At top universities, concern about Pentagon's innovation strategy.

• Author: Beidel, Eric

More than 300 universities conduct research on the Defense Department's dime, and more man half of the Pentagon's basic research grants go to scientists and engineers on college campuses.

The Defense Department often relies on academia to explore fundamental mysteries of science or to pursue high-risk projects that private industry tends to avoid. Basic research undertaken by academic institutions has helped create foundations for stealth aircraft, precision weapons, reconnaissance satellites, lasers and the Internet.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Researchers at several universities who were interviewed by National Defense said they are not concerned about funding cutbacks as of yet. By all accounts, the Pentagon's $2 billion annual budget for basic research is safe for the time being. In addition, the Defense Department recently announced plans to make 32 awards totaling $227 million to academic institutions for basic research initiatives over the next five years.

But scientists nonetheless worry about the United States confronting an innovation gap in the defense and national security arenas.

The country's involvement in two wars during the past decade has shifted much of the focus away from breakthrough discoveries and onto the speedy delivery of the next best thing to the battlefield.

Today's security environment "requires adaptation, innovation and delivery on the timeline of weeks and months," the Pentagon's director of research and engineering Zachary J. Lemnios told a House Armed Services subcommittee earlier this year.

Scientists are concerned that short-term thinking will undermine the nation's standing as a technology powerhouse. "The United States' leadership in science and technology is at risk," said Rick McCullough, vice president of research at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh.

In congressional testimony, McCullough described funding systems that were broken and rewarded low-risk endeavors. He provided examples of Carnegie Mellon programs that were delayed or stalled because the initiatives were deemed too risky to receive funding.

The university's work on claytronics, or the ability to make programmable matter, has struggled. Another project that looks at using ubiquitous sensors and computers to monitor buildings, roads and bridges also has been left out to dry.

"If the idea is truly transformational then probability of success in obtaining funding is a problem," he testified. "That is, you need results to get funded and...