Dec. 7, 2005 -- It's no secret that the United States has grown more dependent on foreign researchers. At Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, for example, 577 foreign undergraduate and graduate students are enrolled, and many are engaged in ongoing research.
The Research Foundation of the State University of New York, meanwhile, says it has 18,006 non-citizens, including researchers, employees and students, on its campuses across the state.
And institutions from General Electric's Global Research Center in Niskayuna to the Ordway Research Institute in Albany have recruited heavily among the foreign-born.
Now, proposals by the U.S. Departments of Commerce and Defense to tighten access by many of these researchers to various sensitive technologies have academic and industry officials warning that the move could endanger the nation's technological edge.
"Graduate education plays a really vital role in moving science along," said Kermit L. Hall, president of the University at Albany. "The regulations are too sweeping (and) not as focused as they should be."
Dependence on foreign researchers has grown as fewer U.S. students study science and engineering.
"Because of the lack of availability of native-born citizens, there are a lot of foreign-born who study at our universities," said Christopher Hanifin, counsel to the Research Foundation. "They tend to be very good. They provide a lot of research assistance."
It's not clear how many researchers and students in the Capital Region might be affected by the new rules. The rules themselves haven't been finalized, said Amy Scott, federal relations officer for the Association of American Universities in Washington, D.C. She said officials at the departments of State and Commerce have received hundreds of comments, which she hopes they will consider in making changes to the proposed rules.
The proposed regulations grew out of perceptions by some federal officials that research institutions weren't being as stringent as they should be in guarding access to technologies that could have military or other strategic applications.
The Defense Department published proposed changes in the Federal Register in July, while the Commerce Department hasn't yet released to the public its proposed rule changes.
While the regulations were intended for contract research funded by the government, officials say it's unclear just how widely those regulations might be applied.
"The issue of greatest concern in the proposed regulation is the omission and complete failure to address or even mention the issue of fundamental research," Omkaram Nalamasu, vice president for research at RPI, wrote in a letter last month to the Defense Acquisitions Regulations Council, which is collecting comments. Previous regulations had exempted fundamental university research, which is published and widely shared.
"Ambiguity in the application of what is or is not fundamental research that is exempt from licensing requirements would have disastrous consequences for virtually every major university in the United States and, ultimately, the competitive position of the United States," he wrote.
Nalamasu and other RPI officials declined to be interviewed for this story.
Another change would be the classification of foreign researchers by country of birth instead of country of citizenship. So a Chinese native who is a citizen of Canada would be classified under more stringent regulations.
"Universities are having a moderately difficult time with export controls as they are," Hanifin said. Seeking the necessary licenses and permits so researchers could continue their work would result in delays -- an expensive proposition at a time when federal research funds already are being reduced. There is, though, one exception.
"Defense-related research projects are becoming more available," Hanifin said. But he added that universities might consider forgoing the research funding altogether, rather than "ramp up and have Fort Knox."
The proposed regulations call for foreign-born researchers to be segregated from labs containing sensitive equipment or other technologies, and to be issued badges for easy identification.
The Research Foundation, in comments filed in advance of the anticipated Commerce Department regulations, said the process of obtaining a license last year when researchers were going to Iran cost $17,716. The figure includes $16,694 for three months of research time lost in the field while scientists waited for approval.
The proposed regulations also would have a "chilling effect" on foreign-born researchers, said Hall, the UAlbany president. He and others worry that the brightest scientists and students will simply go elsewhere.
"The rest of the world is catching up to the United States and making extraordinarily good use" of its scientific talent, Hall said. China, for example, is developing its own research base and system of patents to protect its intellectual property.
And Hall worries that tougher regulations might even shift domestic research elsewhere.
"You're going to force more offshoring of scientific research," he said. At Szechuan University's research park in China, he said, Intel and Dreamworks, among others, already have a presence.
General Electric Co. in recent years has opened new research centers in Shanghai, China; Bangalore, India; and Munich, Germany. But a GE spokesman said that the company remains committed to its Niskayuna research center, and that employment there has grown by more than 15 percent since 2000.
"We all like to talk about the global knowledge economy," Hall said. "Except when we come up with these issues, we suddenly become terribly parochial."
William A. Wulf, president of the National Academy of Engineering, in September testimony before a House subcommittee, also worried about what the regulations were doing to this nation's image as the "land of opportunity."
"We are in the process ... of destroying that image and replacing it with one of a xenophobic, hostile nation," Wulf said.
It's not clear what the final regulations might look like. During a panel discussion in September at the National Academies, which includes the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council, a Defense Department spokeswoman said the public comments would be carefully considered.
The National Academies provide committees of experts in science and technology to advise the federal government.
"The feds are trying very hard not to create undue burdens on universities," said the Research Foundation's Hanifin.
And U.S. Rep. John Sweeney, R-Clifton Park, said through an aide that he recognizes there needs to be a balance.
"We do share concerns about the shortage of researchers," said aide Melissa Carlson. "The congressman has worked closely with our universities and has worked to increase the availability of H-1B visas" used by technology workers.
"Congressman Sweeney definitely would want a balance between filling the needs, but we have to weigh very carefully any security risks that might be involved," she added.
And while officials at Albany NanoTech, which conducts nanotechnology research at UAlbany, declined to comment for this story, the Semiconductor Industry Association, a trade group representing the U.S. computer chip industry, has criticized the regulations.
At the National Academies' September meeting, the SIA said the deemed export licenses that would have to be obtained for foreign-born researchers "may be the single largest burden for SIA companies."
(c) 2005 Times Union, Albany, N.Y.
The Research Foundation of the State University of New York, meanwhile, says it has 18,006 non-citizens, including researchers, employees and students, on its campuses across the state.
And institutions from General Electric's Global Research Center in Niskayuna to the Ordway Research Institute in Albany have recruited heavily among the foreign-born.
Now, proposals by the U.S. Departments of Commerce and Defense to tighten access by many of these researchers to various sensitive technologies have academic and industry officials warning that the move could endanger the nation's technological edge.
"Graduate education plays a really vital role in moving science along," said Kermit L. Hall, president of the University at Albany. "The regulations are too sweeping (and) not as focused as they should be."
Dependence on foreign researchers has grown as fewer U.S. students study science and engineering.
"Because of the lack of availability of native-born citizens, there are a lot of foreign-born who study at our universities," said Christopher Hanifin, counsel to the Research Foundation. "They tend to be very good. They provide a lot of research assistance."
It's not clear how many researchers and students in the Capital Region might be affected by the new rules. The rules themselves haven't been finalized, said Amy Scott, federal relations officer for the Association of American Universities in Washington, D.C. She said officials at the departments of State and Commerce have received hundreds of comments, which she hopes they will consider in making changes to the proposed rules.
The proposed regulations grew out of perceptions by some federal officials that research institutions weren't being as stringent as they should be in guarding access to technologies that could have military or other strategic applications.
The Defense Department published proposed changes in the Federal Register in July, while the Commerce Department hasn't yet released to the public its proposed rule changes.
While the regulations were intended for contract research funded by the government, officials say it's unclear just how widely those regulations might be applied.
"The issue of greatest concern in the proposed regulation is the omission and complete failure to address or even mention the issue of fundamental research," Omkaram Nalamasu, vice president for research at RPI, wrote in a letter last month to the Defense Acquisitions Regulations Council, which is collecting comments. Previous regulations had exempted fundamental university research, which is published and widely shared.
"Ambiguity in the application of what is or is not fundamental research that is exempt from licensing requirements would have disastrous consequences for virtually every major university in the United States and, ultimately, the competitive position of the United States," he wrote.
Nalamasu and other RPI officials declined to be interviewed for this story.
Another change would be the classification of foreign researchers by country of birth instead of country of citizenship. So a Chinese native who is a citizen of Canada would be classified under more stringent regulations.
"Universities are having a moderately difficult time with export controls as they are," Hanifin said. Seeking the necessary licenses and permits so researchers could continue their work would result in delays -- an expensive proposition at a time when federal research funds already are being reduced. There is, though, one exception.
"Defense-related research projects are becoming more available," Hanifin said. But he added that universities might consider forgoing the research funding altogether, rather than "ramp up and have Fort Knox."
The proposed regulations call for foreign-born researchers to be segregated from labs containing sensitive equipment or other technologies, and to be issued badges for easy identification.
The Research Foundation, in comments filed in advance of the anticipated Commerce Department regulations, said the process of obtaining a license last year when researchers were going to Iran cost $17,716. The figure includes $16,694 for three months of research time lost in the field while scientists waited for approval.
The proposed regulations also would have a "chilling effect" on foreign-born researchers, said Hall, the UAlbany president. He and others worry that the brightest scientists and students will simply go elsewhere.
"The rest of the world is catching up to the United States and making extraordinarily good use" of its scientific talent, Hall said. China, for example, is developing its own research base and system of patents to protect its intellectual property.
And Hall worries that tougher regulations might even shift domestic research elsewhere.
"You're going to force more offshoring of scientific research," he said. At Szechuan University's research park in China, he said, Intel and Dreamworks, among others, already have a presence.
General Electric Co. in recent years has opened new research centers in Shanghai, China; Bangalore, India; and Munich, Germany. But a GE spokesman said that the company remains committed to its Niskayuna research center, and that employment there has grown by more than 15 percent since 2000.
"We all like to talk about the global knowledge economy," Hall said. "Except when we come up with these issues, we suddenly become terribly parochial."
William A. Wulf, president of the National Academy of Engineering, in September testimony before a House subcommittee, also worried about what the regulations were doing to this nation's image as the "land of opportunity."
"We are in the process ... of destroying that image and replacing it with one of a xenophobic, hostile nation," Wulf said.
It's not clear what the final regulations might look like. During a panel discussion in September at the National Academies, which includes the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, the Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council, a Defense Department spokeswoman said the public comments would be carefully considered.
The National Academies provide committees of experts in science and technology to advise the federal government.
"The feds are trying very hard not to create undue burdens on universities," said the Research Foundation's Hanifin.
And U.S. Rep. John Sweeney, R-Clifton Park, said through an aide that he recognizes there needs to be a balance.
"We do share concerns about the shortage of researchers," said aide Melissa Carlson. "The congressman has worked closely with our universities and has worked to increase the availability of H-1B visas" used by technology workers.
"Congressman Sweeney definitely would want a balance between filling the needs, but we have to weigh very carefully any security risks that might be involved," she added.
And while officials at Albany NanoTech, which conducts nanotechnology research at UAlbany, declined to comment for this story, the Semiconductor Industry Association, a trade group representing the U.S. computer chip industry, has criticized the regulations.
At the National Academies' September meeting, the SIA said the deemed export licenses that would have to be obtained for foreign-born researchers "may be the single largest burden for SIA companies."
(c) 2005 Times Union, Albany, N.Y.
選擇“Disable on www.wenxuecity.com”
選擇“don't run on pages on this domain”
