Hans J. Queisser
Director emeritus
Max-Planck-Institute for Solid State Research
Stuttgart, Germany
1.Introduction | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
This report describes observations and
offers comments of evaluation concerning
basic research, as financed by the Japan
Science and Technology Corporation (JST).
This agency funds approximately 14 % of all
basic research in Japan. An international
committee of scientists was asked to visit
Japan, inspect some selected sites, enter
into detailed discussions with JST management
and other experts, and to summarize the findings.
This evaluation tour took place during the
second half of February 2001 and lasted approximately
8 days. The Japan Science and Technology Corporation funds basic research in Japan with a variety of specific and well-defined programs in the physical sciences and the life sciences. These programs were executed with a remarkable degree of independence from other government organizations. This type of funding earned considerable praise from the research community. Very recently, however, major organizational changes appear to be imminent in the policies related to Japanese research. Mergers of government agencies supposedly to reduce cost are being planned. Evaluations, both by national experts and by international reviewers are hence needed to appraise previous policies and to optimize future organizational changes. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2.Organzation of this report. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
First, a brief and subjective historical perspective is given in order to provide background. Impressions of the site visits are then listed with attempts to generalize these limited observations. Evaluations of the different types of research-sponsoring programs and their particular aspects are offered in the following section. Next, some comments are made regarding management style of the JST. A summary concludes the main body. In appendices, the names of the committee members are presented, the schedule is outlined, and the curriculum vitae of this reviewer is attached. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3. Historical perception | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Japanese activities in science and technology
have been very closely watched in Europe
and the USA. After World War II, Japan
and
Germany had suffered similar fates,
but the
economic recoveries differed. Germany
realigned
her industries quickly and became successful
in exporting conventional goods, especially
machine tools, chemicals, and automobiles.
Industrial research for novel products
became
successively weaker. Japan, on the
other
hand, was forced to enter new fields,
especially
for exportable consumer electronics,
computer
hardware, and modern optics. Industry
became
active in speedy development, and application-oriented
research was established as a necessity
for
this development. Japanese universities, on the other hand, remained relatively poor and insufficiently supplied with modern research equipment. In Germany, on the contrary, universities insisted upon their historical Humboldt tradition, a mission of intimately combining research and academic instruction. Universities and an increasing number of national laboratories were created, while private industry tried to keep research expenses at a minimum. This tendency explains the German weakness in modern fields like information technology, modern measurement equipment, optics, software - especially when compared to Japan. Japanese companies traditionally hire young engineers and scientists and give them specialists' education within the company. German industry prefers older and highly specialized experts, thus shifting the expensive burden of financing advanced education to the government. Note that most of my students chose one the well-equipped industry laboratories for their postdoctoral stay in Japan - and not the universities. The majority of the Japanese postdocs in Stuttgart came from industry, often with definitive research projects, which were of strategic use. One of the most fascinating examples was the forceful effort by the Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI) to establish a viable Japanese industrial position in semiconductor microelectronics and all the necessary supporting disciplines, especially in sophisticated lithography, as required for semiconductor chip miniaturization. The detailed organization of this "VLSI" campaign (Very Large Scale Integration), the planning, the mix of cooperation and national competition, and the sheer volume of research and development eventually established a seemingly unassailable position in microelectronics and all its applications. Japan had achieved a truly dominant global role, again not based on a foundation of academic research but on highly coordinated and disciplined industrial development efforts. The United States became increasingly concerned about the fact that over half of the world’s semiconductor devices were being fabricated in Japan. Very much of the semi-conductor manufacturing equipment was being produced by Japanese companies, even including sophisticated high-frequency measurement apparatus, but especially litho-graphy devices, X-ray equipment, and electron microscopes. The strategic position of the US was seriously endangered. This competition became a presidential topic. In the US, a consortium was established with some government financing for a major collaborative effort on semiconductor manufacturing: the SEMATECH laboratories in Austin, Texas. Special envoys, such as Carla Hills or Michael Cantor, were sent as emissaries to the Japanese government to exert massive pressure on Japan to change her policy. The strongest American argument was the so-called "free ride" on American basic research results for creating national industrial strength without contributing to the international treasure of fundamental scientific knowledge. Japan was pressured to increase her own contributions in basic, especially academic research, had to limit her world share in semiconductors to a specified percentage, was forced toward stronger imports, such as 20% of the semiconductor devices used in Japan. The Japanese government and Japanese industry apparently had no choice but to yield to the demands of their most important ally and customer USA. This background of Japan-USA friction greatly determines today's research policy in Japan. Support for industrial development by government funds seems to have diminished strongly; in fact, so much that my close friends from industry now speak with noticeable bitterness of the last ten years a lost decade for modern development efforts. In addition, the recent Asian economic crisis with its weakness in industry has sharply reduced the financial means available for industrial research, especially the long-term projects of a more basic nature. On the other hand, the previously neglected university laboratories appear now to enjoy more attention and receive increased financing and help. The scientific disciplines are now also weighted differently. Technology-related fields seem no longer so intensely emphasized, but upcoming areas, above all the life sciences, are given higher priorities. This political climate has already strongly affected the policies of JST. The other important trends of influence for the JST policy stem from the fact of future necessary cuts in government spending, due to the alarming level of Japan's national debt and also due to political promises made to the voters that the number of public servants will be reduced. The personnel related to research and development is often the politically weakest, thus most vulnerable group. We felt apprehensions among our Japanese discussion partners that the proposed mergers of previously distinct, proven funding organizations and the anticipated reorganizations will hit the science sector especially hard. This apprehension is justified and is probably one of the reasons for JST to obtain evaluations from national and international experts. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
4. Individual visits to selected JST projects | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Our committee visited a limited number
of laboratories, which are currently
funded
under JST research programs (see schedule
in appendix B). It is to be assumed
that
most of these visits were made to groups
being particularly successful. Most
laboratories
were active in the physics/electronics
domain;
there was thus an under-representation
of
the life sciences, which was due to
the committee
composition.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
5. Evaluation of JST Program Structures | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The detailed site visits, many long discussions
with JST staff members, national referees,
mentors and students, consultation of the
meticulously prepared program brochures,
study of reprints and preprints, and interactions
with informed outside observers from academe
and industry provide a reasonable basis for
attempting judgment upon JST programs. The most prominent program was and is ERATO: "Exploratory Research for Advanced Technology". International respect has been gained throughout the last decade. The usual period of support is five years, after which good projects might obtain extension either in a post-project phase or, sometimes in an extended or reshaped form, be continued and utilized in a PRESTO program. PRESTO stands for "Precursory Research for Embryonic Science and Technology". International cooperation is supported by a special system, entitled ICORP Finally, TOREST ("Target Oriented Research for Embryonic Science and Technology ") and the yet more directly applicable SORST("Solution Oriented Research [for Science and Technology]") are recent additions, emphasizing applications, catering towards Japanese societal needs and global competitiveness. Choice of scientific areas is extremely important. JST and their many advisors have done a very good selection, which is modern and show foresight, but do not simply imitate other countries and their fashionable "band wagons". Great care has been expended to maintain instrumentation and other systems -such as software-, which had been initiated by industrial laboratories and are brought to usage in modern fields, such as biology. The great emphasis on electron microscopy is one example for this strategy. Life sciences constitute a large portion of the more recent JST program portfolio. Here, our committee did not possess sufficient expertise to truly and fairly review programs and their success. Cell biology, genetics, membrane physiology, brain research, and related matter carry much weight in the present programs. Other, more theoretical fields, such as modern mathematics, software principles, philosophy and historical aspects of science, or technology directed towards social applications seem to have received less attention The amount of financial assistance per project seems in general to be reasonable, often actually on the more generous side. There is enough flexibility for the recipients in spending the money and dividing it appropriately between equipment and salary expense. Timing is a very important issue, especially when the projects are strictly limited to five years. We convinced ourselves that there a practical ways of helping the researchers, such as officially starting a program only after the main equipment purchase has been completed. Most programs rely on competitive applications and strict selection. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
6. Attitudes of Cultivating Basic Research | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The most significant aspect of the JST
programs, however, concerns the attitude
towards modern research. Bureaucracy is very successfully minimized, which is
a remarkable achievement for every nation,
but especially so in the traditional Japanese
society! Hierarchical frameworks are often found in research communities and obviously also prevail in Japan. JST, however, has dared to realize a revolutionary concept. A quick view into the appealing brochures for ERATO, for example, shows large color photographs of the young researchers. Their capitalized family names provide the project titles, e.g. "TARUCHA Mesoscopic Correlation". Such a personalization would be rather unusual in other countries. German custom, for example, would be to rather stress the topic and keep researchers' names modestly hidden in proper anonymity. JST clearly chose this mode of encouraging the young research leaders, but at the same time indicating their personal responsibility, which must be accepted with the research grants. Role reversal is apparent. In most government-funded research worldwide, the scientists are reduced to humble applicants, begging for money from big organizations. A glance at JST's handsome brochures reveals the opposite: JST proudly presents their program participants. It is to be hoped that such policy is recognized by the general public and the mass media; we had no way to determine whether this has been achieved. Seniority is of particular seriousness in many societies, especially those with Confucian elements of expected reverence to "elder masters". The JST programs here display a most intelligent compromise. Youth is overtly favored in selecting the leaders, but the experienced senior professors are chosen as mentors or directors and are visibly mentioned and highlighted. Responsibility is therefore shared. This system appears to be well accepted, as we gleaned from many discussions, both with older and younger colleagues. JST thus seems to be acutely aware of the possible danger of estranging the younger research generation from their elders with long-earned status in the academic realm. The recipients of the generous JST funding with the concomitant strong publicity must not be barred from later reentry into regular university life. Envy and irritations on the part of the seniors is thus deliberately minimized. Isolation of research groups, together with refusals to share information, is success-fully avoided by JST. Teams are formed and cultivated by senior mentors. Interdisciplinarity is a necessary attribute of any research proposal and is honored and rewarded. The information systems of JST are well cultivated and kept open. Male dominance is still to be observed, especially in the earlier JST programs. This fact is not surprising, because entry into science by women is a fairly recent phenomenon in Japan. The younger programs, in particular for the life sciences and medicine-oriented fields, but also in chemistry and crystallography, indicate a definite increase in the participation of young female colleagues. I suspect that no reductions of quality requirements are made for female applicants, which would in fact be counterproductive. Perpetuation of research projects is truly difficult to avoid everywhere, but again a termination of any project is probably even more serious in societies, where "loss of face" is a characteristic stigma Thus, one can wholeheartedly agree with the strict time limitation of program duration. Nobody is losing face upon termination of a project. It is also noteworthy that JST does not sponsor big institutions, which in most cases are resilient against closing. Here again, the predominance of family names and not only research topics is useful in ending programs. Yet, there is a limited probability of some sort of continuation, such as a PRESTO follow-up to a previous ERATO project, but with different personnel and an altered, expanded mission, as seen -for example- in the wavefront electron microscopy project. Nationalistic traditions do sometimes influence science activities, hence might prevent a modernization according to international standards. Such danger is now slight in Japan. The contacts to other countries, especially to the dominant United States, are healthy and strong. Publications are judged by international standards Acceptance of a manuscript by Nature or Science is -correctly- valued very highly. The young researchers, whom we met, all spoke and wrote good English, which is probably a necessary criterion to be met in the competitions for JST support. Some members of the older generation have not adapted sufficiently to the international lingua franca of science and technology. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
7. Management Style of the Japan Science and Technology Corporation | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
President Kawasaki and his manager colleagues
appear to be keenly aware of dangers and
fallacies in funding and supporting basic
research. They are also evidently fully conscious
of the specific needs of their native country
Japan, which is currently in an undeniable
economic difficulty and must rely on excellence
in research in specific fields of promising
applications. The mistakes and success stories
of other countries are closely watched and
carefully analyzed.. Many of my older Japanese friends remarked with respectful surprise how JST management avoided falling into the trap of a bureaucratic system, which often provides good excuses for all kinds of deficiencies. Deviation from well-established bureaucratic modes of operation does require some courage and must be based on experience and international comparisons. At the same time, taxpayers and politicians want accountability for the money spent and the topics chosen. Here, JST seems to comply rather well. The fraction of the funds not directly used for research but for internal JST management seems small indeed, if it is really only about 5 %, as told to us. This surprisingly fresh and courageous management style appears to be based upon a charter of freedom and of limited scope of research funding. Our committee sensed everywhere a considerable apprehension that this exceptional and successful style might be irretrievably lost upon execution of the proposed mergers and reorganizations within the government agencies for science and technology. Japan would then lose a most efficient and modern means of sponsoring research! |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
8. Summary | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Our evaluations were limited in time and scope. Nevertheless we can attest to a very successful strategy of research advancement by JST. This organization does not have the mission of a very broad national coverage of research and development. This limited scope enabled JST to selectively sponsor modern, synergistic, and inter-disciplinary research. Selection of topics is done with close scrutiny and great care. Input from both the top and the bottom of the academic and political strata is possible and is utilized. The various, well-defined and non-bureaucratic programs allowed JST to introduce strategies, which may definitely be called modern, if not revolutionary, for Japan. The quality of the research already sponsored is excellent and clearly meets international standards. Industrial research of great significance was continued and efficiently extended. Intense international contacts have been established. First-rate research is coupled to special academic training by including graduate students wherever feasible. The plans for the future appear well coordinated. No evidence for waste or major strategic errors could be detected by our committee. Universities, however, are seen to be in dire need for improved buildings, more secure laboratories and modernized infrastructure. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
![]() |
APPENDIX A Members of Overseas Review Committee |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Prof. Per C a r l s s o n, Stockholm; chairman,
Physics Section of Swedish Royal Academy Dr. George G a m o t a , Lexington, Mass., president, Sci &Technol. Management Associates Prof. Colin H u m p h r e y s , Materials Science, Cambridge University, United Kingdom (Dr. Arnold J. L e v i n e , president, Rockefeller University, New York; unable to attend) Prof. Guy O u r i s s o n , Louis Pasteur Univ., Strasbourg; Pres. French Academy of Science Prof. Hans J. Q u e i s s e r, Max-Planck-Inst. for Solids, Stuttgart, Germany |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
APPENDIX B Schedule for H. J. Queisser, February/March 2001 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
APPENDIX C Curriculum vitae for Hans J Queisser |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hans Joachim Queisser was born in Berlin,
Germany on July 6, 1931. He studied physics
at the Free University of (West-)Berlin,
at the University of Kansas (USA), and at
the University of Goettingen, Germany. In
Goettingen, he obtained his doctorate in
experimental solid-state physics in 1958. In 1959, he joined the Shockley Transistor Corporation in Mountain View, California, which is now recognized as the "cradle of silicon valley". Under the guidance of Nobel laureate and transistor inventor William B. Shockley, he studied silicon, its crystal growth principles and defect structures, process technology, and basic properties of p-n junctions. With Shockley, he published a seminal paper on the fundamental theory of semiconductor solar energy converters. He was awarded an "Outstanding Achievement Award" in 1963. In 1965, he became Member of Technical Staff at the Bell Telephone Laboratories in Murray Hill, New Jersey. There he did research on compound semiconductor materials, especially on gallium arsenide for optoelectronic applications. He was awarded the basic patent for the invention of the high-efficiency infrared light emitting diode, which is still being used in huge quantities, such as for remote TV control. The University of Frankfurt, Germany appointed him as a professor of physics in 1966. He built up a new laboratory for semiconductor research and training. In 1970, the Max-Planck-Society for Basic Research asked him to become a founding director of a new large laboratory for fundamental research on solid state materials at Stuttgart, Germany, with a facility for high magnetic fields in Grenoble, operated jointly with the French research organization C.N.R.S. In this facility, Queisser's colleague Klaus von Klitzing first discovered the quantum Hall effect, which earned him a Nobel Prize. Queisser's doctoral student Horst Stormer performed his thesis experiments there: he was later also awarded a Nobel Prize for physics. Queisser is a Fellow of the American Physical Society and was President of the German Physical Society. He served on industrial boards, such as for Hewlett Packard (USA), Scientific American (USA), Wacker (Germany) and the Bosch Corporation (Germany). He also served as adviser to several ministers of Research and Technology of the German Federal Republic and is a member in various academies. His book "Kristallene Krisen" was awarded a prize; its English version is published by Harvard University Press under the title "The Conquest of the Microchip". Queisser served in the Senate of the Max-Planck-Society (MPG) and its planning committee; he also served as chairman of the Scientific Council of the MPG. Max-Planck institutes are obliged to initiate and maintain strong international scientific exchange. Queisser was visiting scientist at Bell Labs, and IBM laboratories in San Jose, California and Yorktown Heights, New York. After retirement he was a visiting professor at Stanford and was awarded a "Miller Professorship" at Berkeley; he taught at the National University of Singapore as a "Distinguished Visitor". Queisser has established particularly strong scientific ties to Japan, which began with a visit in 1962. Unusually many postdocs and senior visitors were exchanged between Japan and the Stuttgart institute. Queisser is a member of the Japan-Germany Cooperation Council, which was installed by Prime Minister Miyazawa and Chancellor Kohl. He was on advisory committees for ETL and NAIR in Tsukuba. He spent four months at the SONY Research laboratory in Yokohama. He won the German "Seybold Prize for Scientific Cooperation with Japan". Hans Queisser is married to Inge, nee Scheven. They have three children. Hans Queisser retired from active service as of January 1998. |
This page updated on August 22, 2001
Copyright(C) 2001 Japan Science and Technology Corporation.
www-pr@jst.go.jp