the UK and Scottish Governments. UK investment in the sector has been relatively sustained and has increased since 2002. Almost $295 million has been spent in total, across multiple funding bodies. U.S. spending began with the establishment of the Marine Hydrokinetic division of the DoE Water Power Programme in 2008, which has administered all non-defence federal public funding for the sector. U.S. funding has steadily increased since 2008, with the total funding approaching $92 million.Approximately 40% of total U.S. spending has been on underpinning R&D activities, compared to 20% in the UK which has had a larger focus on funding full scale test infrastructure and related deployment activities. Whilst the U.S. has seen steadily increasing funding for all activities to support the sector, UK funding for deployment activities, especially test centre infrastructure and demonstration activities, has not been sustained and has had significant peaks and troughs in recent years as funding programmes and initiatives have started and finished.     

Hospitals and philanthropy as partners in funding nursing education

The current nursing shortage is complex and varies widely across the country, and remedial approaches lack adequate funding from the federal government. Lasting remedies must originate from new and different partnerships between multiple institutions with complementary missions in these markets. Hospitals as major nurse employers and foundations that leverage critical sources of financing have a vital role in partnerships. Together they promote and require new entrepreneurial skills, innovative educational strategies, and greater accountability in meeting area workforce needs.     

瑞士中小型企业创新发展模式

瑞士联邦政府为促进中小型企业创新活动,专门设立了一个国家级创新基金资助独立法人机构——国家技术创新委员会(KTI)。该机构用自建的"科学技术转移支撑系统",为中小型企业提供包括"丰富创新方案、提升创新目标、帮助寻找合作伙伴直至合作项目形成并提供资助"的全程服务。瑞士中小型企业创新发展模式是:自主创新体现在企业创新想法的形成和自身经费的投入上,创新活动的开展依托在科研机构的参与上,创新成功建立在政府支持形成的有效的产学研结合上。