Report of the 2nd Institute Laboratory Advisory Council　(ILAC2004) to the Director of Discovery Research Institute and the Director of the Harima Institute of RIKEN

　

Introduction

This Institute Laboratories Advisory Council (ILAC 2004) meeting is the second ILAC meeting following the first, held in Wako-shi in 2000. There have been several dramatic changes in RIKEN over the past four years. Five new Institutes have been formed, several new Centers were opened, and a new President of RIKEN was appointed. The formation of the Wako Institute with the Discovery Research Institute as one of its parts and that of the Harima Institute has had a profound impact on RIKEN's Institute Laboratories. Whereas in 2000 the Institute Laboratories (ILs) reported directly to RIKEN's president, they now report to the Directors of the Discovery Research Institute and Harima Institute. Among the many questions that ILAC 2004 was asked to address was the impact of this new organization on the goals and missions of the Institute Laboratories.

Our specific charge was outlined in the ILAC 2004 Focus, a set of objectives prepared by Discovery Research Institute Director Kamitsubo and Harima Institute Director Iizuka. The ILAC 2004 Focus was mailed to ILAC 2004 members prior to the meeting and was presented to us by Directors Kamitsubo and Iizuka on the evening of Sunday, February 1, 2004. The ILAC 2004 Focus asked ILAC 2004 members to address the following issues:

I.

 Reviewing and advising on RIKEN's response to the ILAC 2000 recommendations.
II. Reviewing and advising on ILs management.
(1) The ILs share the same goal and missions. The question is how to achieve cohesion of the ILs when they are geographically separated between the DRI at Wako and the Harima Institute.
(2) Enhancing research activities to take advantage of the ILs' unique characteristics. The ILs cover a wide diversity of fields and it is also their mission to create new fields of research. Are the ILs fulfilling this objective and what measures might be introduced to guide them to higher levels of achievement?
III. Reviewing and advising on the role of the ILs in the Noyori initiative. The Noyori Initiative is :
(1) The ILs share the same goal and missions. The question is how to achieve cohesion of the ILs when they are geographically separated between the DRI at Wako and the Harima Institute.
(2) Enhancing research activities to take advantage of the ILs' unique characteristics. The ILs cover a wide diversity of fields and it is also their mission to create new fields of research. Are the ILs fulfilling this objective and what measures might be introduced to guide them to higher levels of achievement?
(3) Enhancing RIKEN's creative environment,
(4) Ensuring that RIKEN makes meaningful contribution to the betterment of humankind,
(5) Building a RIKEN that will seek out and transmit knowledge of value to the humanities and social sciences.
Other items of concern that may come up in the overall review process.

The full ILAC agenda, along with the listing of ILAC members, is attached to this report. In the course of the presentations by the Directors and Chief Scientists, ILAC members were introduced to the activities and problems of the Institute Laboratories (see Section I of this Report). The committee's report responds in Section II to the questions raised by the Directors of the Discovery Research Institute and the Harima Institute as outlined in ILAC 2004 Focus. There we summarize our Principal Recommendations with seven major points. The committee has refrained from making detailed comments on the performance of individual Chief Scientists or Institute Laboratories, instead we rely on the Midterm Reports and Final Reports for this level of detailed comment. Based on meetings with Chief Scientists and their colleagues we believe that these reports provide an accurate overview of research in the Institute Laboratories. Indeed, the Chief Scientists are distinguished researchers whose work is widely respected both in Japan and worldwide. The committee's remarks are therefore restricted to more general aspects of the individual fields (see Section III of this Report).

I. Presentations by Institute Directors and Chief Scientist Assembly

A detailed presentation of the ILAC 2004 Focus document was made on Monday, February 2, 2004, by Dr. Kamitsubo. This followed a presentation by Executive Director Ogawa, who explained RIKEN's evaluation system, and especially the relationship between ILAC 2004, the RIKEN Advisory Council, and the scheme of Institute Laboratory Assessment, that include Midterm Reviews and Final Reviews.

The Discovery Research Institute was established in response to the recommendation of ILAC 2000 that "active mechanisms to manage change and organizational transformation" be made. Four Chief Scientists now hold concurrent appointments as Center Directors. Another new initiative was the formation of the President's Special Fund for Collaborative Research and the Discovery Research Institute Director's Fund to foster new and innovative research projects. The President's Special Fund was especially aimed at fostering collaboration between Centers and Institute Laboratories, whereas the Discovery Research Institute Director's Fund was aimed at initiating innovative research. To address the problem of retirement of Chief Scientists, a plan has been submitted to RIKEN's Board of Executive Directors for a post-retirement scheme for selected Chief Scientists. Members of ILAC 2004 are supportive of attempts to allow selected Chief Scientists to continue an active research career following formal retirement. Last, there has been a concerted effort to ensure equal opportunities for women, and two new female Chief Scientists have been appointed, effective April, 2004.

To allow the committee to address issues relating to the management of Institute Laboratories, Director Kamitsubo provided background information on the general operation of the Institute Laboratories since the new Institutes were formed. He also touched on the reorganization of the Accelerator Group expected in 2006, and the present status of SPring-8. He emphasized that item III of the ILAC 2004 Focus, namely the role of the Noyori Initiative, would be one of the main subjects of the RIKEN Advisory Council meeting in June, 2004. He emphasized that the main focus of ILAC 2004 was to be on RIKEN's response to ILAC 2000 and on the management and review of Institute Laboratories. Dr. Kamitsubo's remarks were followed by Dr. Iizuka's comments on the relationship between the Harima Institute and Discovery Research Institute, stressing the roles of the nine Institute Laboratories at the Harima Institute. Dr. Iizuka emphasized the special relationship that exists between the Harima Institute Institute Laboratories and the SPring-8 facility, as well as their close ties to the Institute Laboratories at the Wako Institute through the Chief Scientists Assembly.

The relationship between Wako and Harima Institute laboratories was strongly emphasized in the presentations by Dr. Maki Kawai, chair of the Chief Scientists Assembly, and Dr. Akihiko Nakano, chair of the Executive Committee of ILAC 2004, who represented the Chief Scientists Assembly at ILAC 2004. The views of the Chief Scientists Assembly were outlined in a written report: RIKEN Chief Scientists Assembly Current Issues and Proposals for ILAC 2004, distributed to all ILAC 2004 members.

In her presentation, Dr. Kawai focused on the new circumstances that confronted Institute Laboratories and Chief Scientists as a result of the administrative changes that had occurred at RIKEN. She emphasized that formation of the Discovery Research Institute, which was organizationally only one of several other entities reporting to the Director of the Wako Institute, severely reduced the visibility of individual Institute Laboratories. Drs. Kawai and Nakano pointed out that although Institute Laboratories had been considered the ﾒheart of RIKENﾓ and were the home of curiosity driven research at RIKEN, formation of Discovery Research Institute had affected the influence of the Institute Laboratories and the Chief Scientists. Furthermore, formation of two separate Institutes to house Institute Laboratories, the Discovery Research Institute at Wako and the Harima Institute, resulted in administrative separation of the Institute Laboratories. This separation has given rise to two independent steering committees for Institute laboratories at Wako and Harima. This complex relationship between Institute Laboratories at Wako and Harima is further exacerbated by the geographic separation of the Wako and Harima Institutes and by the presence of Institute Laboratories at Tsukuba and Yokohama.

Whereas Dr. Kawai emphasized concerns about the future of Institute Laboratories that resulted from administrative change, Dr. Nakano focused on the impacts that recent changes may have on the direction of research at RIKEN. One of RIKEN's great strengths has been the ability of researchers from different disciplines to profit from synergy effects. The SPring-8 facility provides an excellent example of this, whereby RIKEN biologists have access to a world-class facility to carry out cutting edge research in structural biology. Many other examples of highly fruitful collaborations are available, including the development of new methods for the imaging of biological objects, to the utilization of heavy ion beams at the RIKEN Cyclotron to induce valuable new mutations in plants. These developments were made possible in large part by the close interaction of the Chief Scientists of Institute Laboratories working toward common goals.

II. Response to the Charge and Recommendations of ILAC 2004

ILAC 2004 members were pleased to learn that the recommendations of ILAC2000 were largely implemented by RIKEN. However, the formation of the Discovery Research Institute has raised new problems. As is outlined below, although our committee addressed each of the points raised by Directors Kamitsubo and Iizuka, the relationship of the Institute Laboratories to the Discovery Research Institute and to the Wako and Harima Institutes attracted most of our attention. It was made clear to us by the presentations of the Chief Scientists Assembly representatives that their main concern is that the Institute Laboratory system continue to function well. The Chief Scientists rightly sense that the influence of the Institute Laboratories at RIKEN has declined as other parts of RIKEN have grown. Not only do the Institute Laboratories no longer report directly to the President of RIKEN, but the Institute Laboratories at Harima report directly to the Director of the Harima site while the Institute Laboratories at Wako report to the Director of the Discovery Research Institute, who in turn reports to the Director of the Wako Institute. Thus, Institute Laboratories in the Discovery Research Institute and the Harima Institute do not occupy parallel positions in RIKEN's administrative structure and the Wako Institute Laboratories appear to be even further disadvantaged.

Because RIKEN's historical and continuing success has been based on the system of Chief Scientists and the Institute Laboratories focused on basic research and with considerable independence for the individual scientists, ILAC 2004 members considers it important that this proven, unique feature of RIKEN's organization be maintained and strengthened in a changing environment. In fact, many of the new organizational entities have developed from the activities of Chief Scientists. ILAC 2004, therefore, recommends below that serious consideration be given to a scheme in which all RIKEN Institute Laboratories are organized under one administrative umbrella that reports directly to the president of RIKEN. Although such an administrative change cannot solve the separation that geography imposes on the RIKEN Institute Laboratories, it provides a mechanism that allows them to work together as a unified entity and exert a continuing, seminal influence on the course of RIKEN.

The Institute Laboratories are a unique component of RIKEN because they are charged with carrying out curiosity driven research. What is more, they have been very successful in carrying out this mission, and the high regard with which RIKEN is held both nationally and internationally has come from the high profile of the Institute Laboratories. Reviews of the Institute Laboratories show that they continue to be among the international leaders in their respective fields and they should be returned to their level of prominence at RIKEN.

Principal Recommendations:

1. ILAC 2004 recommends that the RIKEN administration consider the formation of a new Institute having a title such as The RIKEN Institute Laboratories, with the director of the new Institute reporting directly to the President of RIKEN. The committee believes that adoption of such a plan would help preserve the impact of a core of basic science on RIKEN, and having all Institute Laboratories in one new Institute would dispense with the undesirable organizational separation between the present Harima and Wako Institutes.
　
2. The success of RIKEN's Institute Laboratories is in large part due to the quality of its Chief Scientists, but generous funding has also played a prominent role. The change in RIKEN's status from a Special Agency to an Independent Administrative Agency has the potential to change the funding of Institute Laboratories. The committee urges RIKEN's administrators to maintain a level of funding that will ensure that first class cutting edge research is carried out.
　
3. The committee recommends a continuation and expansion of the Initiative Research Unit program. The formation of this program for young scientists is an exciting and innovative development and we strongly support its continuation and possible expansion.
　
4. The committee notes with satisfaction that, based on recommendations of the 1st ILAC, progress is being made in appointing women as (Chief) Scientists and in revising the mandatory retirement of Chief Scientists. ILAC 2004 encourages RIKEN to proceed further in this direction.
　
5. A concerted effort should be made to enhance the scientific interaction between the individual Institute Laboratories. There should be more common seminars between Institute Laboratories and especially between Laboratories from related fields. In addition we encourage the setting up common interdisciplinary research programs that would encompass two or more Institute Laboratories. As an example, we note the possibility of a broad collaborative effort centered around projects to create and use a soft and hard X-ray Free Electron Laser.
　
6. The committee is aware of the shared responsibility of RIKEN and JAERI for the operation of SPring-8 through JASRI. This may change in the near future when JAERI has to move out of its participation and RIKEN might have to take wider responsibility. This will have implications on the Institute Laboratories presently working at Harima since some of its Chief Scientists have additional functions at JASRI for SPring-8. Further implications arise for the field of materials research at SPring-8 now predominantly covered by JAERI. Since many of these questions lie outside the competence of this committee, ILAC recommends that competent advice be sought on these questions to preserve the role of SPring-8 in Japanese science and the effective function of the Institute Laboratories of RIKEN in Harima.
　
7. When RIBF becomes operational, it will require careful thought as to the optimal scheme for capitalizing on the scientific opportunities that it provides for exploring nature. One should also not forget to consider the fact that the facility has an international aspect and has a much larger scale than undertakings that fit into the Institute Laboratory scheme. Possibly a structure similar to the one adopted at SPring-8 might have to be considered. With the approach of first beams the committee considers that it is not too early for these considerations.