Reports & Papers
&a
BCSIA: 1998-1999 ANNUAL REPORT
5. Science Technology & Public Policy Program
CORE FACULTY AND STAFF
John P. Holdren, Program Director and Faculty Chair; Teresa and John Heinz Professor of Environmental Policy
Matthew Bunn, Program Assistant Director
Deborah Hurley, Information Infrastructure Project Director
Nora O''Neil, Information Infrastructure Project Coordinator
Jennifer Weeks, Managing the Atom Project Director
Laura Wilson, Program Assistant; Assistant to John Holdren
Lewis M. Branscomb, Director Emeritus; Aetna Professor of Public Policy and Corporate Management, Emeritus
Harvey Brooks, Director Emeritus; Benjamin Pierce Professor of Technology and Public Policy, Emeritus
Jean Camp, Assistant Professor of Public Policy
Ashton B. Carter, Ford Foundation Professor of Science and International Affairs
William Clark, Harvey Brooks Professor of International Science, Public Policy, and Human Development
Paul Doty, Director Emeritus, BCSIA, Mallinckrodt Professor of Biochemistry, Emeritus
Jane Fountain, Associate Professor of Public Policy
David M. Hart, Associate Professor of Public Policy
Sheila Jasanoff, Professor of Science and Policy
Henry Lee, Lecturer in Public Policy, Director, Environment and Natural Resources Program
Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, Assistant Professor of Public Policy
Steven E. Miller, Lecturer in Public Policy, Director, International Security Program
F. Michael Scherer, Roy E. Larsen Professor of Public Policy and Management
Dorothy S. Zinberg, Lecturer in Public Policy
Dean Berlin, Information Infrastructure Project Research Assistant
Kristen Eddy, Managing the Atom Project Research Associate
Stephen Feinson, Information Infrastructure Project Research Assistant
Charles Meadows, Managing the Atom Project Research Assistant
Laure Mougeot Stroock, Managing the Atom Project Research Associate
Sabine Pust, Assistant to Dorothy Zinberg and David Hart
Andrew Russell, Information Infrastructure Project Staff Assistant; Assistant to Lewis Branscomb and Harvey Brooks
Peter Sedlak, Assistant to Sheila Jasanoff
Associates and Visitors
Guillermo Cardoza, STPP Associate
Robert Frosch, Senior Research Associate
Masamichi Ishii, STPP Associate
Megan Jones, STPP Associate
Calestous Juma, Senior Fellow
Edwin Ruh, Jr, HIIP Associate
Laure Mougeot Stroock, STPP Associate
Research Fellows
Phillip Auerswald, STPP Fellow
Nolan Bowie, Information Infrastructure Project Fellow
Y. T. Chien, Information Infrastructure Project Fellow
Paul de Sa, Energy R&D Fellow
Therese Feng, Energy R&D Fellow
Carolyn Gideon, Information Infrastructure Project Fellow
Masamichi Ishii, STPP Fellow
David Johnston, Information Infrastructure Project Fellow
Thomas Kiessling, Information Infrastructure Project Fellow
Clarisa Long, STPP Fellow
Kate O''Neill, Managing the Atom Fellow
Ambuj Sagar, Energy R&D Fellow
Eli Turk, Information Infrastructure Project Fellow
BACKGROUND
The Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program (STPP) focuses on the interactions of science and technology with public policy institutions and decisionmaking. Specifically, STPP seeks to address the three questions. First, how do these interactions work? Second, how do they affect the mix of societal benefits, costs, and risks associated with science and technology? Third, how can the interactions be improved in ways to increase the benefits and reduce the costs and risks?
Like the other research programs at the Belfer Center, STPP is strongly interdisciplinary, drawing on perspectives and methods from the natural sciences, engineering, political science, economics, management, and law to study problems where science, technology, and policy intersect. Current focuses of STPP research, policy outreach, and teaching include the future of civilian and military nuclear activities and public participation in decision making about them; energy research, development, demonstration, and deployment to meet the challenge of human-induced climatic disruption; the expanding global information infrastructure; science and technology policy to promote the innovation needed for competitiveness, sustainability, and security; the processes by which science and technology policy decisions are made; and the impact of science and technology on society as a whole, along with the role of democratic governance in shaping that impact.
The 1998-99 academic year was a time of continued success in explicating key science and technology policy issues and in shaping a variety of policy debates, from climate change to management of nuclear materials. During the year STPP welcomed a new Senior Fellow, Dr. Calestous Juma (shared with the Center for International Development, a joint venture of the Kennedy School and the Harvard Institute for International Development). Juma, a Kenyan, holds a doctorate in science and technology policy from the University of Sussex, and most recently served as Director of the United Nations Biodiversity Convention, and is an expert on technology policy for development, biotechnology, and biodiversity. STPP also welcomed a new Assistant Professor of Public Policy in the Kennedy School, Dr. Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, whose work focuses on information infrastructure policy issues, including privacy, security, liability, and ownership, and who will be affiliated with STPP''s Information Infrastructure Project. With law degrees from both Harvard Law School and the University of Salzburg and an international relations degree from the London School of Economics, Mayer-Schönberger came to the Kennedy School from the University of Vienna Law School after founding a successful data security software company. Finally, Dr. Vicki Norberg-Bohm, an Assistant Professor of Planning at MIT, who is an expert on technology innovation and a frequent collaborator with BCSIA, agreed to join BCSIA formally as director of its work on energy technology innovation, starting on September 1, 1999, immediately after the period covered by this annual report. While at MIT, Norberg-Bohm has been an active participant in the BCSIA project on energy research and development (described below), and she is co-principal investigator with William Clark and John Holdren on a Department of Energy (DOE)-funded BCSIA project on "Technological Innovation for Global Change: The Role of Assessment, R&D, and Regulation." In addition to welcoming new colleagues, STPP and its participants continued to earn widespread recognition for their work: for example, STPP Director and Faculty Chair John Holdren, who continued to serve on the President''s Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology, was asked by President Bill Clinton to chair a national study of international cooperation in energy innovation (described below), while Professor Sheila Jasanoff, who continued to serve on the Board of Directors of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, became President-elect of the Society for Social Studies of Science.
RESEARCH AGENDA AND POLICY OUTREACH
The Project on Managing the Atom is a multiyear, interdisciplinary research and policy outreach initiative focusing on key topics in two broad areas that are central to the future of nuclear arms reductions, nonproliferation, and nuclear energy:
Nuclear energy-weapons linkages: Managing, monitoring, protecting, and disposing of nuclear materials in the military and civilian sectors (including weapons-usable materials in forms ranging from intact nuclear warheads to spent fuel and other nuclear wastes), and managing potentially weapons-related nuclear technology and knowledge, under current conditions and various possible futures for nuclear arms limitations and nuclear energy; and adapting U.S. nuclear nonproliferation and nuclear trade policies for maximum effectiveness in the post-Cold War period.
Nuclear decisionmaking: Improving the performance of key agencies that make and oversee nuclear policies; reducing nuclear secrecy that is no longer needed; increasing public input into nuclear decisionmaking; finding ways to build consensus around urgently needed actions; and exploring alternative approaches to democratic governance of the nuclear enterprise.
Managing the Atom takes a strategic approach, concentrating on issues that are both (1) central to future policy and (2) a fruitful focus for additional work, because they either are underexamined or the focus of such intense political conflict that unbiased review has been difficult.
While housed in STPP, Managing the Atom addresses core issues that reach across the Belfer Center and beyond, and hence is a joint effort between STPP, the International Security Program (ISP), and the Environment and Natural Resources Program (ENRP), with the directors of all three programs serving as co-principal investigators.
Nuclear issues featured prominently in the news during the 1998-99 academic year. Notably, Russia''s financial collapse in the late summer of 1998 increased the likelihood of nuclear leakage, as guards went unpaid and security equipment unused at key sites in the former Soviet Union. In the spring of 1999, the disclosure of Chinese spying in the U.S. nuclear weapons complex spurred calls for responses that Managing the Atom participants argued were themselves problematic, such as suspending foreign visits to U.S. national laboratories and restructuring management of U.S. nuclear weapons activities in ways that could reduce rather than enhance organizational accountability. Contentious issues from NATO intervention in Kosovo to debates over missile defenses soured U.S.-Russian relations, undercutting prospects for continued nuclear arms reductions. Controversies over nuclear weapons programs in North Korea, Iraq, India, Pakistan, and Iran continued to boil. The election of a new coalition government in Germany that included the Green Party triggered a national debate over the future of nuclear power, and the Asian financial crisis delayed plans for new nuclear reactors in countries such as South Korea that are the world nuclear industry''s principal remaining markets. Major international controversies over plutonium reprocessing persisted. In the United States, the release of the long-awaited viability assessment for the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository was followed by a potential agreement between the federal government and nuclear utilities over management of spent nuclear fuel until a repository becomes available.
Nuclear Weapons Energy Linkages
Managing Cold War Legacies - Warheads, Materials, Complexes
Nothing could be more central to U.S. security than ensuring that the nuclear legacies of the Cold War are securely managed, and that the essential ingredients of nuclear weapons do not fall into the wrong hands. Managing the Atom participants devoted substantial attention during 1998-99 to continuing the Belfer Center''s long-standing work on preventing "loose nukes" and building the basis for deep, transparent, and irreversible reductions in stockpiles of nuclear warheads and weapons-usable nuclear materials. While the year saw little progress on the U.S.-Russian arms reduction agenda, Managing the Atom participants worked behind the scenes to build support for new initiatives to secure, monitor, and reduce stockpiles of nuclear weapons and weapons-usable materials, and to shrink and stabilize the oversized and underfunded Russian nuclear weapons complex. This work fell into six principal categories:
A Strategic Plan for an Expanded Nuclear Security Effort. In the wake of the nuclear security crisis provoked by Russia''s economic meltdown in August 1998 - with nuclear guards leaving their posts to forage for food, and electricity to run nuclear security systems being cut off for nonpayment of bills - it became increasingly obvious that a greatly expanded effort was needed across the entire spectrum of nuclear security cooperation, and that such an effort required an integrated and prioritized overall plan. Accordingly, Managing the Atom participants prepared a series of papers proposing a comprehensive set of new initiatives to secure, monitor, and reduce U.S. and Russian nuclear stockpiles. The first version of these proposals was included in the February 1999 report of the Washington-based Committee on Nuclear Policy, Jump-START: Retaking the Initiative to Reduce Post-Cold War Nuclear Dangers, and presented by Managing the Atom participant Matthew Bunn at the Seventh Carnegie International Nonproliferation Conference in January 1999. A much more detailed version - summarizing the threats posed by current mismanagement of these materials and the current status of numerous bilateral programs designed to address them, and outlining specific proposals for next steps in each of five areas related to nuclear weapons or weapons-usable materials - will be published in a forthcoming book from the Carnegie conference, Repairing the Regime, and, in expanded form, as a special joint report from Managing the Atom and the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. This chapter includes the most extensive set of recommendations published to date for ensuring that security at Russian nuclear facilities can be sustained over the long term - a critical issue highlighted by the August 1998 crisis.
In addition, BCSIA Director Graham Allison and Bunn served as chair and vice chair, respectively, of a high-level task force for the Center for Strategic and International Studies'' "Global Nuclear Materials Management" project, chaired by former Senator Sam Nunn. This task force on "Funding Nuclear Security" outlined a sweeping set of new steps to reduce threats posed by nuclear stockpiles in the former Soviet Union that would be possible if additional funds were applied to the task. Allison also served on the Senior Policy Panel, chaired by Senator Nunn, that integrated the results of all five task forces and included most of the recommendations of the Allison-Bunn task force. The results of this CSIS effort were presented at a major international conference in Washington on July 22, 1999.
During the year, BCSIA brought both DOE Secretary Bill Richardson and Assistant Secretary for Nonproliferation and National Security Rose Gottemoeller to Harvard for presentations and discussions on the "loose nukes" problem. In response to BCSIA''s continued recommendations for new approaches, Secretary Richardson asked the Center in the spring of 1999 to review DOE''s programs to "secure, monitor, and reduce nuclear stockpiles and reduce and stabilize the Russian nuclear complex." A team of Managing the Atom participants is working to identify specific, actionable steps that can make a near-term, measurable, and lasting difference in reducing security threats posed by the current state of the former Soviet nuclear stockpile, and that can be initiated during the remainder of the Clinton administration. Recommendations will be briefed to DOE officials in the fall of 1999. At the same time, Managing the Atom participants will also make key recommendations available to the members of Texas Governor George W. Bush''s foreign policy team.
New Approaches for Nuclear Material Security. During the nuclear security emergency of late 1998 and early 1999, Managing the Atom participants worked closely with a wide range of reporters to document the crisis and make the case for steps to address it, providing a continuously updated list of documented incidents and contributing to news stories on the crisis in outlets including the New York Times, the Washington Post, USA Today, the Los Angeles Times, and the Philadelphia Inquirer. BCSIA Director Graham Allison published an influential article on the crisis in the Washington Post ("Why Russia''s Meltdown Matters," August 31, 1998). Matthew Bunn appeared on the first episode of CBS News''s 60 Minutes II, and Bunn and BCSIA''s Ashton Carter appeared on PBS''s Frontline highlighting the urgency of the nuclear security emergency. Bunn also coauthored an article on the subject that was published in the Boston Globe and several regional newspapers.
Working closely with colleagues from RANSAC, of which Bunn is a member, Bunn and other Managing the Atom participants met repeatedly with DOE and White House officials, as well as with congressional staff members, to build support for a range of measures for addressing the emergency, many of which were ultimately implemented, and for reversing previous plans to slash nuclear material security funding after FY1999. In part as a result of these efforts, requested FY2000 funding for securing nuclear materials in Russia in the President''s Expanded Threat Reduction Initiative was increased from approximately $105 million originally planned to $145 million.
Managing the Atom fellow Stacy VanDeveer applied lessons learned from capacity building in international development assistance to produce a targeted set of recommendations for the crucial issue of building sustainable capacity for long-term safe and secure management of nuclear material in the former Soviet Union. VanDeveer published his findings as a Managing the Atom discussion paper and presented them to policymakers at the State Department. DOE asked Bunn to chair a special session at the American Nuclear Society''s biannual "Global ''99" international nuclear conference on efforts to ensure sustainable security at former Soviet nuclear facilities, with speakers including DOE Assistant Secretary for Nonproliferation and National Security Rose Gottemoeller and First Deputy Minister of Atomic Energy Valentin Ivanov, among others.
A key issue in assessing the "loose nukes" threat in the former Soviet Union is simply to identify and evaluate the wide range of FSU facilities that possess plutonium and highly enriched uranium. During 1998-99, Managing the Atom Fellow Allison Macfarlane developed a database of all facilities in the former Soviet Union where plutonium and highly enriched uranium (HEU) are present, with descriptions of sites, locations, quantities of material present (where information is available from unclassified sources), and other data such as U.S. and international assistance programs under way at each facility. This guide will be published in report form in late 1999, and subsequently converted into a Web-based clickable map. In the spirit of reciprocity, Macfarlane is also preparing a similar publication and clickable map covering U.S. facilities.
Finally, to provide an additional source of revenue for nuclear material security in Russia - particularly crucial when international financial assistance eventually phases out - Managing the Atom participants developed a new concept for a "debt for security" swap, modeled on past "debt for environment" swaps, in which the debtor government places an agreed amount of money in an auditable fund for improving the environment or improving security, in return for forgiveness of a larger amount of debt. A paper outlining this possibility is in preparation, and Managing the Atom participants hope to work with Group of Eight governments as they work toward restructuring Russia''s government debts to put together a major debt-for-security initiative.
Retooling Russia''s Nuclear Cities. U.S.-Russian cooperative efforts can address individual symptoms of the proliferation problem in the former Soviet Union, but as long as Russia maintains a vastly oversized and underfunded nuclear complex, the underlying causes of the problem will remain and the symptoms are likely to recur. Shrinking this complex to a sustainable size and reemploying excess nuclear scientists and technicians are the missions of the new government-level U.S.-Russian Nuclear Cities Initiative (NCI), launched as a result of recommendations from the Russian-American Nuclear Security Advisory Council (RANSAC), with its Managing the Atom participants, who continued to play a central part in shaping the effort during 1998-99.
Matthew Bunn and RANSAC Director Kenneth Luongo were largely responsible for convincing key members of Congress to provide NCI''s initial funding of $15 million (the Clinton administration did not request funds for the program, which was announced after its fiscal year (FY) 1999 budget was completed). Bunn and Luongo then worked with the administration to double that figure in the request for the following year, and with Congress to try to prevent major cuts from the administration''s request. Bunn and his RANSAC colleagues published a comprehensive plan for providing alternative employment in the nuclear cities in the September 1998 Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.
In partnership with BCSIA''s Strengthening Democratic Institutions (SDI) Project and the DOE NCI program, Managing the Atom participants organized a session on the nuclear cities at the January 1999 U.S.-Russian Investment Symposium at Harvard, which included Russian First Deputy Minister of Atomic Energy Lev Ryabev (who is in charge of Russia''s nuclear weapons complex), DOE Assistant Secretary for Nonproliferation and National Security Rose Gottemoeller, DOE NCI Director William Desmond, and representatives from Arzamas-16, Chelyabinsk-70, and Krasnoyarsk-26, the initial priority cities for the Nuclear Cities Initiative. Managing the Atom and SDI participants worked closely with RANSAC in organizing the June 1999 founding meeting of a "Closed City Consortium" bringing together a range of nongovernment organizations, universities, and business and laboratory experts to work collaboratively on business, environment, energy, and nonproliferation initiatives in Russia''s nuclear cities. Managing the Atom participants also worked with RANSAC in raising funds to establish four new nonproliferation and arms control centers in Russia, two in closed cities and two at open nuclear centers; Bunn and Managing the Atom co-principal investigator Steven Miller will serve on the oversight committee for these new centers.
New Measures to Monitor Stockpiles and Reductions. Steps to monitor stockpiles of nuclear weapons themselves and the fissile materials needed to make them will be an essential element of achieving deep, transparent, and irreversible nuclear arms reductions. Managing the Atom participants are playing a key role in this area as well. Co-principal investigator John Holdren chairs the U.S. National Academy of Sciences'' Committee on International Security and Arms Control (CISAC), which initiated a new study in 1998-99 of the elements that would be required for an effective "all-warhead counting regime" to provide the basis for very deep reductions in nuclear arms, as recommended in CISAC''s 1997 report, The Future of U.S. Nuclear Weapons Policy. Managing the Atom participants worked closely with DOE in reviewing and revising the Department''s strategic plan for warhead and fissile material transparency efforts. Matthew Bunn helped organize, and spoke at, a major U.S.-Russian meeting in Washington in November 1998 on warhead dismantlement transparency, where he proposed a number of possible first steps toward the larger goal of a transparency regime. The report of this meeting - including a variety of specific policy recommendations for such initial steps - was widely circulated within the U.S. and Russian governments.
During 1998-99, DOE initiated a formal classified study of the "pit stuffing" concept Bunn proposed a year earlier, which could be used to rapidly, permanently, and verifiably disable thousands of nuclear weapons and to ease the task of verifying their eventual complete dismantlement. Bunn spoke at the first meeting of this study at Sandia National Laboratory in April 1999, outlining the questions that must be addressed before this potentially powerful new arms control tool can be applied.
Steps to Reduce Stockpiles of Excess Weapons Materials. During 1998-99, some of Managing the Atom''s past work on means to reduce stockpiles of excess HEU and plutonium began to bear fruit. Having opposed the privatization of the U.S. Enrichment Corporation on grounds that this step would almost certainly cause the collapse of the U.S.-Russian HEU Purchase Agreement, Managing the Atom participants worked closely with DOE, other outside experts, and the office of Senator Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) to work out means to save the deal after the predictions of privatization critics came true; Senator Domenici ultimately acted to provide $325 million to save the agreement, and a deal on a temporary resolution of the problem was signed in March 1999.
Throughout these discussions and up to the present, Managing the Atom participants have also advocated additional purchases of HEU beyond the 500 tons that Russia declared excess to its military needs as far back as 1992, with the proceeds from additional purchases targeted to improve Russian nuclear security. In addition, Managing the Atom participants have been analyzing and advocating the possibility of a much faster blend-down of both U.S. and Russian excess HEU to forms that are no longer usable in nuclear weapons, resolving the key security issues even while the material continues to be released on the commercial market at a pace the market can bear.
The U.S. and Russian plutonium disposition programs made slow progress during 1998-99, but Managing the Atom participants worked with DOE''s Office of Materials Disposition, State Department participants in the negotiations, and congressional staff to overcome key obstacles (such as financing for disposition of Russian excess plutonium) and move the effort forward.
One key plutonium disposition priority is ensuring that the chosen methods convert plutonium to a form that will prevent it from being reused in nuclear weapons. The "spent fuel standard" proposed by a committee of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences in 1994 - transforming the excess weapons plutonium so that it would be roughly as hard to recover and make bombs from as the much larger quantity of plutonium in spent reactor fuel around the world - was designed to achieve this goal. During 1998-99, Managing the Atom co-principal investigator John Holdren chaired and MacArthur Fellow Allison Macfarlane served on a National Academy of Sciences panel chartered by DOE to provide more detailed guidance on the specific meaning of the spent fuel standard, and on whether DOE''s current approaches to immobilizing plutonium meet the standard. The committee''s interim report, outlining a matrix approach to combining the many factors contributing to proliferation resistance and suggesting new steps to ensure that the proposed "can-in-canister" immobilization form could meet the spent fuel standard, was completed and released in the summer of 1999.
Given the potential risks, costs, and delays involved in relying only on Russian reactors for disposition of Russia''s massive stockpiles of excess plutonium, Macfarlane has been actively pursuing the concept of immobilization of Russian excess plutonium (in parallel with the planned immobilization of some U.S. excess plutonium). Macfarlane published an article analyzing this approach in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists with Sandia researcher Adam Bernstein.
In an attempt to address the issue of financing Russian plutonium disposition - as well as relieving spent fuel storage problems that are the engine driving Japanese reprocessing - Bunn and analysts Neil Numark and Tatsujiro Suzuki crafted a proposal (published as a Managing the Atom discussion paper) for a Japanese-Russian agreement to (1) build a large interim storage facility for spent fuel in the Russian Far East; (2) use some of the revenue from this spent fuel storage site to build a plant to fabricate excess Russian weapons plutonium into mixed-oxide (MOX) fuel; and (3) burn the MOX in Russian and Japanese reactors. A somewhat similar proposal, which would use the revenues from a much larger spent fuel storage operation for a broader array of nonproliferation and cleanup purposes, developed by a nonprofit U.S.-based firm called the Nonproliferation Trust in cooperation with Thomas Cochran of the Natural Resources Defense Council, is now under active discussion between the U.S. and Russian governments. Along the same lines, the Pangea Corporation, which proposes to build an international spent fuel storage site in Australia, is advocating an arrangement in which revenue from that project would be used to accelerate disposition of Russian excess plutonium and HEU. Bunn organized a meeting of experts at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in April 1999 to examine these various proposals, the obstacles facing them, and next steps that would have to be taken if they were to be brought to fruition.
The China Connection. The 1998-99 academic year began with a crisis in Russia, and ended with an upheaval in U.S.-Chinese relations, spurred by disclosures of Chinese spying at U.S. nuclear weapons laboratories. The debate over the significance of this espionage for Chinese weapons programs highlighted the need for greater understanding of China''s nuclear and technological objectives and capabilities.
Managing the Atom Fellow Evan Feigenbaum published two articles that shed light on this issue. In China Quarterly, Feigenbaum argued that, since the 1950s, the Chinese military had played a uniquely important role not just in setting China''s high-technology agenda for military purposes, but also in developing its overall strategy of economic development. Feigenbaum then published an article in International Security that traced the influence of China''s military planners (including leaders of China''s nuclear program) on the nation''s high-technology agenda, and illustrated the close interconnections between China''s military and commercial development strategies. Feigenbaum''s research suggests that Chinese nuclear espionage should be taken seriously, but that Chinese leaders regard improvements in strategic military technology as payoffs from improvements to China''s broader civilian technology base, and that its military technicians are focused on sectors and programs with broad significance for the economy as a whole. Feigenbaum was quoted in radio, television, and press reports on the Chinese espionage issue, in which he cautioned against a U.S. overreaction while noting that China''s actions could improve Beijing''s ability to threaten U.S. interests in limited areas such as the Taiwan Strait.
At the same time, Managing the Atom participants worked to ensure that overreaction to the Chinese espionage case would not destroy cooperative programs with Russia and other sensitive countries that are vital to U.S. security. Bunn collaborated with DOE officials and congressional staff in crafting a successful bipartisan alternative to a proposed ban on all visits by sensitive country personnel to the U.S. weapons laboratories, which would have effectively destroyed most of the cooperative nuclear security programs described above. Managing the Atom Director Jennifer Weeks wrote an op-ed for the Global Beat Syndicate outlining the potential dangers for the environment, safety, and health, as well as nonproliferation if the United States were to go back to an independent nuclear weapons agency with limited external oversight, on the model of the old Atomic Energy Commission; the op-ed appeared in several regional newspapers. Managing the Atom will continue to track this issue as reform proposals move through Congress in the coming year.
Nuclear Nonproliferation: The Hard Cases
Nuclear nonproliferation is a long-standing Belfer Center priority issue and a core interest for Managing the Atom. Our activities in 1998-99 focused on several of the hardest nonproliferation cases - India, Pakistan, North Korea, and Iran - as well as on the continuous need to improve understanding of the factors that motivate countries to pursue or forswear nuclear weapons.
More than a year after India''s and Pakistan''s nuclear tests, South Asia remains one of the most unstable regions in the world, with the two countries coming to the brink of war over Kashmir in mid-1999. Managing the Atom participants Holdren, Weeks, and former Fellow Farah Zahra produced a series of articles on the South Asian tests in 1997-98. In June 1999, Zahra (now researching and writing on arms control issues in Washington, D.C.) received an award from the South Asian Journalists Association for Outstanding Editorial/Op-Ed on South Asia for an analysis she published in the Christian Science Monitor in May 1998.
Continuing Managing the Atom''s focus on this critical region in the current year, Postdoctoral Fellow Samina Ahmed published an article in International Security that traced the history of Pakistan''s nuclear weapons program, examining Islamabad''s motivations for going nuclear and for responding in kind to India''s 1998 tests. Ahmed also represented Pakistan in a crisis simulation exercise on the potential use of nuclear weapons in South Asia organized by the U.S. Naval War College. As tensions escalated in Kashmir, Ahmed wrote an article for Newsline, Pakistan''s premier monthly news magazine, examining the dangers of brinksmanship between India and Pakistan, and was interviewed by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation on the Kashmir crisis and the potential use of nuclear weapons in South Asia. Ahmed is currently writing two book chapters on the issue, assessing (1) Pakistan''s strategies for the future of its nuclear weapons program, and (2) the security dilemmas that confront Pakistan as a result of its nuclear arms race with India. In a paper delivered at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California, in August 1999, Ahmed traced the origins and motivations of India''s and Pakistan''s nuclear weapons programs, and assessed past responses by influential external actors - particularly the United States - in order to identify possible strategies through which the international community might be able to contain the nuclear arms race in South Asia. Her current research examines potential uses of targeted sanctions and incentives to restrain nuclear proliferation in South Asia.
North Korea''s nuclear program also remained a serious concern in 1998-99, as a series of confrontations between Pyongyang and other governments spurred debate over the feasibility of denuclearizing the Korean peninsula and the merits of engaging with the North. (For a discussion of the critical role on this issue played by BCSIA''s Ashton Carter over the last year, see the ISP section of this report.) Managing the Atom Predoctoral Fellow John Sang-Hyoung Park wrote an article for Yisei, a Harvard journal of Korean affairs, on the importance of the 1994 Agreed Framework as an instrument for the United States and South Korea to engage with North Korea and moderate the North''s international actions. Park served as an organizer of the 1999 Harvard Project for Asian and International Relations Conference in Hong Kong, an officially recognized Track-II diplomacy event attended by researchers from influential think tanks spanning Asia, North America, and Europe. At the meeting, Park presented a case study on the 1994 international diplomatic crisis over North Korea''s nuclear program, which found a need for a Track II-style mechanism on the Korean peninsula to help mitigate future crises and facilitate complex negotiations. Park''s dissertation on the role of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) safeguards in North Korea and the prospects for regional safeguards approaches will be completed in the fall of 1999.
Many observers have contrasted the United States'' agreement to help provide nuclear reactors to North Korea with its unqualified opposition to any civilian nuclear trade with Iran (which, U.S. officials charge, is seeking to develop nuclear weapons under the guise of a peaceful nuclear energy program). This issue has become a major sore point in U.S.-Russian relations, as Russia hopes to export the same type of reactors to Iran that the United States has agreed to help supply to North Korea, but the United States is strongly pressuring Russia to sever all nuclear ties with Iran. Managing the Atom Director Jennifer Weeks wrote a paper comparing U.S. policy toward North Korea''s and Iran''s nuclear programs. In it, Weeks suggests a new approach to Iran in which the United States would work through Russia to gain Iranian agreement to a variety of measures that would greatly restrict Iran''s potential to carry out a covert nuclear weapons program. Rather than pressuring Iran directly, the United States would offer Russia incentives to seek these new nonproliferation commitments from Iran. Weeks presented the paper at the American Nuclear Society''s "Global ''99" conference, and a more detailed version is forthcoming in Nonproliferation Review.
In addition to finding new ways to influence holdouts from the global nonproliferation regime, the need to understand countries'' motives for pursuing or renouncing nuclear weapons remains a major issue on the nonproliferation agenda. In 1998-99, Managing the Atom Predoctoral Fellow James Walsh concluded major sections of his dissertation, which analyzes this question using data from two countries that considered but later abandoned the nuclear option: Egypt and Australia. Walsh''s research calls into question many of the traditional explanations for nations'' decisions in this area, such as security threats, superpower pressure, and technological capabilities. Instead, it highlights the importance of domestic politics and the needs of institutions such as scientific bureaucracies, military forces, and other competing government agencies. Walsh applied these lessons to the 1998 Indian and Pakistani nuclear tests in a presentation to the U.S.-Japan Nuclear Nonproliferation Dialogue in Tokyo - where he argued that external threats and technological capabilities did not explain recent developments in South Asia - and presented his analysis of nonproliferation decisions in Australia, Egypt, and Italy at the Naval Postgraduate School in August 1999. Additionally, Walsh is coauthoring, with Dr. Vipin Gupta of Sandia National Laboratory, an analysis of possible preparations by Indonesia to conduct a nuclear test in 1965. The study, which draws on archival materials and recently declassified satellite reconnaisance photographs, will be submitted for publication in the fall of 1999.
Linkages between Nuclear Power and Nuclear Proliferation
Nuclear energy''s inherently dual-use nature has posed a continuous challenge since its earliest days: how to realize the benefits of peaceful nuclear activities without promoting the spread of nuclear weapons. In the 1998-99 academic year, Managing the Atom focused on a key aspect of the proliferation risks from civilian nuclear power: the worldwide reprocessing, transport, and use of weapons-usable separated plutonium - along with assessing more proliferation-resistant alternatives to such reprocessing for managing spent nuclear fuel. The hope was to help influence key countries around the world - including Japan, South Korea, China, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and Russia - that are deciding whether to continue, expand, shrink, or initiate programs for reprocessing spent fuel from commercial power reactors.
Advocates of reprocessing and recycling plutonium argue that (1) the proliferation risk is minor, because safeguards and security are effective, and/or reactor-grade plutonium is not suitable for making effective nuclear weapons; (2) the extra cost of reprocessing and recycle compared to once-through use of low-enriched uranium fuel is minor or nonexistent; (3) uranium resources are limited, and thus reprocessing is necessary to provide both energy security and a base of experience for the transition to plutonium-fueled breeder reactors that will be required within a few decades; (4) removal of the plutonium and uranium from the spent fuel significantly reduces the costs and/or the hazards of waste disposal; and (5) because few communities are eager to host long-term storage sites that could become permanent nuclear waste dumps, reprocessing plants are likely to be the only publicly acceptable place for utilities to send the spent nuclear fuel now filling their cooling ponds.
During 1998-99, Managing the Atom participants took on each of these arguments in a number of separate studies and articles, including:
- A major study of the economics of reprocessing and recycling plutonium, which concludes that with uranium cheap and abundant, reprocessing is substantially more expensive than direct disposal of spent fuel, and will not be economically competitive for many decades, if then. Early results of this work were presented at an international meeting on the future of reprocessing sponsored by the Oxford Research Group and the Uranium Institute in Britain in February 1999, and at "Global ''99," an international nuclear industry conference in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, in August 1999. The final report is expected in the fall of 1999.
A major study on interim storage of spent nuclear fuel, as a safe and proliferation-resistant near-term approach to dealing with utilities'' filling spent fuel cooling ponds while postponing decisions on reprocessing. This study is being conducted jointly with colleagues from the program on "Sociotechnics of Nuclear Energy" at Tokyo University, and it is hoped that it will contribute to more rational policy choices in spent fuel management in both the United States and Japan. In addition to addressing the safety and cost-effectiveness of interim storage, the study will examine the political and legal obstacles to siting spent fuel storage facilities, and suggest approaches to working with the public and addressing public concerns in moving forward with such facilities. In February 1999, Managing the Atom and Sociotechnics of Nuclear Energy cosponsored a meeting of high-level U.S., Japanese, and Russian experts on spent fuel management at Harvard for in-depth discussions of current spent fuel storage issues in the United States, Japan, and Russia to inaugurate this joint study. During the year, Allison Macfarlane worked to prepare a detailed analysis of interim storage in the U.S. case, collecting data on the individual storage needs at each U.S. reactor, and comparing the pros and cons of a developing large centralized interim storage site versus building additional dry storage capacity at existing reactor sites. This paper, also presented at "Global ''99," will be published as a Managing the Atom discussion paper.
A series of papers on different aspects of the possibility of international or regional spent fuel storage or disposal sites that could provide an alternative to reprocessing for several countries at once, and address the difficulties of small countries that may not have suitable sites for large spent fuel storage or disposal facilities. During 1998-99, Postdoctoral Fellow Kate O''Neill wrote a discussion paper on the factors driving consideration of international storage facilities, and the factors that have prevented such ideas from coming to fruition in the past, with some preliminary proposals for means to overcome the obstacles (also presented at "Global ''99"). O''Neill went on to publish an article in Environment that examined controversies over international transportation of spent fuel and radioactive waste, and delivered a paper at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association on the growing role of private economic actors in the international politics of nuclear waste. Managing the Atom has commissioned a paper from Professor Lawrence Scheinman of the Monterey Institute for International Studies, formerly the Assistant Director for Nonproliferation of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, on the history of international spent fuel storage concepts. And, as noted above, Matthew Bunn and colleagues published a discussion paper on a proposal for an international spent fuel facility in Russia, with the profits financing disposition of excess Russian weapons plutonium.
A paper on the serious proliferation risks posed by separated plutonium, and the need for far more stringent international standards for the security of this dangerous weapons-usable material. This paper, too, was presented at "Global ''99."
Initial research for a major study, requested by the Department of Energy, on the environmental impact of reprocessing versus direct disposal of spent fuel. Preliminary work on this issue suggests that reprocessing offers no substantial environmental benefit in reducing repository hazards. Assessing the Future of Nuclear Power
In 1998-99, Managing the Atom received a major grant from the MacArthur Foundation to analyze key issues that will determine the future of nuclear energy. Rising world energy demand and growing support for action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions have spurred debate over the appropriate role for nuclear power. Advocates argue that it is the only mature energy technology that can be expanded rapidly enough to substitute in the near term for fossil fuels, while opponents contend that it has too many drawbacks to serve as even a partial or stopgap tool for meeting future energy needs. Managing the Atom begins from the premise that nuclear power is an option for meeting future energy demand and reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but that it is unlikely to achieve the major growth needed to provide a significant fraction of the world''s carbon-free energy requirements in the 21st century unless the proliferation, safety, waste management, and cost issues that have limited past government, utility, and public acceptance of nuclear power are satisfactorily addressed. Managing the Atom participant Matthew Bunn outlined this case - along with the need for radical democratization of nuclear decisionmaking to address public concerns, and the desirability of avoiding reliance on separated plutonium in order to reduce costs, security risks, and controversies - in an invited plenary paper for "Global ''99," which will be submitted to an industry journal.
The 1999 study on international energy innovation cooperation that John Holdren chaired for the President''s Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST, described below) addressed many of these issues for the future of nuclear power. The panel called for greater international cooperation to address safety, waste management, and proliferation issues associated with nuclear power, and recommended that the United States spend $10 million to $20 million annually toward this end. Specific opportunities for collaboration cited in the study included research on proliferation-resistant fuel cycles, interim storage of spent nuclear fuel, and reactor safety, particularly in Russia and Eastern Europe. The panel also urged the United States to increase its support for the IAEA''s safeguards activities and to seek more support from other IAEA member states. Holdren''s 1997 PCAST study on domestic U.S. energy R&D was the origin of DOE''s new Nuclear Energy Research Initiative, designed to address these four key issues for the future of nuclear power, which made its first round of competitively selected research grants during 1998-99.
As discussed above in connection with Managing the Atom''s work on reprocessing, management of radioactive waste (including, but not limited to, spent fuel) is one of the most problematic aspects of nuclear power. The United States is currently studying a potential repository site at Yucca Mountain, Nevada, with a presidential decision on its suitability scheduled in 2001. The project is far behind schedule, however, and significant technical questions exist as to whether the facility can accomplish its mission of keeping spent fuel separate from the environment for 10,000 years or more. These concerns, and stiff resistance from the state of Nevada, have generated significant public opposition to the site. At the same time, until mid-1999 the U.S. nuclear industry and majorities of both houses of Congress were pressing to open an interim storage facility on the surface near the Yucca Mountain site so that spent fuel can be removed from reactors that have used up their storage space, and DOE could begin meeting its legal obligation to take utilities'' spent fuel. The suitability of Yucca Mountain for either interim or permanent waste storage is highly contested on both technical and political grounds.
MacArthur Fellow Allison Macfarlane, a geologist, authored several analyses of issues related to nuclear waste storage at Yucca Mountain in 1998-99, including a book chapter on U.S. high-level nuclear waste policy and an Managing the Atom discussion paper on interim waste storage at Yucca Mountain presented at the American Nuclear Society''s "Global ''99" conference in August 1999. Macfarlane found that Yucca Mountain was unsuitable for surface storage of spent fuel on several counts, including seismicity at the site, and that many technical uncertainties remain to be addressed before it can be found suitable as an underground repository. A panel organized by MacFarlane at the American Geophysical Union''s 1999 meeting surveyed many of these issues, including forces that might inject water into the repository, as well as the reliability of existing methods for modeling the repository''s performance over tens of thousands of years. Macfarlane gave presentations on high-level radioactive waste policy at East Connecticut State University and the University of Wyoming, and was interviewed on nuclear waste issues for the Christian Science Monitor; Dallas Morning News; Wyoming Public Radio and several Wyoming newspapers; and National Public Radio''s Science Friday talk show.
Many institutions have sought to build consensus among the various industry, public-interest, and community organizations that are influenced by U.S. nuclear waste policy. In 1998-99, Managing the Atom Director Jennifer Weeks participated in the latest of these efforts, a policy dialogue sponsored by the Aspen Institute on the implications of high-level waste disposal policy for nonproliferation and the environment. The dialogue is scheduled to continue at least through the fall of 1999, and may issue a report in 2000 if it produces consensus on key points.
Safety is an area of continuing concern in all countries with nuclear reactors, but particularly so in countries that project growth in nuclear power. China is a major focus of nuclear safety discussions, given its plans to increase its current nuclear generating capacity by as much as a factor of ten over the next decade. Managing the Atom Postdoctoral Fellow Evan Feigenbaum is assessing the management and regulation of nuclear power in China, with a focus on China''s capacity to minimize risk as it expands its nuclear energy sector. Feigenbaum is working with the MIT nuclear engineering department, which has a collaborative relationship with the Institute of Nuclear Technology at Qinghua University, China''s major research center for commercial nuclear power. Feigenbaum''s analysis will be published in the coming year.
After several years in which observers predicted a massive national restructuring of the U.S. electric utility industry, the outlook today has shifted, with restructuring progressing unevenly at the state level and little prospect for passage of national legislation in the near future. Regulatory developments continue to affect the competitive position of nuclear power, however, in some surprising ways. In an address to the 1998 meeting of the Nuclear Non-Owning Operators Group, ENRP Director Henry Lee disagreed with predictions that as many as 40 percent of operating U.S. nuclear plants may close by 2010. Lee pointed to a countervailing trend: new environmental initiatives designed to reduce air pollution that are likely to add significantly to the cost of power from Midwestern coal plants, and could impel U.S. leaders to take measures to support operating nuclear plants in order to avoid producing even more carbon emissions from other sources. Lee and Managing the Atom Director Jennifer Weeks are preparing an article from this talk, addressing issues now being debated in Congress, such as whether tradable emissions credits should be allocated equally to all electricity sources, allowing non-emitting sources such as nuclear and renewable to trade their credits for cash and gain revenue for providing electricity without emissions of sulfur, nitrogen, particulates, or greenhouse gases.
Nuclear Decisionmaking
Managing the Atom''s second area of concentration is the problem of democratic management of nuclear decisions. Nuclear policy issues involve complex technical judgments and risks that are difficult to quantify. Much of the information required for fully informed public debate is restricted on either national security or proprietary grounds. In many countries, nuclear decisions are the purview of a few agencies that allow little if any opportunity for participation by outside parties. All of these conditions reinforce the pervasive mistrust of nuclear technology that characterizes public opinion in many countries. Under these conditions, it is difficult to build consensus even in support of urgent priorities, such as actions to safely manage nuclear waste.
Managing the Atom Director Jennifer Weeks has published several papers and articles on efforts to declassify and publicly release information at the U.S. Department of Energy, and is currently researching the status of public participation in DOE nuclear policy decisions, focusing on two contentious missions: environmental cleanup in the nuclear weapons complex, and transportation of radioactive waste. Weeks''s assessment of DOE''s progress in these two cases will be published as an Managing the Atom discussion paper in the fall.
This project will lay the ground for a joint Managing the Atom study with the program on "Sociotechnics of Nuclear Energy" at Tokyo University comparing public participation in nuclear policy decisions in the United States and Japan. The U.S. and Japanese political cultures in this area are quite different: decisions in Japan typically seek to reach consensus, and Japan has a much smaller and less-developed antinuclear community. Recent accidents and cover-ups at Japanese nuclear facilities, however, have provoked increased public concern over nuclear power, including regional government resistance to permitting new nuclear activities; this has led to a variety of new efforts to involve the public in nuclear decisionmaking. Managing the Atom and our Japanese colleagues (many of whom have been centrally involved in ongoing Japanese reforms) will seek to develop a framework for assessing the quality of public involvement in U.S. and Japanese nuclear decisions by identifying key elements for substantive public input in each country''s political context. The same mechanisms are unlikely to be appropriate to both societies, but we expect to find that certain principles - such as broad public access to information - are key to achieving public trust in either location. Weeks will lead Managing the Atom''s contribution to this study, which is scheduled for publication early next year.
Most of Managing the Atom''s activities in this area examine the impact of nuclear technology on democratic processes, but the relationship also cuts the other way: democratic processes can shape nuclear programs. This phenomenon forms an important component of Managing the Atom Predoctoral Fellow James Walsh''s research on how countries make choices about nuclear weapons. Some scholars have suggested that the spread of democracy reduces the likelihood of war, but others point out that the presence of democratic institutions can complicate or even impede nonproliferation, with political parties playing the "nuclear card" in an attempt to win political support. India''s decision to conduct nuclear tests in May 1998 was widely cited as an example by analysts who argued that the governing Bharatiya Janata Party had approved the tests to strengthen its domestic position.
Walsh''s research indicates that party competition can have pernicious effects, but that in general, democratic institutions are more likely to aid the cause of nonproliferation. In Australia and Egypt, for example, large majorities of voters supported the acquisition of nuclear weapons. In Australia, the Democratic Labor Party, a coalition partner in the ruling government, had a platform that called for the acquisition of nuclear weapons and ran television ads in support of the policy. The pro-bomb effects of party competition were not decisive, however, in part because most national decisions on nuclear weapons are made in secret without the knowledge of the electorate or even of major political parties. The locus and frame of nuclear decisionmaking is far removed from popular sentiment, even in democracies. Moreover, most electorates in most countries follow rather than lead their elected representatives on questions of foreign policy, and in particular on issues involving nuclear weapons.
Of equal importance are the ways in which democratic institutions contribute to nonproliferation. Walsh finds that this happens in three ways:
- Decisions in democracies tend to involve a larger number of policy actors, such as cabinets and foreign offices, in addition to core players such as prime ministers and military leaders; greater numbers of actors reduce the likelihood of decisions to develop nuclear weapons.
Democratic governments tend to take regime commitments more seriously. Once committed to an international treaty such as the Nonproliferation Treaty, democratic governments maintain their commitments even when the parties in power or public opinions change.
The combination of regimes and real democracy - in which parties differ, compete, and rotate in and out of office - creates the conditions for asymmetric, irreversible nonproliferation outcomes, because new governments are unlikely in most cases to reverse legally binding pledges made by their predecessors, even if the new government would not have supported such commitments.
In sum, Walsh argues that if (1) the essence of democracy is that parties rotate in and out of power, and (2) democracies abide by treaties, the long-term effect of democracy will be a series of ever more restrictive commitments to nonproliferation. Walsh''s dissertation will be submitted for publication in the fall of 1999.
Managing the Atom''s work during 1998-99 was funded by generous support from the W. Alton Jones Foundation and the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, support from BCSIA''s International Security Program (much of it from the Carnegie Corporation) for Managing the Atom''s work on military nuclear activities, and a grant from the U.S. Department of Energy for studies of reprocessing and storage of spent nuclear fuel.
II. ENERGY TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION
The Project on Energy Technology Innovation led by STPP Director John Holdren is a multiyear, interdisciplinary effort to develop, propose, and promote effective policy recommendations for national and international energy R&D efforts as the foundation of a global capacity to cooperatively and cost-effectively ameliorate the risks posed by current energy approaches, particularly the risks of greenhouse-gas-induced climate disruption - which are likely to be the most demanding driver of energy technology innovation in the coming century. (The previous project title, "Energy Research and Development Policy for a Greenhouse Gas Constrained World," was broadened to "Energy Technology Innovation" to reflect a broader agenda involving demonstration and deployment of new technologies, including technology transfer issues, as well as research and development itself.) The project aims to address the gaps between the energy innovation strategies now in place in major greenhouse gas-emitting countries around the world and the strategies that would be prudent in light of prospective needs for, and probable binding agreements about, deep reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. It aims not only to identify and characterize those gaps but also to recommend and promote actions that governments can take, separately and collectively, to close them.
Notwithstanding current uncertainties surrounding the pace and probable consequences of climate change from greenhouse emissions, prudence requires having in place an energy innovation portfolio adequate to the task of expanding the array of technological options available for reducing those emissions at the lowest possible economic, environmental, and social cost. The kinds of energy R&D needed to meet the greenhouse challenge would also help address most of the other challenges facing the global energy system. Yet both public and private energy R&D have declined precipitously in the United States and many other countries in recent years, exacerbating the prospects that the world will be forced to cope with the problem of climatic disruption without having developed the technological options needed to do so without major economic consequences.
The primary focus of the project''s work is on the roles of government funding for energy innovation and government incentives for energy innovation in the private sector, taking into account the current and likely future patterns of private-sector energy innovation activities. In addition to R&D itself, the project also identifies and evaluates possible government actions to support the demonstration and commercialization of emissions-reducing energy innovations. To date, the project has focused on the United States, Europe, Japan, and India, with initial work beginning or soon to be under way on China, Russia, and Brazil, providing a diversity of developed and developing country cases.
The project''s program of analysis and policy outreach contains four main elements: (1) characterizing and understanding recent patterns of energy technology innovation, public and private, in the "focus" countries; (2) identifying and describing the departures from these patterns that would offer the greatest promise of increasing the leverage of energy technology innovation against the prospective need to slow and ultimately reverse the growth of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide; (3) developing specific proposals for changes, within the "focus" countries individually and in collaborations among them, in public R&D funding and management, incentives for private R&D funding, and measures to promote the early application of greenhouse-gas-reducing innovations that emerge from R&D; and (4) promoting the adoption of these proposals.
Arguably the most difficult and important question left unanswered at the December 1997 Kyoto Conference is how to engage the developing countries in a collaborative approach to greenhouse gas limitation with the United States and other industrial nations. A coherent set of innovative, interlinked, and in some instances directly collaborative energy R&D initiatives - as the Energy R&D Project is working to craft and to catalyze - can and should be the foundation of the wide-ranging collaboration that will be required if the world is to position itself to achieve not only the Kyoto mandate but the subsequent wider and deeper greenhouse gas reductions likely to be needed to avoid intolerable climatic disruption in the 21st century.
The Energy Technology Innovation Project interacts with and complements work on climate issues being pursued in the BCSIA Environment and Natural Resources Program, ranging from the work by Robert Stavins and Energy Technology Innovation co-principal investigator Henry Lee on designing mechanisms for carbon trading, to Stavins'' work on the economics of the development and diffusion of energy efficiency technologies, to the work on global assessment issues being pursued in the Global Environmental Assessment project. In particular, STPP and ENRP worked together to organize a multifaceted workshop in June 1999 on sequestration of the carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels, which brought together senior officials working on the technological, biological, and economic aspects of carbon management and sequestration in the United States. These efforts are described in the Environment and Natural Resources Program section of this report.U.S. Energy Innovation Policy: Focus on the PCAST Studies
A key focus of the Energy Technology Innovation Project during 1998-99 was the preparation of a new report for the President''s Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology that focused specifically on U.S. policy toward such international collaborative initiatives in energy innovation (chaired by Energy Technology Innovation Project principal investigator John Holdren), along with follow-up seeking to implement the recommendations of the previous PCAST report on the U.S. government''s energy research and development portfolio.
As reported previously, with Holdren''s chairmanship and the participation of several project members, the Energy Technology Innovation Project played a major role in the development of the previous report, Federal Energy R&D for the Challenges of the 21st Century, released in November 1997. That report identified the energy/climate challenge as the most demanding driver of energy R&D needs, and proposed a ramping up of U.S. federal investments in applied energy-technology R&D from its level of $1.3 billion per year in FY1998 to $2.4 billion in FY2000. The report''s influence on the FY1999 energy budget was substantial: the administration put about 60 percent of the $0.5 billion increment recommended by the panel for FY1999 into its budget request for that year, and the Congress ultimately passed two-thirds of this - a $0.2 billion increase over FY1998, amounting to 40 percent of what the Holdren panel recommended. Securing this result involved intensive efforts by Holdren and others including numerous trips to Washington by Holdren, following completion of the report, to brief Executive Branch officials and key members of Congress and their staff on the report''s recommendations and the case for incorporating them in the budget.
This effort has continued through the 1998-99 academic year, in the attempt to maintain and enlarge the FY1999 budget increment in the administration''s FY2000 budget submission, and then to persuade the Congress to pass these increases. This follow-up work has entailed, among other activities, a further dozen trips to Washington by Holdren for discussions with Executive Branch officials and members of Congress, a number of memos from him to the president, the vice president, and congressional leaders, and his participation as one of four invited experts to a four-day Aspen Institute Congressional Seminar on major environmental policy issues in November 1998, involving four days of intensive discussions with 15 members of Congress. (Holdren''s background paper for this meeting is included in the publications list.) The administration''s FY2000 budget request for applied energy-technology R&D is $1.64 billion, an increase of about $140 million over the FY1999 appropriation; while the increment is again smaller than what was recommended by PCAST, and while the size of the administration''s budget request obviously is influenced by many factors, it appears that the PCAST recommendations and the Energy Technology Innovation Project''s efforts to advance the arguments for these recommendations in the policy process were instrumental in bringing about the gains that were achieved, in an environment of stringent budget "caps" for all discretionary spending that many expected would lead to decreases.
Following up one of the recommendations of the 1997 PCAST study, in July 1998 President Clinton requested from his Science and Technology Advisor Neal Lane a report by May 1999 on how to enhance U.S. government efforts in support of international cooperation on energy research, development, demonstration, and deployment. In September, Lane charged Holdren with forming and leading a new PCAST panel to address this issue. The new panel - consisting of 15 members with a wide range of expertises in energy technology and in international science-and-technology cooperation - met throughout the 1998-99 academic year and delivered its 300-page report (Powerful Partnerships: The Federal Role in International Cooperation on Energy Technology Innovation) to the White House at the end of May. The report is now available on the Web at http://www.whitehouse.gov/WH/EOP/OSTP/NSTC/PCAST/pcastdocs.html.
Support of and interaction with this effort constituted a major part of the work of BCSIA''s Energy Technology Innovation Project during the 1998-99 academic year. Most of the biweekly research meetings of the project throughout the year were devoted to reviewing and improving the materials and approaches being developed by the PCAST panel. This served as an effective vehicle for injecting into the PCAST study insights and advice from BCSIA''s senior experts in technology policy and international science-and-technology cooperation - Lewis Branscomb, Harvey Brooks, Robert Frosch, Henry Lee, Dorothy Zinberg - as well as from the Energy Technology Innovation Project''s energetic cadre of graduate students and postdoctoral researchers, and it stimulated a variety of ideas about further research to be conducted within the project.
The commissioning of 13 expert background papers for the panel was coordinated by the Energy Technology Innovation Project with the help of a grant for this purpose by the MacArthur Foundation. In addition, Energy Technology Innovation Fellow Paul de Sa - who served as Assistant to the Chair in the PCAST study - took on the task of lead authorship of chapter 2 of the panel''s final report, dealing with the recent history and current status of international cooperation on energy R&D in the public and private sectors and the factors affecting recent trends. Energy Technology Innovation Fellow Ambuj Sagar provided input to the panel about international energy cooperation involving India.
The report makes the case for increased international cooperation on clean and efficient energy technologies in terms of economic, environmental, and international security rationales; shows that existing programs of cooperation are not commensurate in scope and scale with the challenges and opportunities (including, especially, those connected with the energy/climate-change linkage); and recommends an array of initiatives in capacity building, technology-specific R&D, technology demonstration, programs to buy down the costs of advanced technologies with large public benefits, and financing mechanisms, entailing altogether a doubling of U.S. federal investments in international energy-technology cooperation between 1997 and 2001 and a tripling by 2005.
A BCSIA report by de Sa, expanding on chapter 2 of the latest PCAST study to provide a more detailed picture of the changing international landscape of energy technology development and commercialization, is in preparation.
During the 1998-99 year, STPP launched a new project within the energy innovations area, with funding from the Department of Energy, called "Technology Innovation for Global Change: The Role of Assessment, R&D, and Regulation," with William Clark, Holdren, and Vicki Norberg-Bohm of MIT (soon to come to BCSIA to direct STPP''s work on energy innovations issues) as co-principal investigators. This project seeks to better understand how and under what conditions public policy can influence decisions by the private sector to develop or adopt radical technological innovations that are environmentally enhancing. Public policy could promote private investment in new energy technologies through (1) assessments of current or future environmental impacts from products and processes, which might suggest that there are opportunities for alternative technologies to mitigate these impacts; (2) promotion of R&D, which could allow the private sector to develop technologies that would simultaneously enhance environmental performance and contribute to corporate competitiveness; (3) stringent regulation, which could stimulate private investments in new technologies needed to meet the standards at minimum cost. The project will explore how each of these pathways and the interplay among them affects firms'' R&D investment behavior in the context of other variables less amenable to public policy intervention, such as industry structure, technological trajectories, and corporate management culture. Improved understanding of how these pathways of public influence on private investment actually work should provide some practical guidance to those faced with the task of promoting technological innovation for managing global environmental change, including advice on when and how to use assessments, publicly funded R&D, and regulatory action. Postdoctoral Fellow Robert Margolis came from Princeton University to join STPP in August 1999 to research this topic; in July 1999, Margolis was the lead author for a major article in Science outlining the dangers of underinvestment in energy research and development.
Finally, Energy Technology Innovation Project Fellow Paul de Sa worked closely with the Harvard Electricity Policy Group (HEPG) on its continuing exploration of the future of the U.S. electric industry as rates are deregulated and the industry restructured. De Sa served as the rapporteur for four HEPG meetings during the year, including both plenary sessions and special meetings on regional markets and on retail and wholesale transmission markets.
Europe
Like the United States, the European Union nations are leading consumers of energy, funders of energy R&D, and emitters of greenhouse gases. During the 1998-99 academic year, the Energy Technology Innovation Project continued its in-depth examination of European energy innovation and climate change policies. A BCSIA discussion paper by Paul de Sa, providing detailed data on the European energy R&D picture and European energy and climate policies, is in preparation.
China
China is among the most critical nations on earth for addressing the energy-climate challenge: if current rates of economic growth continue with "business as usual" energy policies, China is projected to surpass the United States as the world''s largest emitter of greenhouse gases by 2020.
A key focus of the Energy Technology Innovation Project''s China work has been support for and interaction with the bilateral U.S.-China energy study being carried out by the two countries'' academies of sciences and engineering. As mentioned in last year''s report, Energy Technology Innovation Project co-principal investigator John Holdren led a U.S. delegation to Beijing in May 1998, which reached agreement with Chinese counterparts on undertaking this joint study, examining the energy futures of each country; the challenges these are likely to present; and the opportunities for U.S.-China collaboration to address these challenges. Holdren drafted the agreed charter for the study. This study was carried out during the 1998-99 academic year by a bilateral panel of which Holdren was an ex officio member.
The final report is currently under review in the four academies. Its recommendations include creation of a continuing standing committee of the four academies to address research, development, demonstration, production, and deployment of clean and efficient energy technologies; organization of periodic dialogues focused on specific energy options, with strong industry participation; government-to-government discussions of incentive programs to accelerate the deployment of advanced energy technologies; collaboration between the environmental protection agencies of the two countries on measures to better address the environmental impacts of fossil-fuel burning; greater emphasis on advanced clean and efficient energy technologies in bilateral and multilateral energy-technology financing vehicles; and increased joint R&D efforts on clean-coal, renewable-energy, and energy-efficiency technologies.
Postdoctoral Fellow Therese Feng joined the project in May 1999 to bolster its China component. Starting from the groundwork done in and for the 1999 PCAST study and the joint academies study just described, and taking advantage of the ongoing work on China''s energy-environment challenges and opportunities being conducted under the China project of Harvard''s University Committee on the Environment, Feng will be constructing a more comprehensive picture than previously available of the existing array of research, development, and demonstration efforts on energy options for China and the areas of opportunity that remain unaddressed or underaddressed. This effort will cover Chinese domestic efforts as well as international cooperative efforts involving other governments, the private sector, multilateral organizations, and nongovernmental organizations. In particular, Feng is evaluating how public and private R&D efforts to develop and invest in lower greenhouse gas-emitting technologies in energy supply and conversion are being affected by the transition to an increasingly market-based economy and the devolution in political authority. Key aspects of this project will be to characterize existing Chinese R&D programs in industrial and transport sectors, fossil and nuclear fuel conversion, and renewable technologies; evaluate trends in funding and public and private institutional research capacity; identify key factors affecting China''s adoption of energy-efficient and prospective conversion technologies; and develop specific proposals for Chinese energy R&D funding and management, including recommendations for U.S. collaboration and support.
India
India, with its population of nearly a billion people and heavy reliance on energy from coal, is also a critical player in the energy-climate challenge, and a key focus of the Energy Technology Innovation Project. As mentioned in last year''s report, a preliminary exploration of the prospects for a joint study of energy issues of mutual interest to the United States and India under the auspices of the academies of science and engineering took place in January 1998 when an energy delegation from the two academies, led by Holdren and National Academy of Engineering Foreign Secretary Harold Forsen, visited Indian counterparts in New Delhi and Bangalore. This led to the formation of committees on U.S.-India Energy Collaboration in the academy complexes on both sides - chaired by Holdren on the U.S. side.
The committees met jointly for the first time in New Delhi in May 1999 and agreed on a list of five initial topics of mutual interest, to be explored in a series of bilateral workshops alternating in location between the two countries. The topics are (1) clean fossil fuels (including clean coal technologies and the potential of gas hydrates); (2) realistic applications of renewable energy sources; (3) approaches to reducing greenhouse gas emissions (including use of the Clean Development Mechanism and other "win-win" approaches); (4) reduction of electrical power shortfalls (including improvements in generation, transmission, and distribution); and (5) clean-vehicle technologies. Energy Technology Innovation Project Research Fellow Ambuj Sagar, who leads the project''s India component, provided an extensive written briefing on the Indian energy situation to the U.S. committee, on which he serves as a consultant, prior to the May meeting. He will continue to play an active role in this project.
The Energy Technology Innovation Project, through the efforts of Sagar and Holdren, has also been participating in the organizational phases of projects on the Indian energy situation and India''s role in the global energy-climate picture being started by a number of other groups: (1) at Harvard, by the University-wide Committee on the Environment; (2) at Carnegie Mellon University, by a group organized by V. S. Arunachalam, a former chairman of the Indian Atomic Energy Commission now visiting at the Engineering and Public Policy Program at Carnegie Mellon; and (3) by a consortium organized by the United Nations Foundation and linking the UN Development Program, the UN Environment Program, and the World Bank.
Sagar spent September 1998 in India, working as an advisor to the Ministry of Environment and Forests (the main ministry for climate change in India), doing background work and analysis of specific issues to assist the Indian government in its preparations for the Fourth Conference of the Parties of the Climate Convention that was held in Buenos Aires in November 1998. This allowed Sagar to develop an insider knowledge of Indian energy and climate policies and their ongoing evolution. At the same time, Sagar has been collaborating with Milind Kandlikar from Carnegie Mellon University on a study of air pollution-climate change linkages in India, with the aim of exploring solutions that might address both these two energy-use-related problems.
World
Some of the Energy Technology Innovation Project''s activities take a global perspective, rather than focusing on a particular country or region. John Holdren has been serving during this academic year as a convening lead author in a new United Nations "World Energy Assessment" (scheduled for completion in late 1999), with responsibility for the chapter on "Environment." This chapter surveys the whole range of environmental impacts of energy supply, but gives particular emphasis to the problem of greenhouse-gas-induced climate change and the reasons the solution to this problem must be at the core of global energy-environment strategy for the next century.
Energy Technology Innovation Project Research Fellow Ambuj Sagar has been working with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), examining approaches to building the institutional capacity of developing countries to address the climate change issue, and expects to be a contributing author for the Third Assessment Report of the IPCC.
Energy Technology Innovation Project Fellow Paul de Sa, working with Jeffrey Sachs and Theodore Panayotou of the Harvard Institute for International Development, organized and ran the "Second Annual Program on Climate Change and Development," a two week course at the Kennedy School for senior officials, with more than 50 participants from 30 countries.
In addition, de Sa and Sagar continued to compile and examine international data on energy R&D expenditures, exploring the gaps and weaknesses in the data that complicate policy-relevant comparisons. A journal article on this work, outlining the problems and making recommendations for better approaches to reporting such data, is in preparation.
STPP''s work on energy innovation is funded by generous support from the Energy Foundation, the Winslow Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, and the U.S. Department of Energy.
III. INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE
As the Harvard Information Infrastructure Project (HIIP) celebrates its tenth year, the information revolution continues to penetrate every aspect of daily life around the globe, affecting everything from national security to personal privacy, from economic competitiveness to democratic participation in governance. The HIIP identifies key issues and guides responsible policy in this critical and fast-moving area. Established in 1989, the project brings together insights and capabilities from STPP, the Kennedy School''s Center for Business and Government, and throughout Harvard University.
The HIIP has provided a neutral, interdisciplinary forum in both Cambridge and Washington for addressing a wide range of emerging policy issues relating to information infrastructure, its development, use, and growth. The HIIP convenes experts from government, industry, and academia, and draws on the perspectives and insights of policymakers, managers, economists, lawyers, political scientists, and technologists in pursuit of its mission to advance the understanding of emerging issues in information infrastructure policy.
In 1998-99, the HIIP continued to focus on its goal of outreach, strengthening and broadening its ties locally to the Kennedy School, Harvard, and Boston-area information technology business (IT) and globally to the international IT community. The HIIP Fellows Program and the HIIP seminars are two key components of these efforts.
HIIP Research Fellows Program
The HIIP Research Fellows Program, initiated in 1997, continues to attract individuals on the cutting edge of information infrastructure research and policy development. The 1998-99 HIIP Research Fellows were Nolan A. Bowie, most recently Associate Professor at Temple University, School of Communications and Theater, Department of Broadcasting, Telecommunications, and Mass Media; Y. T. Chien, on leave from his duties as Division Director at the National Science Foundation; Carolyn Gideon, a Ph.D. candidate at the Kennedy School; David Johnston, Professor of Law at McGill University and former Chair of the Canadian Information Highway Advisory Commission and President-Designate of the University of Waterloo; Thomas Kiessling, Senior Network Planner for GlobalOne; Clarisa Long, also Abramson Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute; and Eli Turk, former Senior Policy Advisor in the Office of the Minister of Industry, Canada. Edwin Ruh, Jr., former General Partner of Gerken Capital Associates, joined the HIIP as an Associate and Anitha Ramanna, visiting on a Fulbright grant, as a Visiting Scholar.
Building on the foundation established during the first two years of the Fellows Program, the HIIP has accepted, for the 1999-2000 academic year, seven practitioners and scholars from Australia, Canada, Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom, and the United States.
HIIP Added Affiliated Faculty
As part of its ongoing efforts to increase its capability to address both domestic and international IT public policy issues, the Kennedy School welcomed Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, formerly on the Faculty of Law at the University of Vienna, as an Assistant Professor of Public Policy and Affiliated Faculty of the HIIP in January 1999. Dr. Mayer-Schönberger''s work focuses on issues of privacy, security, liability, and ownership. His current research centers on the use of network technologies to mediate substate conflicts and on attribution of information in a network society.
Expansion of the HIIP Seminar Series
During its tenth anniversary year, the HIIP and STPP launched the Lewis M. Branscomb Lecture Series, in honor of Dr. Lewis M. Branscomb and his many accomplishments and contributions to the field of science and technology throughout his long and productive career. The Branscomb Lectures are held once each semester and feature senior academics and practitioners. The inaugural Branscomb Lecture was given by Dr. John H. (Jack) Gibbons on March 11, 1999. Dr. Gibbons is the 1998-99 Karl Taylor Compton Lecturer at MIT. He was Science Advisor to President Bill Clinton and Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology (1992-98). He also served as Director of the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment for 13 years.
Each year, the HIIP selects a country for special focus on its information infrastructure policies. During the 1999 spring semester, the HIIP sponsored the Marshall McLuhan Seminar on Canadian Information and Communications Policy, in cooperation with Industry Canada. The McLuhan seminar series was launched by presentations on Canada''s information highway and electronic commerce strategies by HIIP Research Fellow David Johnston. Additional seminars were presented by Michelle d''Auray, Executive Director, Task Force on Electronic Commerce, Industry Canada; Michael Binder, Assistant Deputy Minister, Spectrum, Information Technologies and Telecommunications, Industry Canada; David Colville, Vice Chair, Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC); Eli Turk, HIIP Research Fellow; and Liss Jeffrey, Director, Research Network and the byDesign E-Lab, the McLuhan Program in Culture and Technology, University of Toronto. The initiative also generated several associated teaching activities, such as a video linkup between students at the University of Toronto and the Kennedy School to demonstrate the power of new media technologies in learning, and the development of a new teaching case on Canada''s Strategy for the Information Highway.
The HIIP Seminar recommenced for the 1998-99 academic year with a presentation by Patrick Ball, Senior Program Associate for the Science and Human Rights Program, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, on the topic of "Electronic Security Problems and Cryptographic Solutions for Human Rights Organizations." The spring semester opened with a presentation by Ira Magaziner, who had recently returned to the private sector after leaving his position as Senior Policy Advisor to the President. Other speakers included Scott Bradner, Senior Technical Consultant, Harvard University Information Systems and Office of the Provost; Anne-Marie Slaughter, Professor, Harvard Law School; Jagdish Parikh, On-line Cyber Liberties Research Associate and Web Coordinator, Human Rights Watch; Daniel Salcedo, PEOPLink founder and CEO; Sharon Gillett, Executive Director, and William Lehr, Research Affiliate, MIT Internet Telephony Consortium; Leonard Foner, MIT Media Lab; Kennedy School faculty members Viktor Mayer-Schönberger and Jeffrey Sachs; and HIIP Fellows Nolan Bowie, Y.T. Chien, Carolyn Gideon, David Johnston, Thomas Kiessling, and Eli Turk and HIIP Associate Ed Ruh, Jr.
The Harvard Faculty Seminar on Information Infrastructure and Governance, chaired by Kennedy School Dean Joseph Nye and organized by the HIIP, continued into its second year. The seminar is intended to increase cooperation and multidisciplinary activity throughout Harvard and to create networks among faculty interested in information infrastructure issues. Faculty throughout the university have participated in the seminar and brought their expertise to bear on the interplay of information infrastructure and governance, the manner in which their fields will affect or be affected by this dynamic, and the relationships of their domains to others, both those with which they have traditionally shared borders and those with which now, due to information technology advances, they have begun or will soon begin to overlap or to share common boundaries. Papers were presented by Ira Magaziner, Executive Office of the President; Don Tapscott, Alliance for Converging Technologies; Major Gregory Rattray, United States Air Force; Debora Spar, Harvard Business School; Deborah Hurley, HIIP Director; Richard Zeckhauser and Christopher Avery, the Kennedy School, and Paul Resnick, University of Michigan; David Johnston, McGill University; and Lawrence Lessig, Harvard Law School.
Research Activities, Conferences, and Publications
Under the energetic leadership of its Director, Deborah Hurley, HIIP has continued to grow and take on increasingly challenging - and crucial - information issues, with an accelerating pace of seminars, conferences, and publications.
In June 1999, the HIIP announced the publication of The First Hundred Feet: Options for Internet and Broadband Access, edited by Deborah Hurley and former HIIP Associate Director James Keller and published by MIT Press. The book is the result of an HIIP conference that focused on how best to connect homes and small businesses to the information superhighway. Recasting the "problem of the last 100 feet" as "the opportunity of the first 100 feet," the book challenges individuals, businesses, and policymakers to rethink fundamental issues in telecommunications policy. The contributors look at options for Internet and broadband access from the perspective of homeowners, apartment complexes, and small businesses. They evaluate the opportunities and obstacles for bottom-up infrastructure development and the implications for traditional and alternative providers at the neighborhood, regional, and national levels.
Deborah Hurley contributed the chapter, "Security and Privacy: The Showstoppers of the Global Information Society" to Masters of the Wired World, edited by Anne Leer, which was published by Financial Times Pitman Publishing in the United Kingdom in mid-December 1998, and appeared in the United States in March 1999.
The HIIP was a cosponsor of "One Planet, One Net: The Public Interest in Internet Governance," held October 10-11, 1998, at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Hurley appeared on the panel "Panic over Privacy: A Case Study in Regulation" on October 10. This international symposium, organized by Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, brought together concerned computer professionals and corporate, nonprofit, academic, and governmental leaders to define the public interest and set the stage for an advocacy coalition, to ensure that the public voice is heard.
For the fourth year, Deborah Hurley served on the Program Committee of the annual Conference on Computers, Freedom and Privacy. CFP98 was held in Washington, D.C. on April 6-8, 1999.
Deborah Hurley gave a presentation on the "Future of Electronic Commerce" to the February 1999 meeting of the Leadership Council of the Center for Business and Government (CBG), at the Kennedy School of Government. The Leadership Council strengthens the ties of CBG with the business community in greater Boston and provides an opportunity for business executives and faculty to exchange ideas and assess solutions to important, current public policy issues.
Professor Jane Fountain completed two major research efforts during the 1998-99 academic year. The monograph The Virtual State: Technology, Transformation, and Bureaucracy in the 21st Century examines structural and procedural changes in U.S. federal agencies attributable to advances in information technology. Using cases drawn from the Army, as well as major interagency efforts, the volume explores current innovations from an operational and political perspective. Of key concern is the degree to which advances in information technology are likely to effect fundamental changes in the federal bureaucracy during the next two decades.
As Director of the Women in the Information Age Project, Fountain has undertaken a series of initial studies that will be published this year. The initial project report will include the results of field research on interventions to attract and retain women to information technology-related fields and an analysis of participation rates of women in information technology within universities and business. Currently, data on the participation of women in information technology-related fields are fragmented and reside in a variety of institutions. The project is compiling a comprehensive, unified database to further research efforts in this important area. Women in the Information Age draws on the expertise of the HIIP and the Women in Public Policy Program.
The HIIP has undertaken a large research activity to explore the development of digital television and its policy implications and will host a conference on this subject on October 18-20, 1999, at the Kennedy School. This activity is intended to inform policy by examining technological, economic, and regulatory issues for digital television in both the international and U.S. domestic context. Policy makers, industry representatives, government officials, public interest groups, and academics will gather to examine models for policy development. The conference papers will subsequently be published as a volume in the HIIP''s series with MIT Press.
In June, the HIIP was commissioned by DARPA to conduct a research activity to explore the technological, economic, and policy issues that will influence the widespread availability of advanced data access services in traditional high-cost areas in developed countries.
Continued Commitment to Teaching
HIIP Fellow Nolan Bowie taught "Old Media, New Media, and the Regulation of Public Policy" in the fall semester, an introductory course on how and why information, information technology, information systems, and information networks are regulated or not regulated. The course examines the regulation and public policy of electronic speech, especially American television, in an era of rapid transition from analog to digital and explores the range of policy choices available to policymakers and the public.
For the third year, Deborah Hurley taught "Business and the Internet: Strategy, Law, and Policy," which examines strategic choices in Internet-related industries that illustrate the interplay of business objectives with law and public policy. The course builds on case studies of firm strategies, industry analysis, and policy development as reflected in legal, administrative, and political processes. Students undertake team research projects, embodied in Websites, and make presentations on subjects such as financial services and the Internet; wireless data access for developing countries; issues in information security, reliability, and privacy; digital voting; and cross-border business to business ecommerce.
In the spring 1999 semester, Professor Jean Camp taught "Information and Telecommunications Protocols and Policies," which aims to define the range of options for selected policy problems; examine the protocols for embedded value decisions and policies; evaluate how a new product or program might change these options; and understand the interaction between cultural conflict and underlying information technologies. The course seeks to address issues such as privacy, jurisdiction, universal service, and censorship through the lens of the underlying technologies.
Professor Victor Mayer-Schönberger taught a new course entitled "Virtual Diplomacy," which explores the changing faces of diplomacy - from its traditional form to its modern incarnation, in light of the deep impact of modern information and telecommunication technologies on the scope, conduct, and objectives of diplomacy. It analyzes the various instances and modifications of diplomacy, particularly with respect to the power balances affected, and looks at how different actors may use diplomatic methods to their advantage in the international context. The course included three simulation sessions, a teleconference with the B92 Serbian Independent Radio Re-Broadcasters, and a presentation by Charles Schmitz, one of the leading experts on "Virtual Diplomacy."
HIIP Research Fellow Clarisa Long taught "Law, Policy and Ethics in Biotechnology," which exposes students to the legal, economic, ethical, and social issues posed by biotechnology and recent advances in genetic research. Since its development, biotechnology has created high hopes for some and deep anxieties for others. Recent developments in genetic research, such as the Human Genome Project, have only multiplied the number of vexing legal, economic, ethical, and social issues.
As advances in information technology transform governmental behavior and decisionmaking, public affairs professional education must also be transformed. Leveraging information infrastructure available to the Kennedy School of Government, Fountain has spearheaded an effort at the Kennedy School to develop a series of Web-based, rich-text teaching cases. Beyond their pedagogical innovation, the cases foster discussion in degree and executive teaching programs of the ways in which information technology is changing government. These cases also allow faculty to leverage the resources of the "electronic" classrooms of the Kennedy School by using live Internet connections and teleconferencing to enrich and modernize the traditional case discussion format. "Creating a ''Cyberculture'' of Wilderness: The Development of the Wilderness Information Network" examines the potential as well as the challenges of connectivity across five federal agencies responsible for wilderness management. www.business.gov: Building an Interagency Website challenges students to rethink the ways in which government regulates and provides services to business in an increasingly global economy. Fountain continues to teach a five-session module on information technology and the management of change in the executive program Senior Managers in Government each year.
In addition to the seminar series, the McLuhan Initiative also generated several associated teaching activities, such as a video link-up between students at the University of Toronto and the Kennedy School to demonstrate the power of new media technologies in learning, and the development of a new teaching case on Canada''s Strategy for the Information Highway.
HIIP Public Service
Dr. Lewis M. Branscomb, Aetna Professor of Public Policy and Corporate Management, emeritus, and Principal Investigator of the HIIP, has been awarded the Okawa Foundation Prize for 1998. Dr. Branscomb was honored in a ceremony in Tokyo on December 1 "for outstanding contributions to the progress of informatics, scientific and technological policy, and corporate management." The prize is accompanied by a gold medal and 10 million yen. The Okawa Foundation for Information and Telecommunications, founded in Japan in 1986, supports and encourages research and technological development in the fields of information and telecommunications, and aims at the establishment of an advanced information society in the future.
The HIIP was a charter site in Web, White & Blue <<a href="http://www.webwhiteblue.org" style="color: blue;">http://www.webwhiteblue.org>, the largest online public service campaign promoting the use of the Internet in democracy. The sponsors of this valuable resource are the Markle Foundation and the Kennedy School''s Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics, and Public Policy.
Deborah Hurley continues to serve on the Advisory Committee to the U.S. State Department on International Communications and Information Policy and as cochair of its Working Group on Security, Privacy and Export Controls. She also continues to serve on the Advisory Board of the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, D.C.
At the request of the Internal Revenue Service, Deborah Hurley gave a seminar at IRS headquarters on privacy, security, and management issues in online delivery of government services on October 15, 1998. The seminar was centered around the teaching case, "Social Security on the Web: The Case of the Online PEBES," which is available on the HIIP Website. Professor Hurley also gave a seminar on public diplomacy and information technology at a training session on the theory and practice of public diplomacy for new U.S. Foreign Service officers. The session was organized by the U. S. Information Agency and held in Washington, D.C.
Deborah Hurley assisted the Government of Canada in organizing the participation of nongovernmental organizations, public interest groups, and social partners from 44 countries in the OECD Ministerial Conference on Electronic Commerce, which was held in Ottawa, Canada, in October 1998. She has also chaired two meetings of the global Internet NGO community in October 1998 in Ottawa and April 1999 in Washington DC.
Viktor Mayer-Schönberger advised the Austrian Federation of Newspaper Publishers and the Austrian Press Agency on the planned European Union (EU) Directive of Copyright and Digital Media and coauthored a report on copyright and media clipping services. In addition, he took part in a number of panels, talks, and interviews focusing on the Draft EU Directive on Digital Signatures. He also served as an advisor to the Austrian Municipal public utilities on forming the first alternative Austrian telecommunications network.
MEMBERS'' ACTIVITIES
Nolan Bowie is a Research Fellow and Adjunct Lecturer in Public Policy at Harvard''s Kennedy School of Government. He is affiliated with both the Harvard Information Infrastructure Project (HIIP) and the Shorenstein Center on Press, Politics, and Public Policy. Professor Bowie has also served as an Assistant Special Prosecutor with the Watergate Special Prosecution Force and Assistant Attorney General, Civil Rights Bureau, New York State Department of Law, and as Staff Attorney and Executive Director of Citizens Communications Center, a public interest law firm. He has served on advisory panels of the U.S. Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, and on review panels of applications for the National Information Infrastructure Assistance Program. He was Chairman of the Organizing Committee of the Seventh Annual Telecommunications Policy Research Conference and a member to the U.S. Delegation to the World Administrative Radio Conference in 1979. For the years 1986-98, prior to joining the Kennedy faculty, he was an Associate Professor of Communications in the Department of Broadcasting, Mass Media, and Telecommunications at Temple University. He has served four years active duty, from 1966 to1970, as an officer in the U.S. Naval Reserves (Lt., Senior Grade). He was named among about 35 individuals identified as "High-Tech Heroes Who Work for the Public Good," in a syndicated column by Gary Chapman published in October 1998 in the Los Angeles Times, titled "Digital Nation."
Lewis M. Branscomb is Emeritus Director of the Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program, and is Aetna Professor, Emeritus, in Public Policy and Corporate Management. He is Principal Investigator of a number of projects in the fields of information technology policy and both domestic and international science and technology policy, more generally. His recent research has produced books that focus on evaluating and redirecting the Clinton-Gore technology policy (with James Keller), on state government science and technology (with Megan Jones and Professor Dave Guston), on Korea technology policy (with Young-Hwan Choi), and on intelligent transportation systems (with Keller). He continues to examine research and innovation policy in a forthcoming book (with Professors Fumio Kodama and Richard Florida) on university-industry partnerships in Japan and America. His current research, in collaboration with MIT and the Harvard Business School, explores the way high-tech entrepreneurs and investors manage the technical dimensions of business risk.
Jean Camp is an Assistant Professor at the Kennedy School of Government, with a background in electrical engineering, computer science, and public policy. Professor Camp came to the Kennedy School of Government not only to pursue interdisciplinary research but also to develop a concentration in information and telecommunications policy to teach students to make policy decisions grounded in technical reality. Professor Camp is the Vice-Chair of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-USA Committee on Communications and Information Policy. She is a member of the United States Association for Computational Mechanics. She is on the Board of Directors for Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility. Before joining Harvard University, Professor Camp was at Sandia National Laboratories as a Senior Member of the Technical Staff. Professor Camp received her Ph.D. at Carnegie Mellon University where her studies combined networks, computer science, and public policy. Her research has been published in business forums, Usenix workshops, policy texts, and a textbook on computer design.
Y. T. Chien is a Research Fellow in the Harvard Information Infrastructure. He is also Project Director of the Division of Information and Intelligent Systems at the National Science Foundation (NSF). He received a M.S. and Ph.D., both in Electrical Engineering, from Purdue University. From 1967 to 1982, Dr. Chien was on the faculty of the University of Connecticut, where he taught and did research in the Electrical Engineering and Computer Science Department. Later he assumed the positions of Department Head and Assistant Dean of Engineering for Computer Research. Prior to his current position at NSF, he spent two years as a scientist and group leader at the Artificial Intelligence Center, Naval Research Laboratory in Washington, D.C. At present, besides his responsibilities at NSF, he is involved in several cross-agency activities, including serving as Chair of the Human-centered Systems Working Group of the Committee on Computing, Information, and Communications Committee under the National Council of Science and Technology, and a member of its Technology Policy Subcommittee. Dr. Chien authored or coauthored more than 50 research papers in pattern recognition, computer vision, and artificial intelligence, and three books: Fundamentals in Computing (John Wiley); Interactive Pattern Recognition (Marcel Dekker); and Knowledge-based Systems, IEEE Computer Society Press. He is a Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
Stephen Feinson is a Research Specialist at the Harvard Information Infrastructure Project and was a Research Assistant at the Project from 1998 to 1999, working on digital television and next-generation Internet access projects, among others. He holds an M.A. from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University and a B.A. in Economics from Brandeis University, and studied economics at the London School of Economics. Prior to beginning his studies at Fletcher, Feinson lived for seven years in Israel, where he served in the Israel Defense Forces'' Spokesman''s Office and worked in the Former Soviet Union Department of the American Jewish Joint Distribution Committee. He currently lives in Boston with his wife, Tamar.
Jane E. Fountain is Associate Professor of Public Policy at Harvard''s John F. Kennedy School of Government. She is affiliated with the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, the Center for Business and Government, the Harvard Information Infrastructure Project, the Women and Public Policy Program and the university-wide faculty in Organizational Behavior. Professor Fountain has been selected to be a Radcliffe Public Policy Fellow for the 1999-00 academic year. Her research explores the interrelation between information technology and governance. She is the Director of the Women in the Information Age Project. She was on the editorial board of Informatization and the Public Sector, the first international journal on the development, use, and effects of information technology in the public sector. She co-edited Proposition 2 ½: Its Impact on Massachusetts and coauthored Customer Service Excellence: Using Information Technologies to Improve Service Delivery in Government. She has advised and consulted widely to government agencies in the United States and abroad. Professor Fountain holds a Ph.D. in Political Science and Organizational Behavior from Yale University.
Carolyn Gideon is a Ph.D. candidate in Public Policy at Harvard University and a Research Fellow in the Harvard Information Infrastructure Project. Her primary research interests are the regulation and economics of information infrastructure industries, with particular focus on industry structure. Prior to graduate study, Gideon spent six years in industry as an investment banker, a manager of financial planning and analysis, and a management consultant. She is recipient of the Harvard Graduate Society Dissertation Completion Fellowship and four-time recipient of the Charles Edison Fellowship for research in science, technology, and public policy. She received a B.S. in Economics from the University of Pennsylvania and a Master''s degree in Public Policy from Harvard University.
Deborah Hurley is Director of the Harvard Information Infrastructure Project within the Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program. She is also the Executive Director of Terra Nova, a global public interest policy center for advanced technologies. Hurley was an official (1988-96) of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) in Paris, France, with responsibility for legal, economic, social, and technological issues related to information and communications technologies, biotechnology, environmental and energy technologies, technology policy, and other advanced technology fields. She was responsible for the drafting, negotiation, and adoption by OECD member countries of the 1992 OECD Guidelines for Security of Information Systems. Prior to joining the OECD, Hurley practiced computer and intellectual property law (1983-88) in the United States. She carried out a Fulbright study (1989-90) of intellectual property protection and technology transfer in Korea. Hurley graduated from the University of California, Berkeley and received a law degree from University of California, Los Angeles, Law School. She is a member of the Advisory Committee to the U.S. State Department on International Communications and Information Policy and of the Advisory Board of the Electronic Privacy Information Center.
David Johnston is a Research Fellow in the Harvard Information Infrastructure Project. He is the President of the University of Waterloo. He has served on the Faculties of Law at Queens'' University, the University of Toronto, and McGill University. He became Dean of the Faculty of Law at the University of Western Ontario in 1974. In 1979 he was named Principal and Vice-Chancellor of McGill University. Among many honors accorded Dr. Johnston are honorary doctorates from ten universities and the Order of Canada (Companion). He is the author of ten books, including Getting Canada Online: Understanding the Information Highway, which is intended to challenge Canadians to use the information revolution to build a more economically competitive and civic society, and the most recent Cyberlaw: What You Need to Know About Doing Business Online. He chaired the federal government''s Information Highway Advisory Council (1994-97), the Neuroscience Network Centre of Excellence (1994-98), the federal government''s Blue Ribbon Panel on Smart Communities, and was a member of the federal government''s Steering Group on Prosperity. He presently chairs the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research and is Special Advisor to the Minister of Industry on information highway matters.
Thomas Kiessling is a Research Fellow in the Harvard Information Infrastructure Project. He holds a Ph.D. magna cum laude in Economics from the University of Stuttgart, Germany, an M.S. in Telecommunications Network Engineering, Ecole Nationale Supérieure des Télécommunications, Paris, and an M.A. in Economics from the American University, Washington, D.C. He has six years of professional experience in communications engineering and policy, including assignments at the European Commission, DG IV (Competition) and DG XIII (Telecommunications), and Analysys Ltd., Cambridge, UK, the largest telecommunications consultancy in Europe. Since 1994 he has been working for Global One (Strategic Alliance of Deutsche Telekom, France Telecom, and U.S. Sprint), where he is currently Director of Global Service Planning, responsible for the operators'' global ATM network planning activities. Current research focuses on the impact of the EU and U.S. Telecommunications Regulatory Frameworks on international telecommunications, as well as convergence between media and telecommunications.
Clarisa Long is a Research Fellow for the Harvard Information Infrastructure Project; the Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program; and the Center for Business and Government. She is also the Abramson Fellow at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) for Public Policy Research. Her research concerns include the legal, economic, and policy issues surrounding intellectual property rights, genetic research, and the biotechnology industry. Previously, she was a molecular biologist at the Centre for Gene Technology in New Zealand and at the National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health. The results of her scientific research have been published in the American Journal of Kidney Disease, Cytokine, and other publications. As an attorney in private practice, she has prosecuted patents and worked on intellectual property, takings, and federal procurement cases. She has also served as a law clerk to Judge Alvin A. Schall of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. She is the coauthor of U.S. Foreign Policy and Intellectual Property Protection in Latin America (Standford, Calif.: Hoover Institution Press, 1997), and has published in the Stanford Law Review and other scholarly journals. She is writing "Genomic Information and Intellectual Property Rights: A Clash of Cultures", and is editing Genetic Testing and the Use of Information (Washington, D.C.: AEI Press, 1999). She is also a regular contributor to Intellectual Property News.
Viktor Mayer-Schönberger is Assistant Professor of Public Policy at Harvard''s Kennedy School of Government. He studied law in Salzburg (Mag.iur, ''88, Dr.iur ''91), Cambridge, UK, and Harvard (LL.M. ''89). In 1992 he received an M.Sc. (Econ) from the London School of Economics. He has held various positions in academia and business, including Administrative Dean of the Postgraduate program on Legal Informatics at Salzburg University and Director of the Information Law Project at the Austrian Legal Policy Institute. In that capacity he advised governments on privacy and data protection, as well as cryptography, security, and digital signature issues. In 1986 he founded Ikarus Software, a company focusing on data security and developed the Virus Utilities, which became the best-selling Austrian software product. He has published widely on cyberlaw and politics issues and is author of The Law of Cyberspace (1997, in German). Most recently, Mayer-Schönberger was with the University of Vienna School of Law.
Nora O''Neil is Coordinator of the Harvard Information Infrastructure Project where her responsibilities include grant administration, conference organization, and publication management. O''Neil manages the HIIP Research Fellows Program. Prior to joining HIIP in 1996, she served as a faculty and program assistant within the Center for Science and International Affairs. She is a graduate of the Georgetown University School of Foreign Service as a concentrator in the Science, Technology, and International Affairs Program, with a Certificate in Russian Studies.
Edwin Ruh Jr.''s primary research addressed the issues of capital formation on the Internet and the creation of online sports and entertainment opportunities previously unavailable to the general public ("public venture capital") as well as new market valuation models for Internet-based companies. Mr. Ruh''s primary research vehicle, a field study, is Adventure Assets (Adventas) found at www.adventas.com. A globally-orientated, Internet-enhanced, sports and entertainment studio, Adventure Assets 1) develops, capitalizes and manages original sports and entertainment projects through a $400 million Sports and Entertainment Technology Equity Fund; and 2) exploits emerging e-commerce technologies to create a hybrid form of online finance and entertainment - e-Motion Adventures.
Andrew Russell is a Project Assistant for the Harvard Information Infrastructure Project, as well as Faculty Assistant for Professors Lewis Branscomb and Harvey Brooks. He was previously a labor consultant for the Erie County Industrial Development Agency. He graduated with a B.A. in History from Vassar College, and has also studied at the University of Sussex in Brighton, England.
Eli Turk is a Research Fellow with the Harvard Information Infrastructure Project, where his research focuses on the role and effectiveness of advisory bodies in the formulation of public policy in the information age. During his study toward a Mid-Career Master in Public Administration Degree at the Kennedy School of Government in 1998-1999, Turk was named a Lucius N. Littauer Fellow. For the last five years, he has been Senior Policy Advisor to the Canadian Minister of Industry. In that role, he has provided advice on a wide range of policy issues, including the development and implementation of a national strategy for the information highway as well as the development of a Canadian electronic commerce strategy. Prior to 1993, he was Director of Policy and Programs for the Inuit Tapirisat, the national organization for Canada''s Inuit. Turk has worked as a consultant in the private and public sectors. He has also worked as Policy Advisor and Legislative Assistant to a provincial cabinet minister in Ontario and as a freelance journalist in Europe, Central America, and India.
ARTICLES, BOOK CHAPTERS, AND REVIEWS
L. Jean Camp, "Community Considered," in Elaine Ciulla Kamarck and Joseph S. Nye, Jr., eds., democracy.com? Governance in a Networked World (Hollis, N.H.: Hollis Publishing, 1999)
L. Jean Camp and Rose Tsang, "Universal Service in a Ubiqitious Digital Network," INET 99
Jane E. Fountain, "Constructing the Information Society: Women, Design, and Technology," Faculty Research Working Paper Series, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, 1999
Jane E. Fountain, "The Paradox of Customer Service," Faculty Research Working Paper Series, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, 1999
Jane E. Fountain, "Social Capital: Its Relationship to Innovation in Science and Technology," Science and Public Policy, Vol. 25, No. 2 (1998)
Jane E. Fountain, "The Virtual State: Toward a Theory of Federal Bureaucracy in the 21st Century," in Elaine Ciulla Kamarck and Joseph S. Nye, Jr., eds., democracy.com? Governance in a Networked World (Hollis, N.H.: Hollis, 1999)
Jane E. Fountain and Robert D. Atkinson, "Innovation, Social Capital, and the New Economy: New Federal Policies to Support Collaborative Research" (Washington, D.C.: Progressive Policy Institute, 1998)
Deborah Hurley and James Keller, eds., The First 100 Feet: Options for Internet and Broadband Access (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1999)
Deborah Hurley, "Security and Privacy: The Showstoppers of the Global Information Society," in Anne Leer, ed., Masters of the Wired World (London: Financial Times Pitman Publishing, 1999)
Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, "Internet Privacy: The Internet and Privacy Legislation: Cookies for a Treat?" Computer Law and Securities Report, vol. 14, No.3 (1998), p. 166
Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, "Mr. Coase, the King, the Law, and the Money; Or: The Pivotal Role of Copyright in the Creative Arts," in Andrea Ellmeier and Veronika Ratzenböck, eds., Cultural Competence: New Technologies, Culture and Employment - Proceedings of an EU Conference (1999)
Viktor Mayer-Schönberger and Gerhard Laga, "Tele-Privacy: The European Union Directive on Data Protection in Telecommunications and Its Likely Transatlantic Impact," 2 Loyola Intellectual Property and High-Technology Law Quarterly 1 (1998)
Viktor Mayer-Schönberger and Michael Pilz, "Das Recht am Netz," in Zechner, Holzinger, and Doppel, eds., Handbuch Internet (1998), p. 140
Viktor Mayer-Schönberger and Michael Pilz, "E-Commerce: Rechtliche Rahmenbedingungen und Notwendigkeiten," AnwBl (1999), p. 217
Viktor Mayer-Schönberger, Michael Pilz, Christian Reiser, and Gabriele Schmölzer, "The Austrian Draft Digital Signatures Act," Computer Law and Security Report, Vol. 14, No. 5 (1998), p. 317
IV. SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY FOR COMPETITIVENESS, SUSTAINABILITY, AND SECURITY
Science and technology permeate virtually every aspect of modern life. When government policies designed to promote scientific and technological innovation succeed - as in the case of the U.S. aerospace industry, to take but one prominent example - the result can be dramatic economic gains, major environmental improvements, or dramatic improvements in military capabilities. Indeed, economic growth in the developed world now comes primarily from technological change. Where public science and technology policies fail - as in the case of the U.S. effort to develop synthetic fuels in the 1970s, for example - the result can be the waste of billions of dollars or the inability to achieve economic, environmental, or security goals. Hence the question of how government can best foster the innovation needed for economic competitiveness, sustainability, and security is a critical one, and it continued to be a central focus of STPP''s work in the 1998-99 year.
September 1998 saw the release of an interim report on the poor state of the U.S. government''s ability to integrate science, technology, and health into U.S. foreign policy, by a National Research Council panel chaired by STPP''s Robert Frosch. The report called for a variety of specific steps to improve the State Department''s ability to manage international issues related to science, technology, and health, including designating one of the State Department undersecretaries to be responsible for these issues and improving the career incentives for Foreign Service officers and other State Department officials to have and develop expertise in science, technology, and health issues. As the panel worked to complete its final report, Frosch and others have met repeatedly with top State Department and other executive branch officials to make the case for new steps to better integrate science and technology into the pursuit of U.S. foreign policy goals.
STPP Emeritus Director Lewis Branscomb continued to lead a wide range of efforts related to how government can best foster innovation. Branscomb led an exploratory project in the summer of 1998 exploring how the private sector makes decisions on investments in early stage, high-risk research projects, where the benefits of the R&D are uncertain, may be distant in time, and may be difficult for a single firm to capture. The effort was sponsored by the Advanced Technology Program (ATP) within the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST). A workshop was held on September 17, 1998, at the Kennedy School, and a short report can be found at <<a href="http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/iip/lmb/risk-report1.htm" style="color: blue;">http://www.ksg.harvard.edu/iip/lmb/risk-report1.htm>. This feasibility study led to the current ATP-NIST Project on "Managing Technical Risk: Decision-Making on Early Stage, High-Risk Research." This STPP research project is conducted in collaboration with the MIT Sloan School''s Entrepreneurship Center and the Entrepreneurship Research program of the Harvard Business School. Postdoctoral Fellow Phillip Auerswald joined STPP in the summer of 1999 to direct this project. A workshop was held at MIT on June 21-22, 1999, at which the views of entrepreneurs and venture investors were discussed. A second workshop, at which scholars will present their analyses, will be held at the Kennedy School on September 17, 1999, with a final report to be prepared in December.
STPP continues its interest in comparative S&T policy, especially in Japan, Korea, and China. In September 1998 Branscomb and Fumio Kudama of the Research Center for Advanced Science and Technology at the University of Tokyo cochaired a conference on "Universities and Science-Based Industrial Development: A Comparative USA and Japan Dialogue on Public Policy for Economic Development," sponsored by the Japan Foundation Center for Global Partnership. This event brought together scholars and industrialists from Japan and the United States to discuss their evaluations of the nature of university-industry ties and the policy implications of this strong trend in the two countries. The resulting studies are to appear in early fall 1999 in a book published by MIT Press, edited by Lewis M. Branscomb, Fumio Kodama, and Richard Florida, entitled Industrializing Knowledge: University-Industry Linkages in Japan and the United States.
In March 1999, Branscomb organized a meeting to discuss the draft innovation policy being developed by Japan''s Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI), with Schumpeter Tamada, Special Researcher at MITI and Assistant Professor, Center for Tsukuba Advanced Research Alliance (who is a Kennedy School graduate). Branscomb is also presenting a paper at a conference organized by MIT and the Korea Venture Business Association on "Promoting New Ventures and Innovation and Small and Medium Korean Enterprises."
In May 1999, Branscomb and his fellow STPP Director Emeritus Harvey Brooks, together with Gerald Holton and Gehard Sonnert of Harvard''s Faculty of Arts and Sciences and Paula Rayman of the Radcliffe Public Policy Institute, met with Neal Lane, the President''s S&T Advisor, to launch a project on "Jeffersonian Science." A continuation of work in STPP sponsored by the Sloan Foundation, and work pursued by Holton and Sonnert, this project seeks to bring attention to a class of public research investments that call for long-range basic research in pursuit of high-priority national objectives. Thus one may distinguish three elements of public research strategy: Newtonian (satisfying scientific curiosity), Baconian (solving identified problems), and Jeffersonian (creative, independent research in pursuit of strategic objectives).
STPP Affiliate Professor F. Michael Scherer continued his long-standing work on the economics of technological change and competitiveness. His monograph, New Perspectives on Economic Growth and Technological Innovation, was published by the Brookings Institution. It surveys old and new views on how technological change contributes to economic growth, notes that given rates of real national income growth per capita have required appreciably larger technological activity growth rates, and explores how growth can be sustained in two key science and engineering inputs - investment capital and human capital. Tapping the vast human potential of Asia and the former Soviet Union is seen as crucial to sustaining technological change in the future. A co-edited volume on price theory and its applications was also published during the year.
With Dietmar Harhoff of the Center for European Economic Research, Mannheim, Germany, and Joerg Kukies of the University of Chicago, Scherer has conducted during the past two years a broad-ranging analysis of the statistical distribution of payoffs from technological innovations, revealing that the distribution of returns to innovative activity is highly skewed; relatively few particular innovations account for the lion''s share of total economic payoffs. One implication of the project''s findings is that standard portfolio approaches to R&D risk-hedging work badly with the types of skew distributions observed. Considerable variability of pooled outcomes at the firm, agency, industry, and perhaps even the macroeconomic level is virtually unavoidable. This means, inter alia, that it is unrealistic to expect that a high fraction of public sector R&D investments will yield substantial successes. This work led to the publication of several reports and journal articles, detailed in the publications list.
In a major review of STPP Associate Professor David Hart''s 1998 book, Forged Consensus: Science, Technology, and Economic Policy in the United States, 1921-1953, (described in last year''s report), Granger Morgan, Director of the Science and Technology Policy Center at Carnegie Mellon University, called it "a new science policy classic." Hart''s work was also cited by Martin Nolan in the Boston Globe as "an essential volume on a Cold War bookshelf." Hart published two journal articles based on research derived from the book, including an examination of antitrust policy''s impact on technological innovation, published in Issues in Science and Technology, and a historical review of the enduring significance of Herbert Hoover''s science and technology policies. A larger version of the study on antitrust policy and innovation is in preparation.
Funding for STPP''s work in these areas is provided by the National Institute of Standards and Technology; the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation; the Competitiveness Policy Council; and the Japan Foundation Center for Global Partnership.
V. SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY PROCESSES
The ways decisions get made often have an enormous effect on what decisions get made; hence STPP has maintained its long-standing interest in the processes for science and technology policy decisionmaking. A substantial part of STPP''s work in this area is "researching by doing," through the participation by key STPP personnel such as Holdren, Branscomb, Brooks, Jasanoff, Hurley, and others in a variety of national and international advisory or decisionmaking panels on particular aspects of science and technology policy.
In addition, during 1998-99 Associate Professor David Hart continued his in-depth research into the role of high-technology businesses in influencing science and technology policy decisionmaking. The project, expected to lead to a book, examines the policy priorities, preferences, and tactics of these businesses - what they want in Washington and how they try to get it. Hart has begun with an in-depth case study of IBM''s political activities from 1970 to 1999, which was presented at the Business History Conference and has led to two articles submitted to peer-reviewed journals. Another paper on high-tech firms'' political action committees from the 1970s to the 1990s is in preparation. VI. SOCIAL, LEGAL, AND POLITICAL STUDIES OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Science and technology inevitably have far-ranging effects on society - on culture, values, the distribution of wealth and power, and democratic goverance - and, in turn, these factors help shape the course of scientific and technological change.
The arrival of Professor Sheila Jasanoff has greatly strengthened STPP''s capabilities in these critical areas. The Department of Science and Technology Studies at Cornell, which Jasanoff founded, is designed precisely to promote and deepen understanding of the ways in which science and technology shape the world and are themselves shaped by history, politics, and culture.
During 1998-99, Jasanoff continued her research on the comparative politics of science and technology, with a major project on the regulation of biotechnology and the development of bioethics in Britain, Germany, and the United States, exploring the dramatic differences in social attitudes and government policies toward biotechnology on both sides of the Atlantic.
In cooperation with fellows Clark Miller and Marybeth Long, among others, Jasanoff continued her examination of the institutional prerequisites for the creation of authoritative scientific knowledge, seeking to understand what general conclusions can be drawn about the factors that contribute to trust in scientific knowledge as it applies to global environmental policy. What makes one projection or assessment more widely accepted and influential than another? Jasanoff and her colleagues are working to describe the dimensions of comparison among international environmental regimes on climate, ozone, biodiversity, and desertification. In a separate but related endeavor, Jasanoff also began looking at the role played by visual representations in the evolution of global environmental thought and action.
Jasanoff also continued work on a theoretical project looking at the ways in which scientific and social orders co-evolve in modern societies; an edited volume is in preparation on this theme, based on a workshop Jasanoff organized on this theme at the Kennedy School in November 1998, entitled "States of Knowledge: Science, Power, and Political Culture." Jasanoff is also leading smaller ongoing projects on the "mad cow" crisis in Britain and its political aftermath, the mass tort lawsuits on silicone gel breast implants, and the changing rules for evaluating scientific evidence in U.S. courts, building on her past work in these areas.
During 1998-99, Lecturer Dorothy Zinberg continued her research on several aspects of the intersection of international science, technology, and society: the changing roles played by, and arrangements among, industries, universities, and governments as a function of the increasing commercialization of science; the major changes in universities brought about by the information technologies and biotechnology; and the ever-changing patterns of education and career development for scientists and engineers. Currently Zinberg is writing the second volume of The Changing University, which examines the impact of the information technologies on the structure of universities, and the new arrangements between research universities and industry, as they affect traditional research practices; the openness of universities; economic competitiveness;, and the future of careers in science, engineering, and technology. Zinberg also writes a monthly column, "World View," for the (London) Times Higher Education Supplement, which is also syndicated by the New York Times News Service.
VII. CONTINUED COMMITMENT TO TEACHING
Training the next generation of science and technology policy scholars and policymakers is a core commitment of the STPP Program. Science, Technology, and Public Policy is one of the Policy Areas of Concentration (PACs) offered to Master in Public Policy students at the Kennedy School. Students with this concentration can take not only courses labeled as science and technology policy, but related courses from the environment concentration, the security concentration, other schools at Harvard, as well as other universities in the Boston area. Moreover, the courses offered in this PAC are of interest to a broad range of students beyond those focusing specifically on science and technology policy. These courses are not restricted to students with strong backgrounds in science and technology. People who work at the intersection of S&T with public policy in the "real world" come to this intersection with a wide variety of backgrounds, and Kennedy School graduates with many different specializations and job descriptions are likely to encounter interactions between science, technology, and public policy in some phase of their work. Indeed, the array of contemporary challenges and opportunities involving the interaction of S&T with public policy - AIDS, energy, genetic engineering, global environmental change, industrial ecology, the Internet, nuclear weapons, telecommunications, toxic substances, transportation, and more - command the attention and understanding of all citizens.
STPP''s teaching has two primary orientations. The first entails the study of the processes and methods by which public-policy decisions about S&T or involving S&T get made. This focus includes attention to the methods used by analysts of science, technology, and public policy issues to compare alternative courses of action; the means and institutions through which policymakers obtain S&T advice; how public and private interests and decisionmaking about these matters interact; and exploration of how scholars study the interactions of S&T with policy. The second orientation entails the study of particular issues where the interactions of S&T with public policy raise difficult and important problems. Such issues include nurturing technological innovation systems for industrial productivity and competitiveness, for national defense, and for environmental sustainability; developing national and international energy strategies; managing nuclear-energy and nuclear-weapons technologies; shaping and administering the evolving global information infrastructure; and determining the appropriate levels of public support for basic science and for S&T education, among many others.
During the 1998-99 year, Associate Professor David Hart taught the introductory STPP survey course, "Science, Technology, and Public Policy," while Lecturer Dorothy Zinberg taught the follow-on "Seminar in Science, Technology, and Public Policy," in which students developed their required policy analysis exercises. STPP Director John Holdren taught "Issues in Science and Technology Policy: Designing and Conducting S&T Assessments for Policy," which explored the detailed mechanics of conducting interdisciplinary studies of major issues at the intersection of science, technology, and public policy, drawing on a wide range of case studies, and a broad team including Holdren, Professor Sheila Jasanoff, Professor William Clark, and Associate Professor Daniel Schrag of the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences taught "Scientific Assessments in International Affairs," an interdisciplinary examination of the production, use, and impacts of science-based assessments in international affairs, using current debates about climate change as an example. The following semester, Jasanoff, Clark, and Academic Dean Frederick Schauer taught "Experts, Expertise, and Public Policy," which looked at the nature of expertise, the processes and institutions through which it is used in making and legitimating public policy, and the implications for democratic governance of deferral to experts in the policy process.
There were also a number of courses on specific policy areas related to science and technology that carried an STPP label or were taught by STPP-affiliated faculty. Information Infrastructure Project Director Deborah Hurley taught a seminar on "The Internet: Business Strategy, Law, and Policy," examining strategic choices in different Internet-related industries that illustrate the interplay of business objectives with legal principles and public policy. Assistant Professor Jean Camp taught "Information and Telecommunications Protocols and Policies," exploring the values embedded in technological choices in the information infrastructure and how these choices affect the range of policy options available in such areas as privacy, jurisdiction, universal service, and censorship. Professor F. Michael Scherer taught "Technology, Innovation, and Economic Growth," exploring how technological change affects the economy and how economic incentives and managerial decisions in turn affect the rate and direction of technological change. Associate Professor David Hart taught "Technological Innovation for Economic Growth: Policy and Politics," an examination of how governments influence technological innovation in the private sector. Finally, Holdren and Lecturer Henry Lee taught "Designing and Managing Energy Systems," introducing students to energy technology and policy, including engineering, economic, environmental, and institutional issues in the development and selection of energy options in industrialized and developing countries.
Associates'' Activities
Guillermo Cardoza, in the academic year 1998-1999 did research on the topics of learning and innovation paths in East Asia; a regional innovation system for the Caribbean; the learning and innovation (L&I) ladder: a management approach to new product development; higher education and research and development (R&D) in East Asia and Latin America; and an integrative policy framework for Lmp;amp;I-based industrial development in Latin America. As a result, his article, "Learning and Innovation Paths in East Asia," was published in Science and Public in August 1999. In addition, he completed "Regional System for Caribbean Innovation: A Proposal for Implementing a Mechanism for Cooperation in Science and Technology among the Member States of the Association of Caribbean States (ACS)," http://www.acs-aec.org/.
Robert Frosch chaired a National Research Council study on improving the State Department''s
ability to integrate science, technology, and health information in international decision-making. Frosch also continued his work on industrial ecology, and played key roles in the Energy Technology Innovation, Managing the Atom, and Global Environmental Assessment projects.
Masamichi (Max) Iishi served as project manager on a multi-year research grant assisting STPP''s Professor Lewis Branscomb and Professor Fumio Kodama of the University of Tokyo. He organized the conference on Universities and Science-Based Industrial Development at the John F. Kennedy School of Government on September 10-12, 1998. At the conclusion of the project in June 1999, he made an official report to Center for Global Partnership (CGP), the sponsor of the project. In October 1999 the results of the project were published by The MIT Press in Industrializing Knowledge, edited by Professors Branscomb and Kodama.
Megan Jones has publicized the findings of the STPP publication Informed Legislatures: Coping with Science in a Democracy through speaking engagements and book reviews and has begun preliminary planning with coauthors Lewis Branscomb and David Guston for the next phase of a study tentatively entitled, "Science for Policy in State Government: the Role of State Universities." She has served on the Whitehead Task Force on Genetic Testing, Privacy, and Public Policy which is planning a major, international policy symposium to be held on May 10-12, 2000 at the Kresge Auditorium. Ms. Jones has also been a guest investigator at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution. In addition, she has been actively involved in developing a viable health care system for residents of Cape Cod and serve on both system-wide and local hospital boards and committees.
Laure Mougeot Stroock researched a variety of issues related to the nuclear fuel cycle for the Managing the Atom Project during the Academic Year 1998-99. PUBLICATIONS
Books and Reports
Graham T. Allison and Matthew Bunn (chair and vice-chair), Global Nuclear Materials Management Phase II: Report of Task Force I: Funding Nuclear Security: What More Could Be Done To Secure Nuclear Warheads and Fissile Materials with More Resources? (Washington, D.C.: Center for Strategic and International Studies, July 1999)
Lewis M. Branscomb, Fumio Kodama, and Richard Florida, eds., Industrializing Knowledge: University-Industry Links in Japan and the United States (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1999 forthcoming)
Matthew Bunn, Neil J. Numark, and Tatsujiro Suzuki, "A Japanese-Russian Agreement to Establish a Nuclear Facility for MOX Fabrication and Spent Fuel Storage in the Russian Far East," BCSIA Discussion Paper 98-25, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, November 1998
John P. Holdren, "Getting to Zero: Is Pursuing a Nuclear-Weapon-Free World Too Difficult? Too Dangerous? Too Distracting?" BCSIA Discussion Paper 98-24 (Cambridge, Mass.: Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, April 1998)
John P. Holdren (chair), Powerful Partnerships: The Federal Role in International Cooperation on Energy Innovation (Washington, D.C.: President''s Committee of Advisors on Science and Technology, June 1999)
John Holdren, Judith Reppy, Josephy Rotblat, and Vsevold Avduyevsky, eds., Conversion of Military R&D, (Basingtoke, U.K.: Macmillan, 1998), pp. 11-33
Allison Macfarlane, "Prospects for the Interim Storage of Spent Fuel at Yucca Mountain," BCSIA Discussion Paper (Cambridge, Mass.: Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, forthcoming, Summer 1999)
Kate O''Neill, "(Not) Getting to ''Go'': Recent Experience in International Cooperation over the Management of Spent Nuclear Fuel," BCSIA Discussion Paper 98-22 (Cambridge, Mass.: Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, October 1998)
Frederic M. Scherer, New Perspectives on Economic Growth and Technological Innovation (Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution, 1999)
Frederic M. Scherer and Bernard Saffran, eds., Price Theory and Its Applications (Hants, U.K.: Edward Elgar, 1998)
Stacy VanDeveer, "Thinking Outside the Box: Cooperative Security Programs, Capacity Building, and Radioactive Materials Management in the Former Soviet Union," BCSIA Discussion Paper (Cambridge, Mass.: Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, forthcoming, Summer 1999) Articles, Book Chapters, and Reviews
Samina Ahmed, "Dangerous Diplomacy," Newsline (July 1999)
Samina Ahmed, "Dangerous Games," Newsline (June 1999)
Samina Ahmed, "Pakistan''s Nuclear Weapons Program: Turning Points and Nuclear Choices," International Security, Vol. 23, No. 4 (Spring 1999)
Lewis M. Branscomb, "Managing Science-based Industrial Innovation," Unesco Courier (forthcoming, 1999)
Lewis M. Branscomb, "Le mariage de la science et de la technologie" Unesco Le Courrier (May 1999); pp. 21-22
Lewis M. Branscomb, "Technology Diffusion: The U.S. Case," in Dalgon Lee, Eui-Jae Kim, and Lewis M. Branscomb, New Strategies for Utilization of Science and Technology Research Results for Industrial Development (Korean Science and Engineering Foundation, Report 97-11, June 28, 1999)
Matthew Bunn, "Urgently Needed Next Steps to Control Warheads and Fissile Material," in Joseph Cirincione, ed., Repairing the Regime (New York: Routledge, forthcoming)
Matthew Bunn, Oleg Bukharin, Jill Cetina, Kenneth Luongo, and Frank von Hippel, "Retooling Russia''s Nuclear Cities," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (September/October 1998)
Matthew Bunn and Kenneth N. Luongo, "A Nuclear Crisis in Russia," Boston Globe, December 29, 1998
Paul de Sa, "The Politics of Poverty," Letter to the Editor, New York Times, August 5, 1998
Paul de Sa, "Population, Carbon Emissions, and Global Warming: Comment," Population and Development Review, Vol. 24, No. 4 (December 1998); pp. 797-803
Paul de Sa, "Review: Mapping the Energy Future," Energy Policy (forthcoming 1999)
Paul de Sa, "When Free Trade Fails," Letter to the Editor, New Republic, August 3, 1998
Evan Feigenbaum, "Who''s Behind China''s High Technology ''Revolution?'' How Bomb Makers Remade Beijing''s Priorities, Policies, and Institutions," International Security, Vol. 24, No. 1 (Summer 1999)
David Hart, "Antitrust and Technological Innovation," Issues in Science and Technology (Winter 1998) pp. 75-82
David Hart, "Herbert Hoover''s Last Laugh: The Enduring Significance of the ''Associative State'' in the United States," Journal of Policy History, Vol. 10, No. 4 (Fall 1998); pp. 419-444
David Hart, "U.S. Technology Policy: New Tools for New Times," NIRA Review (Summer 1998); pp. 3-6
David Hart, review of William E. Leuchtenburg, The FDR Years: On Roosevelt and His Legacy, Journal of Policy History Vol. 11 (1999); pp. 94-99
John P. Holdren, "Energy, Climate Change, and Federal Energy R&D," in Briefing Book for the Aspen Congressional Seminar on Environmental Policy (Washington, D.C.: Aspen Institute, November 1998), chap. 1
John P. Holdren, "The Energy-Environment-Development Challenge," in Proceedings of the U.S./India Symposium on Sustainable Development (Washington D.C.: National Research Council, October 1998)
John P. Holdren, "Getting to Zero: Is Pursuing a Nuclear-Weapon-Free World Too Difficult? Too Dangerous? Too Distracting?" in Maxwell Bruce and Tom Milne, eds., The Force of Reason: Essays Celebrating the 90th Birthday of Joseph Rotblat (Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan, forthcoming 1999)
John P. Holdren, interview by Neil L. Numark, in The Nuclear Top Ten, 1999: The Key Players Discuss Current Issues in U.S. Commercial Nuclear Policy (Washington, D.C.: Numark Associates, Inc., 1999)
John P. Holdren and Matthew Bunn, "Reducing the Threat of Nuclear Theft," in Joseph Rotblat and Frank Blackaby, eds., Nuclear Weapons: The Road to Zero (Boulder, Colo.: Westview, 1998)
John P. Holdren and Judith Reppy, introductory chapter in Conversion of Military R&D (Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan, 1998)
John P. Holdren and Kirk R. Smith, "Energy and the Environment," in José Goldemberg, ed., World Energy Assessment (United Nations Environment Programme, New York, 1999 in press)
Sheila Jasanoff, "Coming of Age in Science and Technology Studies," Science Communication, Vol. 20, No. 1 (1998); pp. 91-98
Sheila Jasanoff, "Contingent Knowledge: Implications for Implementation and Compliance," in H. Jacobson and E. Brown Weiss, eds., Engaging Countries: Strengthening Compliance with International Environmental Accords (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1998)
Sheila Jasanoff, "Expert Games in Silicone Gel Breast Implant Litigation," in M. Freeman and H. Reece, eds., Science in Court (London: Dartmouth, 1998)
Sheila Jasanoff, "The Eye of Everyman: Witnessing DNA in the Simpson Trial," Social Studies of Science, Vol. 28, Nos. 5-6 (1998); pp. 713-740
Sheila Jasanoff, "The Songlines of Risk," in Maurie J. Cohen and Alan Holland, eds., Environmental Values, Vol. 8, No. 2 (1999); pp. 135-152
Sheila Jasanoff and M. Lynch, "Contested Identities: Science, Law and Forensic Practice," Social Studies of Science, Vol. 28, Nos. 5-6 (1998); pp. 675-686
Kandlikar and Ambuj D. Sagar, "Climate Change Research and Analysis in India: An Integrated Assessment of a South-North Divide," Global Environmental Change , Vol. 9, No. 2 (1999); pp. 119-138
Allison Macfarlane, "Immobilization of Excess Weapons Plutonium: Reasonable Alternatives to Vitrification," Science and Global Security, Vol. 7 (1998)
Allison Macfarlane, "Preventing a Big Bang: Excess Weapons Plutonium Immobilization," in Martin Kalinowski, ed., Global Elimination of Nuclear Weapons (Darmstadt: IANUS, forthcoming)
Allison Macfarlane, "Standoff at Yucca Mountain: High-Level Nuclear Waste in the U.S.A.," in Jill Schneiderman, ed., Geology''s Gaze: Looking toward a Livable Future (New York: W. H. Freeman & Co., forthcoming)
Allison Macfarlane and Adam Bernstein, "Canning Plutonium: Cheaper and Faster," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists (May/June 1999)
A. Najam and Ambuj D. Sagar, "Avoiding a COP-out: Moving towards Systematic Decision-Making Under the Climate Convention," Climatic Change, Vol. 39, No. 4 (1998): iii-ix
Kate O''Neill, "International Nuclear Waste Transportation: Flashpoints, Lessons, and Controversies," Environment, Vol. 41, No. 4 (May 1999)
John S. Park, "The Agreed Framework: A Path towards Stability on the Korean Peninsula," Yisei (Fall/Winter 1998)
Ambuj D. Sagar, "Capacity Building and Climate Change," Policy Matters, Vol. 4 (1999): 17-20
Ambuj D. Sagar, "Wealth, Responsibility, and Equity: Exploring an Allocation Framework for Global GHG Emissions," forthcoming in Climate Change, 1999
Ambuj D. Sagar and T. Banuri, "In Fairness to Current Generations: Lost Voices in the Climate Debate," forthcoming in Energy Policy, 1999
Ambuj D. Sagar and A. Najam, "Shaping Human Development: Which Way Next?" in Third World Quarterly (Summer 1999)
Frederic M. Scherer, "Introduction," in Moise Naim and Joseph Tulchin, eds., Competition Policy and Economic Reforms in Latin America (Washington, D.C.: Woodrow Wilson Center, forthcoming 1999)
Frederic M. Scherer, "The Pharmaceutical and Medical Devices Industries," in Joseph Newhouse, ed., Handbook of Health Economics (Amsterdam: NorthHolland, forthcoming 1999)
Frederic M. Scherer, "Retail Distribution Channel Barriers to International Trade," Antitrust Law Journal, Vol. 67 (1999); pp. 77-112
Frederic M. Scherer, "The Size Distribution of Profits from Innovation," Annales d''economie et de statistique, No. 49/50 (1998); pp. 496-516
Frederic M. Scherer and Dietmar Harhoff, "Technology Policy for a World of Skew-Distributed Incomes," Research Policy (forthcoming in 1999)
Frederic M. Scherer, Dietmar Harhoff, and Joerg Kukies, "Uncertainty and the Size Distribution of Rewards from Technological Innovation," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Vol. 9 (forthcoming 1999)
Frederic M. Scherer, Dietmar Harhoff, and Katrin Vopel, "Citations, Family Size, Opposition, and the Value of Patent Rights: Evidence from Germany" Working paper (Mannheim, Center for European Economic Research, Germany: 1998)
Frederic M. Scherer and Joerg Kukies, "Zeit fur wirtschafts - und finanzpragmaticschen Transfer: Das Innovationsverhalten deutscher und amerikanischer Unternehmen," in Sebastian Lorenz and Marcel Machill, eds., Transatlantischer Transfer von Politik, Wirtschaft und Kultur (Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag, 1998); pp. 233-245
Stacy VanDeveer and Geoffrey D. Dalbelko, "Redefining Security around the Baltic: Environmental Issues in Regional Context," Global Governance, Vol. 5, No. 2 (1999)
Jennifer Weeks, "Back to the Future at DOE," Global Beat Syndicate, June 30, 1999
Jennifer Weeks, "The Nuclear Rivalry in South Asia," in Encarta 98 Encyclopedia (Seattle, Wash.: Microsoft Corporation, July 1998)
Dorothy Shore Zinberg, "China''s Gift to U.S. Colleges," Boston Globe, June 14, 1999
Dorothy Shore Zinberg, "A World View: Two Tarnished Institutions," The (London) Times Educational Supplement, April 30, 1999
Dorothy Shore Zinberg, "World View: The Ten Commandments," The (London) Times Educational Supplement, March 12, 1999
Dorothy Shore Zinberg, "World View: Workers Flower in Desert," The (London) Times Educational Supplement, February 5, 1999
Dorothy Shore Zinberg, "World View: World Worth Fighting For," The (London) Times Educational Supplement, December 25, 1998
Dorothy Shore Zinberg, "World View: Bad News from Cyberspace?" The (London) Times Educational Supplement, October 30, 1998
Dorothy Shore Zinberg, "World View: No Party for the People," The (London) Times Educational Supplement, September 25, 1998
Table of Contents:
Environment and Natural Resources ProgramInternational Security Program Science, Technology, and Public Policy Program Strengthening Democratic Institutions Project BCSIA Events BCSIA Publications Associates Biographies
Want to read more?
The full text of this publication is available in the link below.
