tokyo

Japanese scientists are increasingly concerned about a government plan to turn 14 basic research institutes attached to the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture (Monbusho) into semi-autonomous ‘agencies’ with greater administrative independence.

The National Research Institutes for Joint University Use — which include the High Energy Acclerator Research Organization, the National Institute of Genetics (NIG) and the Institute of Space and Astronautical Sciences (ISAS) — are the latest target of the government's planned administrative reforms (see Nature 398, 5; 1999).

These are stand-alone entities with their own research staff, facilities and research agendas, but they are also used by university researchers, and some institute staff have affiliated positions at universities.

The plan, based on the UK ‘Next Steps’ initiative, seeks to improve administration by restructuring government ministries and agencies. It would create semi-autonomous bodies with separate management systems. Each institute would have its performance evaluated by an external assessment body every 3 to 5 years.

The plan initially included research institutes attached to science-related ministries, such as the National Institute of Radiological Sciences (see Nature 395, 211; 1998). But the government has recently made a proposal to turn institutes for joint university use into semi-autonomous institutions as well.

The government hopes to reduce the number of civil servants by 25 per cent within the next decade by giving agency status to government-run organizations. But critics argue that the government's aim is ambiguous, as they have announced that most of the agencies' staff will remain as civil servants.

Junichi Tomizawa, former director of NIG, says he is afraid that the restructuring will be used “as a scapegoat to cover up a possible failure to reduce the number of civil servants at other organizations”.

Although many researchers support the plan's basic principles, such as giving the institutes greater flexibility in funding, they are opposed to its emphasis on performance-related targets, which they say are inappropriate for basic research laboratories.

According to policy documents released in January, agencies would have an accounting system like that of private companies, with performance targets related to costs. But the government has now revised these targets, so that financial performance would not dictate the priorities of the research institutes.

But researchers are still concerned that the targets the research institutes would have to meet have not been adequately specified by the government. “Although the emphasis on cost performance is not necessarily explicit in the policy outlines, we are worried that the plan has been made within the framework of the administrative reform plan, which is aimed at reducing government costs” says Yoshiki Hotta, director of NIG.

Hotta also suggests that the performance of research institutes should not be judged in periods of 3 to 5 years, given the long-term nature of basic research. “Excellent scientific contributions are not necessarily regarded as good during their initial stages,” he says

Some researchers are calling for a separate agency plan for basic research institutes, so that appropriate targets and evaluation systems can be introduced.

Tomizawa says the needs of the institutes and the national universities should be handled jointly. He is worried that their close relationship would be jeopardized if the institutes fall under a different administrative system to that of universities.

The government would like to turn universities into agencies, but has had to abandon this in the face of strong opposition from the academic community (see Nature 395, 730; 1998). Akito Arima, the education minister and director-general of the Science and Technology Agency, has declared that such reforms would harm both education and research. The government says it will not make a final decision on how the reforms will affect the national universities until 2003.

Minoru Oda, former director of ISAS, warns the universities against complacency. “Some of the powerful imperial universities, such as Tokyo and Kyoto, have this sense of security that they will not be subjected to any radical changes, while others have simply given up, thinking there is no way out from this agency plan,” he says.