REVIEW OF JST BASIC RESEARCH PROGRAMMES

Colin Humphreys
Department of Materials Science & Metallurgy,
University of Cambridge,
Cambridge CB2 3QZ, UK
31st March 2001

1. Summary and Recommendations
	The research funded by JST under ERATO, CREST, PRESTO and ICORP is at the leading edge internationally, highly innovative and enormously impressive. I make the following recommendations 1.1 The highly successful ERATO programme should be expanded from the existing 4 new projects per year to 5 or 6 new projects per year. I believe the funding per project, typically Y2 billion (about US$16 million, UK£11 million) to be about right. 1.2 A start-up period of up to 2 years should exist before ERATO, CREST and ICORP projects commence when the Project Director, or Leader, can order equipment and arrange to hire staff in advance of the official start date. 1.3 Despite considerable attention being given by JST to technology transfer I believe that problems still remain. I recommend that JST sets up a Working Party to consider in detail technology transfer out of its ERATO and other programmes. 1.4 Off-campus sites (but still close to the university campus) should be sought for CREST projects in order to provide sufficient good quality space for the research. The CREST projects are excellent and their number should be increased. 1.5 JST should set up a Working Party to consider how international representation, particularly from Western countries, can be increased in both CREST and ERATO projects. However, this is difficult because of the shortage of good western scientists (apart from in the life sciences, where the supply is greater and the demand is less) and because of language problems. 1.6 The highest successful PRESTO programme should be expanded by 50%. I believe this can be done without loss of quality. The amount of money per project is about right. Consideration should be given to having both 3 and 5 year PRESTO projects. 1.7 The budget for all JST programmes should have more flexibility, with money being able to be carried forward (or back) from one year to another, provided that the total budget for the project is not exceeded. 1.8 The ICORP programme, despite being difficult to set up and manage, is outstandingly good and should be continued and expanded. This joint international programme is of great benefit to Japan and to the overseas partner country. 1.9 If JST decides to pay overheads to universities, these should not be too large, possibly in the range of 20% to 40% on salaries. 1.10 The excellent JST projects for promoting public understanding of science and technology should be expanded, possibly to include leading overseas scientists giving public lectures with demonstrations.
2. Introduction
	This Review is based upon my visit to Japan from 22 - 28 February 2001, as part of an International Review Panel set up by the JST to review their basic research programmes in science and technology. The other members of the Review Panel who visited Japan were Professor Per Carlson (Sweden), Dr George Gamota (USA), Professor Guy Ourisson (France), and Professor Hans Queisser (Germany). The Review Panel visited many research groups and individuals funded by the JST, heard presentations from members of research groups, and had discussions with many individual scientists, both young and old. We received excellent documentation about the overall funding strategy of the JST and the detailed funding of individual projects. We also had meetings and discussions with JST officials. All these meetings were very useful and informative and our visit was extremely well planned by the JST. In this Review I will comment separately on the different JST programmes: ERATO, CREST, PRESTO and ICORP. I will also comment separately on the overhead (indirect costs) situation in the UK and on the Public Understanding of Science and Technology.
3. ERATO - Exploratory Research for Advanced Technology
	In the ERATO programme, the JST uses a 'Think Tank' and many interviews with scientists to carefully select key individuals working in new and important research areas to become the Directors of major research projects which are funded for 5 years. The total funding per 5-year project is typically Y2 billion (about US$16 million or about UK£11 million), which currently does not include overhead funding. JST and the Director then select the project team of scientists from universities, national laboratories and industry: the scientists usually being young scientists. Concerning the funding profile, as expected, most of the equipment is purchased in the first year or two, and in the last three years most of the funding is spent on salaries for the scientists. We made site visits to three ERATO projects out of the 20 current projects as described below: 3.1 Kitano Symbiotic Systems (Tokyo) This is a very ambitious, exciting, challenging and high-profile research programme which aims to establish a new field of computational biology and intelligent systems. The Project Director, Dr Kitano, is Senior Researcher at the Sony Computer Science Laboratories, and he was originally trained as a particle physicist. He has enormous vision and drive. The project is roughly 70% biology and 30% computing, it employs 22 people and had two years of preparation before the official start date of 1998. The project is strongly linked into Sony in California for software developments, and one key aim of this project is to make the software developed the international standard in this field. 4 spin-off companies have already been generated by this project. The intelligent robots being developed in this project are enormously impressive and are receiving a huge amount of media publicity in the international press, (for example in 'Time' magazine). 3.2 Namba Protonic Nano Machine (Kyoto) The aim of the project is to understand the physical processes and mechanisms underlying biological molecular machines, for example exactly how is the rotation of flagella in bacteria driven. The Project Director, Dr Namba, is the Research Director of the Advanced Technology Research Laboratory of the Matsushita Electric Industrial Company. I found the results of this project, which started in 1997, quite amazing. The work is very beautiful and the detailed mechanisms which have been determined for proton flow driving the rotation of a biological molecular motor which causes the flagella to rotate is a brilliant piece of research. This multidisciplinary project employs 15 people and involves advanced electron microscopy, X-ray diffraction, physics and biology. No start up time was required before this project officially started since the project was started in Matsushita. 3.3 Yokoyama Nano-Structured Liquid Crystal (Tsukuba) This project started only recently and currently employs 11 staff paid for by JST. The aims of the project are to understand the self-organising properties of liquid crystals, combine these with biological molecules and design nanometre-scale superstructures in liquid crystal media. The Project Director, Dr Yokoyama, is the Chief of the Molecular Physics Laboratory of the Electrotechnical Laboratory. This very exciting project combines theory and simulation with two experimental groups, one basic and one applied. There is huge potential in the world class work being performed in this project. 3.4 Assessment and Recommendations for ERATO The work being performed is extremely innovative and world leading. It is enormously impressive. The JST policy of carefully selecting a Project Director and then giving him a substantial budget plus a team of outstandingly able younger scientists from both universities, research institutes and industry, works extremely well. We do not have this system in the UK and this Japanese ERATO system works much better than related systems (e.g. Interdisciplinary Research Centres) we have tried in the UK. My first recommendation therefore is that you should keep the highly successful ERATO system that you have developed. I recommend expanding this from the existing 4 new projects per year to 5 or 6 new projects per year. I believe the funding per project (US$16 million) to be about right. In all the projects I visited it was clear that having only five years as the project length was a problem. However, I do not recommend extending this. I recommend that the start-up phase, when equipment is ordered and staff are selected and hired, is carefully co-ordinated with the Project Director and can last for up to 2 years. The 5-year project can then start and 'hit the ground running'. Of course, 2 years start-up may not always be needed: flexibility is required in this. My clear impression is that, despite substantial JST activity on technology transfer, there are still problems with technology transfer out of ERATO programmes in particular. I do not know the causes, but part of the problem may be a lack of knowledge of the researchers about technology transfer. Another problem may be that the large companies employing the Project Director and/or some of the staff understandably may not be happy to see new ideas being exploited in new small companies, which sometimes may be a faster route to exploitation than through large companies. I recommend that JST sets up a Working Party to look into technology transfer.
4. CREST - Core Research for Evolutionary Science and Technology
	The purpose of CREST is to promote basic research in strategic research areas through universities and national laboratories. JST selects key research areas within the strategic sectors identified by the STA and solicits research proposals in these areas. The research project period is up to five years, and the research budget per project is typically between Y50 million to Y200 million per year (US$400,000 to US$1.6 million or UK£300,000 to 1.1 million per year), including overheads. There are typically 10 - 20 researchers per project. We made site visits to the following CREST projects out of the 287 current CREST projects. 4.1 Microscopic Resolution of Phase and Amplitude of Electronic Wave in Solids, led by Professor Kitazawa and Dr Tonomura. Unfortunately my plane did not arrive in time for me to attend this site visit. However, I am well aware of the superb work being carried out by Professor Kitazawa as the leader with the co-operation of Dr. Tonomura, the former ERATO leader. 4.2 Synthesis of Antiferromagnetic Quantum Spin Ladder Compounds and their Novel Properties, led by Professor M. Takano (Kyoto University). This is an extremely novel and challenging research project. 4.3 Molecular Mechanisms of Ageing. Led by Professor Nabeshima (Kyoto University). This important project is to study the mechanisms for ageing. In particular a novel mutant mouse, called klotho mouse, has been genetically engineered to have multiple ageing related disorders. The causative gene has been identified and these findings raise the possibility of studying the molecular mechanisms of ageing and obtaining a therapy for these. 4.4 Assessment and Recommendations for CREST The CREST programmes I saw were highly innovative and very successful. The projects are mainly performed on university campus sites, and the project leaders often have difficulty in finding sufficient space for the research. I therefore recommend that off-campus sites (but still close to the campus) are sought for CREST projects. The number of CREST projects should be increased. 26% of the 500 CREST researchers employed by JST are foreign, but mostly from Asia. It would be good to have a wider geographical spread of foreign researchers, both for CREST and for ERATO projects. I recommend that JST sets up a Working Party to examine how international representation, particularly from Western countries, can be increased in both CREST and ERATO projects. The flexible funding available under CREST is excellent. I recommend that, as with ERATO, a start-up time of up to 2 years is considered in addition to the 5 years of the main project.
5. PRESTO - Precursory Research for Embryonic Science and Technology
	PRESTO research areas are chosen for really new seedcorn science and technology. There are no restrictions on age of the applicants so this is an excellent opportunity for young researchers to gain independence and pursue their own ideas. PRESTO projects are for 3 years and each researcher has a distinguished Research Mentor for advice and support. There is also no restriction on institutions, so individual researchers can hold a PRESTO grant at a public or private university, research institute, etc. In the year 2000, 382 researchers held PRESTO grants totalling over Y4,000 million (about US$34 million or UK£24 million). Over the 3 years of a project, the budget per researcher for equipment, consumables, etc. is between Y30 - 40 million (about US$250,000 - 320,000 or UK£170,000 - 220,000). PRESTO is an excellent programme for young scientists to pursue ideas generated in ERATO and CREST programmes. In fact, 12 young scientists employed on ERATO projects then went on to PRESTO projects and 5 young researchers with CREST went on to obtain PRESTO grants. In addition 2 young researchers from ICORP (see below) projects went on to PRESTO projects. The process works the other way as well: 7 scientists from successful PRESTO projects were selected as leaders of CREST projects, and a further 2 were selected as Directors of ERATO projects. In addition 7 researchers from PRESTO went on to follow up TOREST programmes. The JST Programmes therefore form an integrated, interlocking set of programmes which I find very impressive. In Kyoto we had presentations from four PRESTO researchers. Each one was extremely impressive and PRESTO is clearly a very excellent scheme. I understand from speaking to the young PRESTO scientists we met that the scheme is very competitive, also the 3-year length of the grant can sometimes be too short, and in addition the yearly budget has to be spent each year. Many of those selected for PRESTO awards subsequently achieve rapid promotion. For example, out of the 200 researchers who have concluded a 3-year PRESTO project, 25 university lecturers or assistant lecturers have been promoted to Professor or Associate Professor and 21 Associate Professors were promoted to Professors. In addition, 6 researchers at private companies went to universities and 11 researchers at private research institutes became Professors. I recommend that the highly successful PRESTO programme is substantially expanded by 50%. I believe this can be done without reducing quality. The amount of money per project is about right. I also recommend that consideration is given to having both 3 and 5 year PRESTO projects, and that the budget spending should have more flexibility, so that money can be carried forward from one year to another.
6. ICORP - International Co-operative Research Project
	Last but certainly not least we come to the ICORP programme. The objective of ICORP is to develop new knowledge and new concepts in key areas of science and technology through international links between Japan and foreign researchers, based on an equal sharing of costs. Thus a research team is set up in Japan which works closely with a similar research team set up in an overseas country. The key areas from which the research projects are chosen include new materials, life sciences and electronics. Each ICORP project lasts for 5 years and employs about 10 researchers in each country (a total of 20 for the project). Typically 60% of the money is spent on salaries, with the rest being for equipment, consumables, etc. Each research team can contain scientists from academia, industry and government research organisations and there is a Research Director from each country. The budget for each country per project is Y2 billion (about US$16 million or UK 11 million) not including overheads. The intellectual property rights (IPR) are shared between the JST and the equivalent organisation in the overseas country. We made a site visit to the ICORP project on Nanotubelites (Research Directors Prof. Sumio Iijima, Meijo University and Prof. Christian Colliex, CNRS Aime Cotton Laboratory, France). Professor Iijima, the discoverer of carbon nanotubes, described the world leading research being undertaken on this ICORP project on many aspects of carbon nanotubes, particularly growth mechanisms, the synthesis of new materials for nanotubes and other nanostructures, the use of advanced electron microscopy and electron energy loss spectroscopy (EELS) for their characterisation at the atomic level, etc. Recently the possibility of hydrogen storage in nanotubes is being explored. This very exciting project is absolutely world class and world leading. I would particularly like to urge the continuation and expansion of the ICORP programme. First it must be recognised that international collaborations like this are by their nature very difficult. The Research Directors on each side must be very high quality scientists and leaders, and they must get on well with each other. The research teams on each side must also be very high quality and must get on well with each other. The administrators on both sides must recognise different approaches and different methods of working in the countries involved. Achieving real integration between the two international teams so that 'the whole is greater than the sum of the parts' is difficult, and some international projects will probably fail because of one or the other of the difficulties mentioned above. However, the rewards for success are great. If the integration of world-class research teams in Japan and an overseas country can be achieved then this will mean that 'the whole is greater than the sum of the parts' and the project should greatly benefit from different viewpoints and inputs. In addition, long lasting research collaboration should be achieved, which long outlives the 5-year timescale of the ICORP project. I therefore recommend that the excellent ICORP programme is continued and expanded.
7. Overheads (Indirect Costs)
	I understand that at present the JST pays no, or a very small amount of overheads to universities or research institutes, but that this is under consideration. The overhead situation in the UK is as follows. On European Network grants, funded by the European Union (EU) it has been agreed that the EU will pay 20% overheads on the total value of the grant to the university holding the grant. In many European countries the university returns all or most of this overhead to the research group that generated the grant for use as flexible research money. In most UK universities, for example, Cambridge, this does not happen and the central administration of the university keeps the overheads. UK academic staff are not happy with this since it places them at a disadvantage compared to other European research groups. On UK Government grants from Research Councils (for example the EPSRC - the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council) the Government pays 46% overheads on the salary element of the research grant. In some universities part of this overhead money is returned to the research group that generated the grant, but again in Cambridge this does not happen. On industrial research contracts to universities, the overhead charged depends upon the university. Imperial College London charges over 100% overheads. Cambridge charges a minimum of 70% overheads on the salary element of the grant. Again in Cambridge none of this overhead money comes back to the research group that generated the grant and the University spends the overhead money largely on other projects. Many UK industries resent paying such large overheads, which I believe act to decrease industry - university collaboration. Indeed UK industries are increasingly funding work in overseas universities because of their lower overhead charges. Many UK academics also resent UK university administration taking such large overheads. I therefore urge JST not to go down the route of paying large overheads. I recommend overheads in the range of 20 - 40% on salaries.
8. Public Understanding of Science and Technology
	Many countries in the world have a problem with the public image of science and with the number of school children who want to become scientists and engineers. Because success in science and technology is essential for a successful economy, it is important to improve the public awareness of science and the promotion of science. The JST Projects for promoting public understand of science and technology are excellent and impressive but I recommend that even more effort is devoted to this. One possible additional activity would be to have more public lectures, with demonstrations, from leading overseas scientists with proven ability to give exciting public lectures.
C. J. Humphreys 31 March 2001