In the case of postdocs in the “narrow sense” at research institutions, their future career paths are uncertain, and growing older while repeatedly renewing terms of unstable employment is becoming a problem. In this study, in order to clarify this situation and its causes, we use individual data_ from the “Survey on postdoctoral fellows regarding employment and moving-out situations – FY 2009 -,” Knowledge Infrastructure Policy Division, Science and Technology Policy Bureau, MEXT, to analyze transitions to permanent employment (full-time, unlimited term). Postdocs are most commonly ages 30-34. Their average number of years since completing a doctorate is 4-5. Transition to permanent employment can take as long as 5-7 years. Clearly, it is often the case that the transition is made after the training period of the postdoc, at the turning point of the end of that term. However, the average transition rate of 6.3% is markedly lower than the transition rate of general college graduates from non-regular to regular employment. The transition rates of women, those employed in science and medicine, and those employed using competitive funds in particular are significantly lower. Based on these circumstances, the necessity of providing support through the turning point that is the fifth year to enable transition to stable employment is indicated. In the future, it will be necessary to also consider the transition to permanent employment of research assistant, who appointed to fixed terms, which is not captured in this data.

• Study on the Transition from Postdoc to Permanent Employment

For comprehensively understanding the status and trends of R&D activities in a country or a region, various data on research input and output should be collected, processed, and organized. Specifically, data analysis of research output data obtained from bibliographic databases at the organizational or departmental level (micro-data analysis) is necessarily accompanied with accurate identification of author-affiliated organizations and departments which generally have numerous name variations.

In order to help micro-data analysis conducted by researchers and policy-makers, NISTEP has carried out a project “Development of data infrastructure on R&D activities in universities and public organizations” since FY2011. Through this project, it prepares and publishes an organization name dictionary playing a central role in identification and some lists of name variations in databases for universities and public organizations in Japan. This report outlines the project, with some results of analysis on name variations of author-affiliated organizations. Finally, it discusses importance of standardization of organization name description.

• Development of Data Infrastructure on R&D Activities in Universities and Public Organizations – NISTEP’s Contribution to Micro-Data Analysis –

An Overview of Disease Prediction, Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment Technologies for the Realization of a Healthy and Active Aging Society
– A Study on Lifestyle-related Disease (Type 2 Diabetes) –

This survey was conducted as part of the Science and Technology Scenario Planning with a vision for the future. In order to achieve a healthy and active aging society in Japan, the socioeconomic problems related to type 2 diabetes must be addressed. To achieve this, the prediction, prevention, diagnosis of type 2 diabetes and the technology related to its treatment were schematized.

First, based on a literature review and a debate at the Expert Workshop, technologies to control type 2 diabetes were organized from the viewpoints of disease stage, prediction, prevention, diagnosis, and treatment; these were compiled in a technology map. Next, based on the technology map, 11 technical scenarios that anticipate changes in technology related to drugs, medical equipment, and regenerative medicine up to approximately 2030, were created. Relative comparisons of the impact from the viewpoints of scope of technical application, timing of technical achievement, timing of social implementation, and size of industrial and medical spillover were performed between these technical scenarios. The results revealed that scenarios on predictive diagnostic markers, imaging diagnosis, and regenerative medicine had a stronger impact than other scenarios.

Furthermore, challenges for the progress of practical applications and research development incorporating technical maps and technical scenarios were investigated.

Finally, 11 future challenges that may become particularly important for Japan were identified.

• An Overview of Disease Prediction, Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment Technologies for the Realization of a Healthy and Active Aging Society
  – A Study on Lifestyle-related Disease (Type 2 Diabetes) –

Technology Foresight for Scenario Planning
-A study on Lifestyle-related Disease (Type 2 Diabetes)-

The Science and Technology Foresight Center, National Institute of Science and Technology Policy has implemented Scenario Planning that can accommodate political, social, and economic needs as part of the 10 th Science and Technology Foresight being held at the center from 2013 through 2015. In this survey, a Delphi study on type 2 diabetes was conducted as part of scenario planning. In Japan, type 2 diabetes is becoming a public health problem with a major socioeconomic impact, which must be addressed to achieve a healthy and active aging society. To date, technology maps and scenarios have been created at the Science and Technology Foresight Center in order to schematize technology related to type 2 diabetes. In order to revise these scenarios, experts at the Japan Diabetes Society and the Science and Technology Foresight Center completed repeated questionnaire surveys regarding the technologies considered important to effectively address the health problems related to type 2 diabetes.

• Technology Foresight for Scenario Planning -A study on Lifestyle-related Disease (Type 2 Diabetes)-

This investigation aims to clarify the content of the innovation indicators contained in The Global Innovation Index (“GII”) report drafted by INSEAD, with the aim of providing reference information for the selection of indicators to measure the state of innovation in Japan.

I have carried out an analysis from the perspective of investigating what types of innovation indicators have been used in the GII, how the selected innovation indicators have changed each year, and how Japan’s global innovation index ranking has changed in accordance with the selected indices.

The types of indicators used in GII were as follows. In the 2008-09 GII, soft data accounted for 46%, hard data accounted for 40% and index data accounted for 14%. By the time of the 2013 GII, there had been significant changes in the indicators used, and hard data had increased to 71%, soft data accounted for just 6% and index data accounted for 23%.

Japan’s ranking in the GII was 9th in the 2008-09 GII, but in the 2013 GII its ranking had fallen to 22nd. When we look at Japan’s ranking based on innovation input and innovation output, its ranking did not change significantly in terms of innovation input, but in terms of innovation output its ranking fell significantly.

Japan’s ranking in “7. Creative outputs”, which is one of the sub-categories of innovation output, fell sharply from the 2009-2010 GII to the 2011 GII, and this can be considered to have been a result of changes in the indicators used.

• Investigation into Changes in the Global Innovation Index (GII) in INSEAD

Analytical Report for 2013 NISTEP Expert Survey on Japanese S&T and Innovation System (2013 NISTEP TEITEN survey)

NISTEP expert survey on Japanese S&T and innovations system (NISTEP TEITEN survey) aims to track the status of S&T and innovation system in Japan through the survey to Japanese experts and researchers in universities, public research institutions, and private firms. It asks for respondents’ recognitions on the status of the S&T and innovation system, such as diversity in basic research, in Japan and usability of research funds, which is usually difficult to measure through the R&D statistics.
The NISTEP TEITEN survey is a panel survey which will be conducted annually in the duration of the fourth S&T basic plan (FY2011 – 2015). The 2013 NISTEP TEITEN survey is the third round. It was conducted from September 24, 2013 to December 24, 2013. The same questionnaire was sent to the same respondents who were selected in the first round.
Individual responses to 2012 NISTEP TEITEN survey were fed back to respondents in 2013 NISTEP TEITEN survey. Respondents were asked to provide comments about why he/she changed their evaluation from the previous survey or comments about supplemental information about their evaluation. Additional detailed survey was conducted for the following three issues; 1) the changes of the number of young scholars by employment status; 2) the status of independence of young and mid-career researchers; 3) the factors that hamper leading research outputs of Japanese universities to economic and social outcomes.

• Analytical Report for 2013 NISTEP Expert Survey on Japanese S&T and Innovation System (2013 NISTEP TEITEN survey)

2013 NISTEP Expert Survey on Japanese S&T and Innovation System (2013 NISTEP TEITEN survey), Data Book

NISTEP expert survey on Japanese S&T and innovations system (NISTEP TEITEN survey) aims to track the status of S&T and innovation system in Japan through the survey to Japanese experts and researchers in universities, public research institutions, and private firms. It asks for respondents’ recognitions on the status of the S&T and innovation system, such as diversity in basic research, in Japan and usability of research funds, which is usually difficult to measure through the R&D statistics.
The NISTEP TEITEN survey is a panel survey which will be conducted annually in the duration of the fourth S&T basic plan (FY2011 – 2015). The 2013 NISTEP TEITEN survey is the third round. It was conducted from September 24, 2013 to December 24, 2013. The same questionnaire was sent to the same respondents who were selected in the first round.
Individual responses to 2012 NISTEP TEITEN survey were fed back to respondents in 2013 NISTEP TEITEN survey. Respondents were asked to provide comments about why he/she changed their evaluation from the previous survey or comments about supplemental information about their evaluation. Additional detailed survey was conducted for the following three issues; 1) the changes of the number of young scholars by employment status; 2) the status of independence of young and mid-career researchers; 3) the factors that hamper leading research outputs of Japanese universities to economic and social outcomes.
This report is the data book which shows detailed results of 2013 NISTEP TEITEN survey.

• 2013 NISTEP Expert Survey on Japanese S&T and Innovation System (2013 NISTEP TEITEN survey), Data Book

“Science and Technology Indicators” is a basic resource for understanding Japanese science and
technology activities based on objective, quantitative data. It classifies science and technology
activities into five categories, R&D Expenditure; R&D Personnel; Higher Education; The Output of
R&D; and Science, Technology, and Innovation. The multiple relevant indicators show the state of
Japanese science and technology activities. Structure of the chapter of “Output of R&D” was
changed in the Japanese Science and Technology Indicators 2013. A detailed explanation of the
concept of the counting method is provided, and the adjusted number of top 1% highly cited papers
in the world, which provides a qualitative perspective of the output, was newly analyzed. An
international comparison was made on the number of patent applications using patent families. The
“Science, Technology and Innovation” chapter has been enhanced with the addition of an indicator,
i.e. transition in the export value of medium high technology industry.
Changes in various indicators are registered in the Japanese Science and Technology Indicators
2013 compared with the previous year. Total research and development expenditure in Japan, which
has continued to decline in recent years, showed a 1.6% increase over the previous year. The number
of newly-hired researcher has been trending downward since peaking in 2009. The number of people
enrolling in undergraduate, masters and doctoral programs declined both in 2011 and 2012.
Looking at the number of papers produced in Japan, Japan was third according to the fractional
counting method (degree of contribution in the production of papers in the world). As for the
adjusted number of the top 10% and top 1% highly cited papers in the world, Japan ranked sixth and
seventh, respectively. In the number of patent families, which is the indicator for international
comparison of the number of inventions, Japan ranked number one in the world.

• Japanese Science and Technology Indicators 2013

Grasping the signs of changes in society, science and technology is one of the key issues for our better future society developing. Such activities as scenario planning and horizon scanning are becoming popular now around the world. These efforts are also important for the companies as well as the government.
This conference aims to discuss the future direction of the foresight activities from both international and domestic viewpoints, and to share the experience around the world, including how we can grasp emerging trends of society, science and technology to elicit implications towards desirable society.