Smithsonian May Go On Science Diet

A special commission studying research at the Smithsonian Institution endorsed the work of two threatened centers and called for a significant increase in efforts to raise private funds for the institution.

Commission Chairman Jeremy A. Sabloff said that Smithsonian science programs in recent decades have been "unfocused and underfunded."

Sabloff told a briefing that the institution needs to recapture its prominence in science, a step that will require strong leadership and a reversal of years of declining support.

"The Smithsonian should be the leader in science education nationally," said Sabloff, director of the University of Pennsylvania Museum of Archaeology and Anthropology in Philadelphia.

David L. Evans, the Smithsonian's undersecretary for science, said the institution will begin efforts to implement the recommendations, commenting: "We're all pretty excited about the future."

The report comes nearly 18 months after the commission was appointed amid fierce criticism of proposals for research cutbacks and closings made by Smithsonian Secretary Lawrence M. Small.

The White House Office of Management and Budget later fanned the flames by suggesting that some Smithsonian funds be switched to the National Science Foundation, a step that would have forced institution researchers to compete with outsiders for grants.

When the science commission was established in 2001, Congress ordered that no changes be made in the institution's research operations until the commission had completed its study and issued recommendations.

While the public face of the Smithsonian is formed by the many museums it operates, its charter is for the "increase and diffusion" of knowledge, a goal it seeks to meet through a wide variety of research in fields ranging from anthropology and astronomy to geology and zoology. It operates research centers ranging from an astronomical center in Cambridge, Mass., to a tropical unit in Panama.

The science commission urged that the Smithsonian research concentrate on four primary areas:

• The origin and nature of the universe.
• The formation and evolution of the Earth and other planets.
• Discovering and understanding life's diversity.
• The study of human diversity and culture change.

Last year the institution received $165 million in private and corporate grants, down from $178 million the year before. Officials attributed the drop to the weakness of the stock market and the aftermath of the terrorist attacks.

In addition to raising more private funds, the group urged working with Congress to increase federal funding and to seek more grants from the National Science Foundation.

Small declined to discuss the report prior to a briefing Tuesday, but the Smithsonian's governing Board of Regents issued a statement saying it "endorses the vision and direction of the report."

Two proposals that drew particular criticism, leading to the establishment of the commission, were suggestions to close a National Zoo research center in Virginia and the institution's Center for Materials Research and Education.

The commission said the zoo research is important and needs to continue, but suggested that the Zoo be given two years to find outside funds and, if that cannot be done, to work with Congress to turn control over that research division to the General Services Administration within three more years.

The Center for Materials Research should continue, but concentrate on the needs of the Smithsonian itself, with some of its scientists being transferred to the National Museum of Natural History. Part of the current work of the center includes assisting outside museums in preserving their collections.

In October, a pair of studies by outside organizations concluded that scientific research at the Smithsonian is unique and of such high quality that it deserves continued federal funding.

The National Research Council, an arm of the National Academy of Sciences, concluded that work at the National Zoo and the Smithsonian Center for Materials Research and Education is unique and deserves its own source of money.

Three other centers — the Smithsonian's Astrophysical Observatory in Cambridge, Mass., Environmental Research Center on the Chesapeake Bay and Tropical Research Institute in Panama — do "world-class" science, the council said, and changing the source of funds would hamper their work.

The National Academy of Public Administration, an independent organization that was also asked to look at the Smithsonian science programs, issued a separate report also calling for continuation of direct appropriations for Smithsonian science.

The Smithsonian had operating expenses of $631 million in fiscal 2001, but officials said the various missions of the institution are so intermixed it is impossible to detail what portion of that goes to science research. Some 57 percent of income is from federal funds, 21 percent from private grants, 12 percent from government grants and contracts, 5 percent from investment earnings and 4 percent from business ventures.