If there's one thing that almost all Japanese scientists, science policy-makers and industrialists agree on, it is that Japan would benefit from more coordination between its various governmental science activities. To that end, the cabinet-level Council for Science and Technology Policy (CSTP) was born earlier this year.

Some claim that the CSTP has already overstepped its bounds in its first year by making specific budget decisions rather than merely defining broad national priorities. Others would like to give it more power, for example to distribute grants, and there is even discussion about creating an integrated biosciences body — what some say would be a Japanese National Institutes of Health (NIH) — under its auspices (see page 659).

Concerns that the CSTP is too bureaucratic — ministers dominate the CSTP in numbers and influence — are mirrored by fears that any NIH-like organization would be completely 'top-down' in operation. The worst-case scenario is that these non-scientists would back only the kind of science that produces short-term gain and expands their own ministries' budgets. Many researchers feel alienated from and distrustful of this body, which should be representing them in the government. They plead that a certain amount, say 60%, of spending on research and development should be set aside for basic science.

No integrated science effort will be successful in Japan without a greater voice from scientists in the government. The CSTP should include more than the one active scientist it has now. The government must learn to broaden its group of decision-makers. If implemented correctly, the CSTP could come into its own over decisions about setting up an NIH-like organization or by taking a leading role in supporting such a body. Otherwise, the worst fears of Japanese scientists could be realized.

For their part, researchers must make their voices heard. Too often they wait for their opinions to be asked, and complain when they are not, but at the same time view such political activity as getting their hands dirty. They should, rather, actively voice their concerns to their institute directors, their politicians and, not least, the CSTP.