THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS    500 Fifth Street, NW    Washington, DC 20001

NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.

This project was supported by the Department of Defense/NAVY Award # N00014-05-G-2088, DO#29; United States Department of Agriculture Award # 2020-38840-21438; Air Force Office of Scientific Research Award #FA9550-13-1-0155; and Task Order, HHSN26300008 of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Evaluation Set-Aside Program (14-6005 M OD-OER GUIRR), administered by the Office of Program Evaluation and Performance, Division of Program, Coordination, Planning, and Strategic Initiatives, Office of the Director (OD), NIH; and the National Academy of Sciences.

Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.

International Standard Book Number 13: 978-0-309-30895-3
International Standard Book Number 10: 309-30895-X

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences.

The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., is president of the National Academy of Engineering.

The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president of the Institute of Medicine.

The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. C. D. Mote, Jr., are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.

This page intentionally left blank.

PLANNING COMMITTEE FOR THE WORKSHOP ON CULTURE MATTERS: AN APPROACH TO INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH AGREEMENTS

BARBARA B. MITTLEMAN (Co-Chair), Vice President, Clinical and Head, Immunology, Nodality Inc.

ARTURO PIZANO (Co-Chair), Manager, University Collaborations Program, Siemens Corporation

ASTRID-CHRISTINA KOCH, Director General, Infrastructures Unit, Copernicus: The European Earth Observation Program

PATRICK SCHLESINGER, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Research Administration and Compliance, University of California, Berkeley

SUBHASH C. SINGHAL, Independent Consultant and Battelle Fellow Emeritus, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

Principal Project Staff

SUSAN SAUER SLOAN, Rapporteur and Director, Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable

THOMAS ARRISON, Executive Director, InterAcademy Council

KATIE KALINOWSKI, Senior Program Associate, Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable (until September 2013)

KRISTINA THORSELL, Associate Program Officer, Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable (effective February 2014)

LAURENA MOSTELLA, Administrative Assistant, Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable

CLAUDETTE BAYLOR-FLEMING, Administrative Coordinator, Federal Demonstration Partnership

CHRIS VERHOFF, Financial Associate, Policy and Global Affairs Division

JOE ALPER, Consultant Writer

This page intentionally left blank.

Preface and Acknowledgments

Shortly after hosting an engaging and timely “Workshop on Examining Core Elements of International Research Collaboration” in July 2010, members of an active working group convened by the National Academies and its Government-University-Industry Research Roundtable (GUIRR) agreed that there was more exploration to be done around the notion of culture and research. More specifically, the group, which goes by the moniker “I-Group,” began to question aloud how culture and cultural perception factor into, influence, and impact the process by which research agreements are made and negotiated across international boundaries.

Challenges associated with language differences are perhaps most obvious when one thinks about culture; however, many other challenges come in to play as well when negotiating on a global scale. For example: How do differing cultural attitudes toward ownership of ideas and intellectual property (IP) affect cross-cultural partnerships? How is IP enforced? How is project risk assessed through different cultural lenses? Which country’s legal framework prevails when or if a project goes awry (beyond budget, timeline, etc.)? What happens when ideas about ethics and the conduct of research fail to align or harmonize across geographic boundaries? How does culture influence the wording/shaping/development of standards? What impact does culture have on a nation’s ability to innovate?

Ponder the influence of culture on multi-party, multi-country, possibly multi-disciplinary and/or multi-sector (government, universities, industry, other) partnership arrangements and the questions just keep coming.

This line of inquiry led to the proposal of a second international workshop, this one designed to look very carefully at cultural issues within the context of research and global partnering. A small planning committee was established and worked over several months to lay out a broad framework to address the I-Group’s questions. The committee identified and secured internationally recognized experts who could speak to and share insights from their respective areas of expertise.

I-Group members actively engaged with and supported the efforts of the planning committee and must be commended. Members of the I-Group include: Lida Anestidou, National Academies; Giulio Busulini, Embassy of Italy; Susan Butts, Susan B. Butts Consulting; John Carfora, Loyola Marymount University; James Casey, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; John Hickman, John Deere & Company; Wayne Johnson, California Institute of Technology; Mary Jordan, U.S. Agency for International Development; Mark Maurice, Air Force Office of Scientific Research; Celia Merzbacher, Semiconductor Research Corporation; Barbara Mittleman, Nodality, Inc.; C. D. Mote, Jr., National Academy of Engineering; Arturo Pizano, Siemens Corporate Research; Marie-Christine Piriou Reames, Georgia Institute of Technology; Andrew Reynolds, U.S. Department of State; Walter Schaffer, National Institutes of Health; Patrick Schlesinger, University of California at Berkeley; Robin Staffin, U.S. Department of Defense; David Stonner, National Science Foundation; and Sandra Titus, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services-Office of Research Integrity.

The follow-on workshop was held July 29-31, 2013, in Washington, DC, and titled “Culture Matters: An Approach to International Research Agreements.” The event was the culmination of tremendous effort and the focus of this resultant workshop summary report that bears, by design, the more encompassing title of Culture Matters: International Research Collaboration in a Changing World.

Providing assistance to the planning committee were the GUIRR staff members who are listed by name with the planning committee roster on page v. This workshop would not have been realized without their steadfast encouragement and able involvement.

We wish to acknowledge and thank the Air Force Office of Scientific Research and the National Institutes of Health Evaluation Set-Aside Program for providing primary support for the workshop and contributing financially to the production of this report. Additional support for this project came from the Office of Naval Research, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and GUIRR’s University-Industry partner organizations.

This summary has been prepared by the rapporteurs as a factual summary of what transpired during the workshop. The planning committee’s role was limited to planning and convening the workshop. The statements made in this report do not necessarily represent positions of the planning committee, I-Group, the workshop participants, GUIRR, or the National Academies.

This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Academies’ Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published reports as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for quality and objectivity.

The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the process.

We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report: Charles Dunlap, CRDF Global; Robert Hardy, Council on Governmental Relations; Elizabeth Heitman, Vanderbilt University Medical Center; Miriam Kelty, Independent Research Professional; and Max Voegler, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG). Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the content of the report, nor did they see the final draft before its release. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the rapporteurs and the institution.

Finally, we do not purport to have raised all the appropriate questions or considered all possible responses and/or approaches; however, this report reflects an earnest attempt to consider, in a careful if cursory way, an important aspect of research globalization, namely the role of culture.

This page intentionally left blank.

Contents