- Email: [email protected]
On the establishment of a US national center for hydrologic research and technology transfer
Journal of
Hydrology ELSEVIER
Journal of Hydrology 172 (1995) 15-21
[11
On the establishment of a US national center for hydrologic research and technology transfer K.P. G e o r g a k a k o s Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0224, USA and Hydrologic Research Center, 12780 High Bluff Drive, Suite 260, San Diego, CA 92130, USA Received 27 October 1994; accepted 20 February 1995
Abstract
The establishment of a US national center for hydrologic research and technology transfer is advocated. The pertinent scientific, technological and policy issues are outlined. A national meeting of academic hydrologic scientists is proposed as a first step toward the gradual realization of such a center.
And yet nothing truly valuable can be achieved except by the disinterested cooperation of many individuals (Albert Einstein, 1928) 1. Introduction
In the principal paper of this series, James (1995) outlines the compelling historical, political and scientific reasons for the establishment of the US National Science Foundation (NSF) Program on Hydrologic Sciences. He further presents the forces that shape its administrative structure and research priorities and he discusses the institutional and administrative issues associated with the management of the Program. His important conclusion is that, even though hydrologists in the USA have become a community, they have yet to become a 'productive culture'. This phrase is used to describe a group of scientists that produce creative proposals, generate constructive peer reviews, and communicate sound findings effectively. Specifics of the organization and policy of the NSF Program may be argued on the basis of whether they in fact promote a hydrologic scientific 'culture'. It is much more Address for correspondence: Hydrologic Research Center, 12780 High Bluff Drive, Suite 260, San Diego, CA 92130, USA. 0022-1694/95/$09.50 © 1995 - Elsevier Science B.V. All fights reserved SSDI 0022-1694(95)02743-2
16
K.P. Georgakakos / Journal of Hydrology 172 (1995) 15-21
rewarding, however, to explore other concepts which will complement existing efforts to give hydrology a solid theoretical basis. One such concept is the establishment of a National Center for Hydrologic Research and Technology Transfer. In this paper, the merits of such a center in the USA are explored from scientific, technological, and policy perspectives. Although, as Dr. James clearly states, it is early in the program for a comprehensive evaluation and for general conclusions, it is intuitively clear that his conclusion is not an artifact of a small sample. Training of hydrologists in the past primarily occurred in engineering departments, and research efforts were motivated by local and regional applied problems. Absent was the vision of a hydrologic science aimed at understanding that would lead to solutions of hydrologic problems on large scales. Currently, when a young hydrologic science community is nourished in the USA by newly established funding programs, many hydrologists are experiencing a transition from an engineering-applied-research mentality to a scientific-basic-research mentality; a transition that is sometimes difficult and not always successful. The arguments presented here support a center with truly national character, and not a center dominated by a few universities. Also, the advocated center is seen as an autonomous research entity, rather than a center through which funds for university research are distributed. This paper is addressed to both the hydrologic research community and to managers of hydrologic funding programs. It is made in the spirit expressed so well by Smith (1990): 'Scientific developments moved from the early stages dominated by specialists to the wider political arena in which narrow expertise blends with broad judgments on values, constitutional constraints, and political norms.'
2. Why create a national center for hydrology?
The most urgent current needs of the young hydrologic science in the USA are the following: (1) the building of its basic research infrastructure; (2) an increase in the number of scientists engaged in building its theoretical basis; (3) the creation of effective mechanisms for dissemination of research findings to users (e.g. government agencies, private industry). Certainly, the enhancement of research funding of hydrologic programs in universities must happen for a productive hydrologic culture to develop. Enhanced funding of university research in hydrology will not only contribute to foundation building, but it will also contribute to the increase of the human resources devoted to its foundation building. Funding of university research in hydrology, however, will not develop in itself a hydrologic culture without an infrastructure that promotes among the research scientists a strong sense of coherence of the research enterprise. In addition, it will be an ineffective way to establish solid foundations for hydrologic science in the USA. The latter statement is made in recognition of the present-day time pressures and demands imposed on faculty members in the USA. Research projects of limited tenure awarded to university faculty, who are pressured to justify continued support and to achieve promotion and possibly tenure, must be augmented with concerted
K.P. Georgakakos / Journal of Hydrology 172 (1995) 15-21
17
efforts for basic research. Such efforts must be funded on the basis of longer-term goals (such as presented by the National Research Council (NRC, 1991)), allow and promote collaboration among many scientists from several universities, departments of universities and other institutions, and utilize experimental and computational facilities dedicated to long-term hydrologic research goals. It is the thesis of this paper that a national center which is dedicated to hydrology and is based on the collaboration of several university programs of hydrology across the USA would make a significant contribution toward meeting the needs stated above. Before discussing the potential scientific and technological contributions of the proposed center, it is important to outline the relevant historical, political, and fiscal framework in which such a center would be realized. What follows are elementary notions and considerations of such a framework, but successful strategic choices depend on a good understanding of the framework itself. Centers of research employing groups of scientists and engineers (or inventors) for the solution of interdisciplinary problems have increased in number and scope since the industrial research center of Edison in Menlo Park, New Jersey, and the scientific research center of Joseph Henry at the Smithsonian Institution (Josephson, 1959). After the Second World War the US government has developed science policy and it has succeeded in funding basic research which led to many spectacular benefits to society. Federally funded research and development (R&D) centers in the USA account for about 3% of total national R&D funding, and universities account for about 9°/0, with these numbers having remained remarkably stable over the years (Smith, 1990). Thus, precedence exists for funding a national research center (as an example, we may consider the National Center for Atmospheric Research established in 1960). Although the US government routinely funds basic research, scientists now more than ever need public support for the enterprise of science and they must therefore be involved in the educating the public as to what their science can contribute to national objectives. To echo Harr6 (1984): 'In any real society it seems very unlikely that the pursuit of knowledge would be universally agreed to be the overriding good to which all other valued activities have to be sacrificed.' Choices about support for overlapping and interdisciplinary scientific ventures, such as the advocated national hydrology center, require clear plans for their mission and an outline of the anticipated benefits to society as a whole. This effort would first require convincing hydrologists themselves (both in academia and elsewhere) of the benefits that such a center would yield, then convincing influential scientific bodies and societies, and finally convincing the government and the public. This education process is necessary for the establishment of a center with a truly national role for hydrology. It will also help shape the center's organization and function to address both national hydrologic needs and national public policy agenda items. These considerations suggest a center with hydrologic basic research effectively coupled with the transfer of research results to users for the production of needed (and visible) benefits.
2.1. Scientific perspective A national center in hydrology would contribute significantly toward the
18
K.P. Georgakakos / Journal of Hydrology 172 (1995) 15-21
enhancement of the science basis of hydrology by: (1) facilitating the collaboration of scientists from different disciplines and home institutions or departments working on problems of fundamental importance to the development of hydrologic science; (2) facilitating the development and management of good quality hydrologic databases, and the subsequent dissemination of data to interested scientists; (3) increasing the pool of hydrologic scientists working on fundamental hydrologic problems. All of these functions are fundamental to science building for hydrology. The N R C (1991) discussed each of the items (1)-(3) in convincing detail, and suggested research priorities: hydrologic effects of human activity, coordinated global-scale observation of water reservoirs and the fluxes of water and energy, land surface-atmosphere interactions, scaling of dynamic behavior, and chemical and biological components of the hydrologic cycle. It is expected that such priorities would shape the broad research goals of the center. What is important to present here is why a center is needed to realize substantial advances in each of the three areas. The administrative autonomy of a national center would allow direct collaboration among scientists from various disciplines and/or institutions without the substantial obstacles created by disciplinary and institutional boundaries. Following practices of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (Hallgren, 1974), one may argue for the establishment of both permanent and visiting staff positions at the center, which would facilitate collaboration. The existence of a center would permit young scientists to work on fundamental hydrologic problems (collaborating with several mature hydrologists from various institutions), rather than on the project-type scientific research offered by individual investigators in particular institutions. The center would offer opportunities for collaborative research between hydrologists and scientists from various disciplines, who, under typical university departmental requirements, cannot be hired to support hydrologic programs. This facilitation of collaboration in fundamental studies is very likely to be the most substantial means of developing a productive hydrologic culture. Collaboration among scientists is also likely to be promoted by the proposed center through the in-house maintenance and wide dissemination of results from state-of-the-science large-scale hydrologic models, and global atmosphere and ocean models. Specific numerical experiments with clear hydrologic scientific goals may be designed and executed with very beneficial results. (Such experiments necessitate the availability of adequate computational resources for the proposed center.) Foundation building in any science is based on careful and exhaustive analysis of good quality relevant observations. A center would facilitate the conduct of largescale experiments, the processing of data, data maintenance and data dissemination to interested scientists. In-house expertise in remote sensing would facilitate the use of vital remotely sensed data by a wide population of hydrologic scientists, insuring rapid advances in foundation building in large-scale problems. Logistical and technical support for data processing and maintenance is likely to be a substantial function of the proposed center. Collaboration with government data collection centers or agencies is also important for these center activities.
K.P. Georgakakos / Journal of Hydrology 172 (1995) 15-21
19
A very important and necessary aspect of the foundation building and subsequent development of the hydrologic science is the increase of the pool of scientists who are devoted to long-term basic research in hydrology. A well-funded national center of hydrologic research would undoubtedly make this happen, as it would have a visible identity clearly associated with basic hydrologic research. Training of post-doctoral scientists and acceptance of Ph.D. candidates from various universities for collaborative research are means available to a national center toward this goal. Lastly, some of the center activities are likely to be devoted to conducting focused experiments or participating in large-scale experiments with clear scientific hydrologic benefits and goals. Maintenance of substantial in-house experimental facilities (e.g. satellite down-link facilities, weather and ground-penetrating radars, laboratories for physical model studies in geomorphology, etc.), which would be too expensive for individual universities, is one of the direct contributions the center could make to the infant large-scale diagnostic hydrology. Plans in this area must consider the fact that the conduct of science itself will lead to the emergence of new instruments and new opportunities for their application. 2.2. Technological perspective
It has become clear that it will be difficult to launch large-scale scientific ventures in the USA that do not conform to broad national policy considerations. Issues of economic performance and regulating the Earth's climate are two important items in the present-day public policy agenda. Basic understanding of the issues associated with extreme hydrologic environments and with the global and regional hydrologic cycles will undoubtedly contribute to the solution of these public policy agenda items. A prerequisite for such a contribution is the existence of effective means of converting research results into visible benefits. Furthermore, effective technology transfer that results in improved technology applications benefits the discipline of hydrology by enhancing the market for hydrologic expertise and thus increasing the number and competency of its professionals (Hays and Rouhban, 1993). For these reasons, the establishment of a national hydrologic center devoted to basic research must carry a strong component of technology transfer of research results to users. In this respect, the establishment of a center in this decade is timely, as this is the International Decade of Natural Disaster Reduction (e.g. Askew et al., 1993). The envisaged national center can achieve its necessary technology transfer role by (1) facilitating the close collaboration of researchers and users, (2) establishing continuing education and training programs, and (3) widely disseminating research results. It has been a rather widely accepted conclusion in many fields of science that universities have not sought to be and have not been an effective means of technology transfer (e.g. Wladawsky-Berger and Blnmenthal, 1989; Smith, 1990). For this aspect of the center's activities to be successful, participating universities must embrace and support it from the beginning. It is also important that center administration and participating universities make certain that the coexistence of basic research and
20
K.P. Georgakakos / Journal of Hydrology 172 (1995) 15-21
technology transfer is synergistic (as suggested by Waggoner (1990) and as discussed by Ettema and Kennedy (1990)).
3. Conclusions and recommendations It is proposed that a national center for hydrologic research be established in the USA to complement current efforts to nurture the science basis of hydrology. Presentday national policy and funding climate for basic research require that such a center have a strong component of technology transfer to complement basic research efforts. Strong ties with universities that have research programs in hydrology is essential and should be established at an early stage. Prerequisites for the establishment of a funding basis for the center are as follows: (1) convincing the federal government (agencies and the public) that a center as advocated will in fact contribute toward meeting national policy goals; (2) insuring the support of scientific bodies such as the National Academy of Sciences; (3) insuring the support of national associations and societies with large hydrologic membership; (4) insuring the support of the academic hydrologic community and the academic communities of allied disciplines; (5) acquiring the support of existing centers in allied disciplines. Even after the establishment of the center, peer review must continue to dictate its broad goals. Because of the envisioned center's goals and functions, it seems appropriate that the NSF administer core funding for such a center. Technology transfer aspects of the center, however, may be sponsored by several government agencies and possibly by private companies. Funding for the center's basic research activities must be with new funds, generated on the.basis of the center's merits, and not with existing funds of the NSF Hydrologic Sciences Program (other than for planning activities). In the current limited-funding environment for science (e.g. White, 1991), aggressive efforts must be made to secure center funding. The admittedly important role that hydrologic science can play in reducing damage from extreme hydrologic events and enhancing understanding of the global hydrologic cycle and its changes owing to anthropogenic influences must be explained to various bodies of the US government. It is likely that once established, the national center would facilitate the appropriation of new funding for hydrologic science. As a first necessary step toward the realization of a center, a national meeting of academic hydrologic scientists is recommended. Important agenda items are as follows: (1) desirability and timing of establishing a US national center for hydrology; (2) strategies for securing center funding; (3) issues associated with the organization, administration and personnel of the center, as well as with its relationship with participating universities; (4) concrete plans for its gradual realization.
Acknowledgments The comments and suggestions of W. Krajewski, A. Georgakakos, and D.R. Maidment are gratefully acknowledged.
K.P. Georgakakos / Journal of Hydrology 172 (1995) 15-21
21
References Askew, A.J., Miller, J.B. and Rodda, J.C., 1993. Countering natural disasters, a global view. In: P.A. Merriman and C.W.A. Browitt (Editors), Natural Disasters, Preventing Vulnerable Communities. Thomas Telford, London, pp. 130-139. Ettema, R. and Kennedy, J.F., 1990. Commercial projects at university laboratories: student training? research adjunct? or unfair competition? IAHR Bull., 7(2): 13-18. Hallgren, E.L., 1974. The University Corporation for Atmospheric Research and the National Center for Atmospheric Research, 1960-1970, an Institutional History. NCAR Report, NCAR, Boulder, CO, 146 pp. Harr6, R., 1984. The Philosophies of Science, an Introductory Survey, 2rid edn. Oxford University Press, New York, 203 pp. Hays, W.W. and Rouhban, B.M., 1993. Worldwide technology transfer for natural disaster reduction. In: P.A. Merriman and C.W.A. Browitt (Editors), Natural Disasters, Preventing Vulnerable Communities. Thomas Telford, London, pp. 489-501. James, L.D., 1995. NSF research in hydrologic sciences. J. Hydrol., 172: 3-14. Josephson, M., 1959. Edison, a Biography. Wiley, New York, 511 pp. National Research Council, 1991. Opportunities in the Hydrologic Sciences. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 348 pp. Smith, B.L.R., 1990. American Science Policy since World War II. Brookings Institution, Washington, DC, 230 pp. Waggoner, P.E. (Editor), 1990. Climate Change and US Water Resources. Wiley, New York, 496 pp. White, R.M., 1991. Too many researchers, too few dollars. Issues Sci. Technol., VII(3): 35-37. Wladawsky-Berger, I. and Blumenthal, M.S., 1989. Putting supercomputers to work. Issues Sci. TechnoL, V(3): 48-51.
Hydrology ELSEVIER
Journal of Hydrology 172 (1995) 15-21
[11
On the establishment of a US national center for hydrologic research and technology transfer K.P. G e o r g a k a k o s Scripps Institution of Oceanography, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0224, USA and Hydrologic Research Center, 12780 High Bluff Drive, Suite 260, San Diego, CA 92130, USA Received 27 October 1994; accepted 20 February 1995
Abstract
The establishment of a US national center for hydrologic research and technology transfer is advocated. The pertinent scientific, technological and policy issues are outlined. A national meeting of academic hydrologic scientists is proposed as a first step toward the gradual realization of such a center.
And yet nothing truly valuable can be achieved except by the disinterested cooperation of many individuals (Albert Einstein, 1928) 1. Introduction
In the principal paper of this series, James (1995) outlines the compelling historical, political and scientific reasons for the establishment of the US National Science Foundation (NSF) Program on Hydrologic Sciences. He further presents the forces that shape its administrative structure and research priorities and he discusses the institutional and administrative issues associated with the management of the Program. His important conclusion is that, even though hydrologists in the USA have become a community, they have yet to become a 'productive culture'. This phrase is used to describe a group of scientists that produce creative proposals, generate constructive peer reviews, and communicate sound findings effectively. Specifics of the organization and policy of the NSF Program may be argued on the basis of whether they in fact promote a hydrologic scientific 'culture'. It is much more Address for correspondence: Hydrologic Research Center, 12780 High Bluff Drive, Suite 260, San Diego, CA 92130, USA. 0022-1694/95/$09.50 © 1995 - Elsevier Science B.V. All fights reserved SSDI 0022-1694(95)02743-2
16
K.P. Georgakakos / Journal of Hydrology 172 (1995) 15-21
rewarding, however, to explore other concepts which will complement existing efforts to give hydrology a solid theoretical basis. One such concept is the establishment of a National Center for Hydrologic Research and Technology Transfer. In this paper, the merits of such a center in the USA are explored from scientific, technological, and policy perspectives. Although, as Dr. James clearly states, it is early in the program for a comprehensive evaluation and for general conclusions, it is intuitively clear that his conclusion is not an artifact of a small sample. Training of hydrologists in the past primarily occurred in engineering departments, and research efforts were motivated by local and regional applied problems. Absent was the vision of a hydrologic science aimed at understanding that would lead to solutions of hydrologic problems on large scales. Currently, when a young hydrologic science community is nourished in the USA by newly established funding programs, many hydrologists are experiencing a transition from an engineering-applied-research mentality to a scientific-basic-research mentality; a transition that is sometimes difficult and not always successful. The arguments presented here support a center with truly national character, and not a center dominated by a few universities. Also, the advocated center is seen as an autonomous research entity, rather than a center through which funds for university research are distributed. This paper is addressed to both the hydrologic research community and to managers of hydrologic funding programs. It is made in the spirit expressed so well by Smith (1990): 'Scientific developments moved from the early stages dominated by specialists to the wider political arena in which narrow expertise blends with broad judgments on values, constitutional constraints, and political norms.'
2. Why create a national center for hydrology?
The most urgent current needs of the young hydrologic science in the USA are the following: (1) the building of its basic research infrastructure; (2) an increase in the number of scientists engaged in building its theoretical basis; (3) the creation of effective mechanisms for dissemination of research findings to users (e.g. government agencies, private industry). Certainly, the enhancement of research funding of hydrologic programs in universities must happen for a productive hydrologic culture to develop. Enhanced funding of university research in hydrology will not only contribute to foundation building, but it will also contribute to the increase of the human resources devoted to its foundation building. Funding of university research in hydrology, however, will not develop in itself a hydrologic culture without an infrastructure that promotes among the research scientists a strong sense of coherence of the research enterprise. In addition, it will be an ineffective way to establish solid foundations for hydrologic science in the USA. The latter statement is made in recognition of the present-day time pressures and demands imposed on faculty members in the USA. Research projects of limited tenure awarded to university faculty, who are pressured to justify continued support and to achieve promotion and possibly tenure, must be augmented with concerted
K.P. Georgakakos / Journal of Hydrology 172 (1995) 15-21
17
efforts for basic research. Such efforts must be funded on the basis of longer-term goals (such as presented by the National Research Council (NRC, 1991)), allow and promote collaboration among many scientists from several universities, departments of universities and other institutions, and utilize experimental and computational facilities dedicated to long-term hydrologic research goals. It is the thesis of this paper that a national center which is dedicated to hydrology and is based on the collaboration of several university programs of hydrology across the USA would make a significant contribution toward meeting the needs stated above. Before discussing the potential scientific and technological contributions of the proposed center, it is important to outline the relevant historical, political, and fiscal framework in which such a center would be realized. What follows are elementary notions and considerations of such a framework, but successful strategic choices depend on a good understanding of the framework itself. Centers of research employing groups of scientists and engineers (or inventors) for the solution of interdisciplinary problems have increased in number and scope since the industrial research center of Edison in Menlo Park, New Jersey, and the scientific research center of Joseph Henry at the Smithsonian Institution (Josephson, 1959). After the Second World War the US government has developed science policy and it has succeeded in funding basic research which led to many spectacular benefits to society. Federally funded research and development (R&D) centers in the USA account for about 3% of total national R&D funding, and universities account for about 9°/0, with these numbers having remained remarkably stable over the years (Smith, 1990). Thus, precedence exists for funding a national research center (as an example, we may consider the National Center for Atmospheric Research established in 1960). Although the US government routinely funds basic research, scientists now more than ever need public support for the enterprise of science and they must therefore be involved in the educating the public as to what their science can contribute to national objectives. To echo Harr6 (1984): 'In any real society it seems very unlikely that the pursuit of knowledge would be universally agreed to be the overriding good to which all other valued activities have to be sacrificed.' Choices about support for overlapping and interdisciplinary scientific ventures, such as the advocated national hydrology center, require clear plans for their mission and an outline of the anticipated benefits to society as a whole. This effort would first require convincing hydrologists themselves (both in academia and elsewhere) of the benefits that such a center would yield, then convincing influential scientific bodies and societies, and finally convincing the government and the public. This education process is necessary for the establishment of a center with a truly national role for hydrology. It will also help shape the center's organization and function to address both national hydrologic needs and national public policy agenda items. These considerations suggest a center with hydrologic basic research effectively coupled with the transfer of research results to users for the production of needed (and visible) benefits.
2.1. Scientific perspective A national center in hydrology would contribute significantly toward the
18
K.P. Georgakakos / Journal of Hydrology 172 (1995) 15-21
enhancement of the science basis of hydrology by: (1) facilitating the collaboration of scientists from different disciplines and home institutions or departments working on problems of fundamental importance to the development of hydrologic science; (2) facilitating the development and management of good quality hydrologic databases, and the subsequent dissemination of data to interested scientists; (3) increasing the pool of hydrologic scientists working on fundamental hydrologic problems. All of these functions are fundamental to science building for hydrology. The N R C (1991) discussed each of the items (1)-(3) in convincing detail, and suggested research priorities: hydrologic effects of human activity, coordinated global-scale observation of water reservoirs and the fluxes of water and energy, land surface-atmosphere interactions, scaling of dynamic behavior, and chemical and biological components of the hydrologic cycle. It is expected that such priorities would shape the broad research goals of the center. What is important to present here is why a center is needed to realize substantial advances in each of the three areas. The administrative autonomy of a national center would allow direct collaboration among scientists from various disciplines and/or institutions without the substantial obstacles created by disciplinary and institutional boundaries. Following practices of the National Center for Atmospheric Research (Hallgren, 1974), one may argue for the establishment of both permanent and visiting staff positions at the center, which would facilitate collaboration. The existence of a center would permit young scientists to work on fundamental hydrologic problems (collaborating with several mature hydrologists from various institutions), rather than on the project-type scientific research offered by individual investigators in particular institutions. The center would offer opportunities for collaborative research between hydrologists and scientists from various disciplines, who, under typical university departmental requirements, cannot be hired to support hydrologic programs. This facilitation of collaboration in fundamental studies is very likely to be the most substantial means of developing a productive hydrologic culture. Collaboration among scientists is also likely to be promoted by the proposed center through the in-house maintenance and wide dissemination of results from state-of-the-science large-scale hydrologic models, and global atmosphere and ocean models. Specific numerical experiments with clear hydrologic scientific goals may be designed and executed with very beneficial results. (Such experiments necessitate the availability of adequate computational resources for the proposed center.) Foundation building in any science is based on careful and exhaustive analysis of good quality relevant observations. A center would facilitate the conduct of largescale experiments, the processing of data, data maintenance and data dissemination to interested scientists. In-house expertise in remote sensing would facilitate the use of vital remotely sensed data by a wide population of hydrologic scientists, insuring rapid advances in foundation building in large-scale problems. Logistical and technical support for data processing and maintenance is likely to be a substantial function of the proposed center. Collaboration with government data collection centers or agencies is also important for these center activities.
K.P. Georgakakos / Journal of Hydrology 172 (1995) 15-21
19
A very important and necessary aspect of the foundation building and subsequent development of the hydrologic science is the increase of the pool of scientists who are devoted to long-term basic research in hydrology. A well-funded national center of hydrologic research would undoubtedly make this happen, as it would have a visible identity clearly associated with basic hydrologic research. Training of post-doctoral scientists and acceptance of Ph.D. candidates from various universities for collaborative research are means available to a national center toward this goal. Lastly, some of the center activities are likely to be devoted to conducting focused experiments or participating in large-scale experiments with clear scientific hydrologic benefits and goals. Maintenance of substantial in-house experimental facilities (e.g. satellite down-link facilities, weather and ground-penetrating radars, laboratories for physical model studies in geomorphology, etc.), which would be too expensive for individual universities, is one of the direct contributions the center could make to the infant large-scale diagnostic hydrology. Plans in this area must consider the fact that the conduct of science itself will lead to the emergence of new instruments and new opportunities for their application. 2.2. Technological perspective
It has become clear that it will be difficult to launch large-scale scientific ventures in the USA that do not conform to broad national policy considerations. Issues of economic performance and regulating the Earth's climate are two important items in the present-day public policy agenda. Basic understanding of the issues associated with extreme hydrologic environments and with the global and regional hydrologic cycles will undoubtedly contribute to the solution of these public policy agenda items. A prerequisite for such a contribution is the existence of effective means of converting research results into visible benefits. Furthermore, effective technology transfer that results in improved technology applications benefits the discipline of hydrology by enhancing the market for hydrologic expertise and thus increasing the number and competency of its professionals (Hays and Rouhban, 1993). For these reasons, the establishment of a national hydrologic center devoted to basic research must carry a strong component of technology transfer of research results to users. In this respect, the establishment of a center in this decade is timely, as this is the International Decade of Natural Disaster Reduction (e.g. Askew et al., 1993). The envisaged national center can achieve its necessary technology transfer role by (1) facilitating the close collaboration of researchers and users, (2) establishing continuing education and training programs, and (3) widely disseminating research results. It has been a rather widely accepted conclusion in many fields of science that universities have not sought to be and have not been an effective means of technology transfer (e.g. Wladawsky-Berger and Blnmenthal, 1989; Smith, 1990). For this aspect of the center's activities to be successful, participating universities must embrace and support it from the beginning. It is also important that center administration and participating universities make certain that the coexistence of basic research and
20
K.P. Georgakakos / Journal of Hydrology 172 (1995) 15-21
technology transfer is synergistic (as suggested by Waggoner (1990) and as discussed by Ettema and Kennedy (1990)).
3. Conclusions and recommendations It is proposed that a national center for hydrologic research be established in the USA to complement current efforts to nurture the science basis of hydrology. Presentday national policy and funding climate for basic research require that such a center have a strong component of technology transfer to complement basic research efforts. Strong ties with universities that have research programs in hydrology is essential and should be established at an early stage. Prerequisites for the establishment of a funding basis for the center are as follows: (1) convincing the federal government (agencies and the public) that a center as advocated will in fact contribute toward meeting national policy goals; (2) insuring the support of scientific bodies such as the National Academy of Sciences; (3) insuring the support of national associations and societies with large hydrologic membership; (4) insuring the support of the academic hydrologic community and the academic communities of allied disciplines; (5) acquiring the support of existing centers in allied disciplines. Even after the establishment of the center, peer review must continue to dictate its broad goals. Because of the envisioned center's goals and functions, it seems appropriate that the NSF administer core funding for such a center. Technology transfer aspects of the center, however, may be sponsored by several government agencies and possibly by private companies. Funding for the center's basic research activities must be with new funds, generated on the.basis of the center's merits, and not with existing funds of the NSF Hydrologic Sciences Program (other than for planning activities). In the current limited-funding environment for science (e.g. White, 1991), aggressive efforts must be made to secure center funding. The admittedly important role that hydrologic science can play in reducing damage from extreme hydrologic events and enhancing understanding of the global hydrologic cycle and its changes owing to anthropogenic influences must be explained to various bodies of the US government. It is likely that once established, the national center would facilitate the appropriation of new funding for hydrologic science. As a first necessary step toward the realization of a center, a national meeting of academic hydrologic scientists is recommended. Important agenda items are as follows: (1) desirability and timing of establishing a US national center for hydrology; (2) strategies for securing center funding; (3) issues associated with the organization, administration and personnel of the center, as well as with its relationship with participating universities; (4) concrete plans for its gradual realization.
Acknowledgments The comments and suggestions of W. Krajewski, A. Georgakakos, and D.R. Maidment are gratefully acknowledged.
K.P. Georgakakos / Journal of Hydrology 172 (1995) 15-21
21
References Askew, A.J., Miller, J.B. and Rodda, J.C., 1993. Countering natural disasters, a global view. In: P.A. Merriman and C.W.A. Browitt (Editors), Natural Disasters, Preventing Vulnerable Communities. Thomas Telford, London, pp. 130-139. Ettema, R. and Kennedy, J.F., 1990. Commercial projects at university laboratories: student training? research adjunct? or unfair competition? IAHR Bull., 7(2): 13-18. Hallgren, E.L., 1974. The University Corporation for Atmospheric Research and the National Center for Atmospheric Research, 1960-1970, an Institutional History. NCAR Report, NCAR, Boulder, CO, 146 pp. Harr6, R., 1984. The Philosophies of Science, an Introductory Survey, 2rid edn. Oxford University Press, New York, 203 pp. Hays, W.W. and Rouhban, B.M., 1993. Worldwide technology transfer for natural disaster reduction. In: P.A. Merriman and C.W.A. Browitt (Editors), Natural Disasters, Preventing Vulnerable Communities. Thomas Telford, London, pp. 489-501. James, L.D., 1995. NSF research in hydrologic sciences. J. Hydrol., 172: 3-14. Josephson, M., 1959. Edison, a Biography. Wiley, New York, 511 pp. National Research Council, 1991. Opportunities in the Hydrologic Sciences. National Academy Press, Washington, DC, 348 pp. Smith, B.L.R., 1990. American Science Policy since World War II. Brookings Institution, Washington, DC, 230 pp. Waggoner, P.E. (Editor), 1990. Climate Change and US Water Resources. Wiley, New York, 496 pp. White, R.M., 1991. Too many researchers, too few dollars. Issues Sci. Technol., VII(3): 35-37. Wladawsky-Berger, I. and Blumenthal, M.S., 1989. Putting supercomputers to work. Issues Sci. TechnoL, V(3): 48-51.