Sir

National research institutes in Japan will experience a major reorganization before becoming semi-autonomous agencies in 2001 (Nature 398, 269; 1999). Although change may be necessary to improve efficiency, I do not have a rosy view of the reorganization. Scientists may have to struggle with even more red tape than at present.

This is what I predict will happen. Each ministry will try to retain power over the institutes that it controls at present. Preservation of power and budget is almost the basic principle of a government ministry. Existing institutes will be merged into a smaller number of research centres. It will be much easier for a ministry to control a smaller number of centres. But centralization may mean that individual institutes will lose their research independence. For scientists, centralization will certainly mean more tiers of administration above them. A research proposal must travel upwards through all the tiers of the hierarchy, winning approval at each stage. Having more tiers simply means more delay and more obstacles to clear. Politics and formalities rather than science may prevail in the decision-making process.

I believe that the hierarchical structure of the Japanese research system must be flattened to improve scientific performance and cut costs. Scientific performance will be the biggest concern for the new agencies, because it will be the criterion by which they are evaluated every three to five years, with the possibility that poor performers may be closed down.

The reorganization is planned as a means of cutting costs, and the agencies will be required to be much more efficient in spending money than the institutes are now. It is therefore crucial that the reorganization is done for the sake of performance and efficiency. If, instead, it is done for political reasons, the agencies will be laden with difficulties from the outset.