KOSEN 한인과학기술자네트워크

닫기

더 많은 혜택을 위해
로그인 하세요.

동향

동향

리포트

리포트는 KOSEN 회원님들이 작성하는 최신연구동향 보고서입니다.
국내외 연구기관에서 발간하는 최신 동향보고서를 제공합니다.

자료 유형

키워드 검색

전체 46817

글쓰기
전체 46817
글쓰기

Euroabstracts Vol.36-5/98 스크랩

  • 김보영 김보영
  • |
  • 무소속
  • |
  • 과학기술과 인문사회

Euroabstracts is Published six times a year in English by the European Commission's Innovation Programme, under the responsibility of Edith Cresson, Member of the Commission responsible for Research, Innovation, Education, Training and Youth. [Contents] ㅇ Innovation - Innovationese without toil - Helping knowledge make the world go round - Riding the winds of change - Talking our way out of crisis - Strategies for fulfilling eastern promise ㅇ Feature - Opening Pandora's letterbox - making money on the web ㅇ Information and Communication Technologies - Push-me-pull-you: is do little the best approach? - Is there intelligent life in the universe? Try the telephone - Extracting needles from haystacks ㅇ Energy, environment and sustainable development - Return to Eden - But from where I stand... - To our children's children's children ㅇ Production/Transport - Oil and troubled waters ㅇ Life Sciences and Technologies - Hidden Killers

1999-12-17

1998 ANNUAL REPORT : CELBRATING A HISTORY OF SERVICE SCIENCE 스크랩

  • TIffany Ayers
  • |
  • 과학기술과 인문사회

AAAS(AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE) was formed by 461 charter members to address science's needs with a unified voice and to serve as an alliance for progress. By gringing together scientists from a variety of disciplines, AAAS helped establish the scientific agenda that guided the country's economic and intellectual formation during the 19th century. In 1988, AAAS marked its sesquicentennial anniversary with a year of celebration, including special events at its annual meetin, a history exhibit at the association's headquaters, a series of essays in Science magazine, and a distinguished lecture series. All these events allowed AAAS not only a glimpse of the past, but also a look ahead to the future. CONTENTS -Introduction -Chairman's Statement -Executive Officer's Statement -Membership, Circulation, and Meeting -Science -Education and Human Resources -International Programs -Science and Policy -Project -Sections and divisions -Awards -Officers and Management -Board of Directors -Fellows -Affiliates -Financial Statement -ONline Resources

1999-12-17

INTERNATIONAL BENCHMARKING OF US MATERIALS SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING RESEARCH 스크랩

  • KATE KELLY
  • |
  • 과학기술과 인문사회

INTERNATIONAL BENCHMARKING OF US MATERIALS SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING RESEARCH -Panel on International Benchmarking of US Materials Science and Engineering Research -Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy -NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES/ NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE -PREPUBLICATION COPY *******************************CONTENTS****************** EXECTUTIVE SUMMARY 1.BACKGROUD 2.INTODUCTION 3.DETERMINANTS OF SCIENTIFIC LEADERSHIP 4.BENCHMARKING RESULTS 5.PROJECTION OF LEADERSHIO DETERMINANTS 6.LIKELY FUTURE POSITIONS 7.SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 8.PEFERENCES 9.APPENDIX A:PANEL AND STAFF BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION 10.APPENDIX B:BENCHMARKING RESULTS TABLES 11.APPENDIX C:HOT TOPICS LIST PREFACE In 1993,the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy(COSEPUP) of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine issued the report Science, Technology, and the Federal Government:National Goals for a New Era. In that report, major fields of science so that it can quickly apply and extend advances in science wherever they occur. In addition, the report recommended that the United States maintain clear leadership in fields that are tired to national objectives, that capture the imagination of society, or that have multiplicative effect on other scientific advances. These recommendations were reiterated in another Academy report, To measure internation Leadership, the reports recommended the establishment of independent panels that would conduct comparative international assessments of scientific accomplishments of particular research fields. COSEPUP indicated that these panels should consist of researchers who work in the specific fields under review(both form the United States and abroad), people who work in closely related fields, and research users who follow the fields closely. To test the feasibility of that recommedation, COSEPUP is conducting experimental evaluations of three fields: mathematics, materials science, and engineering, and immunology. The panel for each field has been asked to address the following three questions: -What is the position of the United States in research in the field relative to that in order regions or countries: -What key factors infuluence relative US performance in the field? -On the basis of current trends in the US and abroad, what will be relative US position in the near term and the longer term? SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The report summary and conclusions are provide below. Overall, the anlysis was limited by a paucity of field-specific and international data. Nontheless, the members of the Panel have confidence in the conclusions provided below 7.1.The United States is among the world's leaders in all subfields, and ti is the leader in some 7.2.The flexibility of the enterprise is as much a key indicator of leadershio as is the amount of funding 7.3.The innovation system is a major detemanats of US leadership 7.4.The United States enjoys strength through intellectual and human diversity 7.5.Shiftin federal and industry funding priorities, a potential reduction in access to foreign talent, and deterioatin materials research facilities could curtail US ability to capitalize on leadership opportunities.

1999-12-17

INTERNATIONAL BENCHMARKING OF US IMMUNOLOGY RESEARCH 스크랩

  • Kelly Huegel
  • |

INTERNATIONAL BENCHMARKING OF US IMMUNOLOGY RESEARCH :Panel on International Benchmarking of US Immunology Research -Commisttee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES/ NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING/INSTITUTE OF MEDICINE PREPUBLICATION COPY National Academy Press Washington, DC 1999 The Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy(COSEPUP)is a joint committee of NAS(National Academy of Sciences), NAE(National Academy of Engineering), and IOM(The Institute of Medicine). It includes members of the councils of all three bodies. PREFACE In 1993,the Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy(COSEPUP) of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine issued the report Science, Technology, and the Federal Government:National Goals for a New Era. In that report, major fields of science so that it can quickly apply and extend advances in science wherever they occur. In addition, the report recommended that the United States maintain clear leadership in fields that are tired to national objectives, that capture the imagination of society, or that have multiplicative effect on other scientific advances. These recommendations were reiterated in another Academy report, To measure internation Leadership, the reports recommended the establishment of independent panels that would conduct comparative international assessments of scientific accomplishments of particular research fields. COSEPUP indicated that these panels should consist of researchers who work in the specific fields under review(both form the United States and abroad), people who work in closely related fields, and research users who follow the fields closely. To test the feasibility of that recommedation, COSEPUP is conducting experimental evaluations of three fields: mathematics, materials science, and engineering, and immunology. The panel for each field has been asked to address the following three questions: -What is the position of the United States in research in the field relative to that in order regions or countries: -What key factors infuluence relative US performance in the field? -On the basis of current trends in the US and abroad, what will be relative US position in the near term and the longer term? This document presents results of the third and final assessment, that of research in immunology. The panel concluded that the US is the world leader in immunology, and in its major subfields. ......................... -CONTENTS- 1.INTRODUCTION 2.BENCHMARKING RESULTS 3.KEY FACTORS 4.LIKELY FUTURE POSITION 5.SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 6.REFERENCES 7.APPENDIX:PANEL AND STAFF BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION -SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS- 5.1 The US is the world leader in all the major subfields of Immunology but is only among the world leaders in some specific Sub-Subfields 5.2 Flexibility to pursue original and innovative research idears has attracted both domestic and international human capital. Federal, State, and Private Funding have all contrubuted to a climate ripe for this innovative research. 5.3 Industrial interests have fastered many striking breakthroughs in immunology 5.4 A scarity of large-scale clinical trialx in immunology can be attributed to shortages of funding and of qualified personnel. In addition, increasing dominance of managed care means that fewer are available to academic institutions for clinical Trails 5.5 Shifting Federal and Industry Priorities. A Potential Reduction in access to domestic. And Foreign talent, and increasing cost of maintaining mouse facilities could US ability to capitalize on leadership opportunities.

1999-12-17

Research in Germany at a Glance 스크랩

  • 김보영 김보영
  • |
  • 무소속
  • |
  • 과학기술과 인문사회

[Contents] - Interview with the Federal Minister of Education and Research, Ms Edelgard Bulmahn - Equal Opportunity and Responsibility in Education and Research - Annex: European Links to Research in Germany - CORDIS-German Points: Consulting agencies provided by the German Government for the European Research Framework Programme - German National Contact Points for the 5th European Research Framework Programme

1999-12-17

US Department of Transportation's Research and Development Plan - 1999.5 스크랩

  • DOT(Department of Transportation)
  • |
  • 과학기술과 인문사회

1967년 DOT(Department of Transportation)의 설립이래로 다양한 기관이 부내 안밖에서 스스로의 필요에 따라 연구개발을 추진하였다. 따라서 유사한 목적의 중복투자와 관리의 혼선이 빚어졌다. 이와 관련하여 DOT는 최근에 프로젝트계획과 관리를 효율적으로 하기 위한 노력을 하고 있다. 1980년대부터 각각의 연구개발부서는 여러가지 연구개발활동에 대한 정보를 공유하기 위하여 모임을 갖고 19991년부터 서로간의 연구개발에 관한연보를 제공하기로 하는 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act(ISTEA)를 결정하였다. 이 자료는 이러한 고속도로,철도, 버스, 항공, 수로,파이프 라인등에 관한 모든 운송에 대한 연구개발프로젝트에 관한 보고서이다. Contents 1.The National Transportation Systems 2.Strategic Goals and Transportation R&D 3.Partnership Initiatives and Technology Sharing 4.Enabling research 5.Measuring success 6.Implementation and Incentives

1999-12-16

International Benchmarking of US Materials Science and Engineering 스크랩

  • Technical Insights Alerts
  • |
  • 재료

미국의 NAS(National Academy of Science),NAE(National Academy of Engineering)와 IM(Institute of Medicine)으로 구성된 COSEPUP(Committee on Science, Engineering, and Public Policy)는 재료과학 연구수준을 다른 나라들과 비교하여 미국의 리서쉽 위치를 조사분석하였다. COSEPUP위원회는 수학, 재료과학과 방역의 개개 분야로 나누어 각국의 기술 수죽을 조사하였고 분 보고서는 재료과학에 관한 것이다. 위원들이 미국 내외의 동료들과 교신하여 9개 재료과학 분야를 통괄하는 가상적인 국제회의 대본을 작성하였다. 위원들은 동료들에게 각 분야에서 5-6개의 활발한 연구주제와 각 주제별로 세계적으로 8-10명의 석학을 선택하였다. 각 분야에서 3-4개의 가장 권위있는 상과 지난 5년동안에 수상자 그리고 지난 5년동안에 재료과학 분야에서 가장 탁월하게 연구결과도 조사하였다. 각 재료분야에서 미국의 연구현황을 비교대상 국가들과 비교하였으며 평가에 참고가 되는 유명저널과 정기간행물을 조사하였다. 이와 같은 방법은 조직적인 평가로는 부족한 점이 있고 어느 정도 주관적 분석이지만, 각 분야의 지도자급 연구자들이 최고중의 최고가 참석하는 국제 학외를 조직하는데 쓰이는 방법이다. 이와 같은 평가를 실시하는 데 있어서 위원들은 개인뿐만 아니라 동료들의 판단력에 의존하였다. 이보고서는 http://www2.nas.edu/cosepup에서도 연람할 수 있다. 분 요약서에는 위원회가 9개 재료기술 분야(생체재료, 세라믹스, 복합재료, 자성재료, 금속재료, 전자재료, 초전도체, 고분자 재료와 촉매제)에 대하여 미국의 현재의 위치와 앞으로의 전망 및 결론을 번역하였다. 목차 1.COSPUP위원회의 요약 2.미국의 MSE 연구의 벤치마킹 3.미래경쟁력에 대한 예측 4.요약 및 결론

1999-12-16