Literature DB >> 28348239

Why the US science and engineering workforce is aging rapidly.

David M Blau1,2, Bruce A Weinberg3,2,4.   

Abstract

The science and engineering workforce has aged rapidly in recent years, both in absolute terms and relative to the workforce as a whole. This is a potential concern if the large number of older scientists crowds out younger scientists, making it difficult for them to establish independent careers. In addition, scientists are believed to be most creative earlier in their careers, so the aging of the workforce may slow the pace of scientific progress. We develop and simulate a demographic model, which shows that a substantial majority of recent aging is a result of the aging of the large baby boom cohort of scientists. However, changes in behavior have also played a significant role, in particular, a decline in the retirement rate of older scientists, induced in part by the elimination of mandatory retirement in universities in 1994. Furthermore, the age distribution of the scientific workforce is still adjusting. Current retirement rates and other determinants of employment in science imply a steady-state mean age 2.3 y higher than the 2008 level of 48.6.

Keywords:  aging; demography; innovation; retirement; science of science

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28348239      PMCID: PMC5393244          DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1611748114

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A        ISSN: 0027-8424            Impact factor:   11.205


  5 in total

1.  Age dynamics in scientific creativity.

Authors:  Benjamin F Jones; Bruce A Weinberg
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-11-07       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Research funding. Structural disequilibria in biomedical research.

Authors:  Michael S Teitelbaum
Journal:  Science       Date:  2008-08-01       Impact factor: 47.728

3.  Biomedical research. The graying of NIH research.

Authors:  Jocelyn Kaiser
Journal:  Science       Date:  2008-11-07       Impact factor: 47.728

4.  Rescuing US biomedical research from its systemic flaws.

Authors:  Bruce Alberts; Marc W Kirschner; Shirley Tilghman; Harold Varmus
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2014-04-14       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Policy Implications of Aging in the NIH-Funded Workforce.

Authors:  Misty L Heggeness; Frances Carter-Johnson; Walter T Schaffer; Sally J Rockey
Journal:  Cell Stem Cell       Date:  2016-07-07       Impact factor: 24.633

  5 in total
  10 in total

1.  Forecasting innovations in science, technology, and education.

Authors:  Katy Börner; William B Rouse; Paul Trunfio; H Eugene Stanley
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-12-11       Impact factor: 11.205

2.  Gender disparities among independent fellows in biomedical research.

Authors:  Jason M Sheltzer
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2018-10-11       Impact factor: 54.908

3.  Aging and scientific medicine: 60 is the new 40.

Authors:  Serpil C Erzurum
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 14.808

Review 4.  Scientific progress despite irreproducibility: A seeming paradox.

Authors:  Richard M Shiffrin; Katy Börner; Stephen M Stigler
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2018-03-13       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Opinion: The Next Generation Researchers Initiative at NIH.

Authors:  Michael Lauer; Lawrence Tabak; Francis Collins
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2017-11-07       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Cross-Center Virtual Education Fellowship Program for Early-Career Researchers in Atrial Fibrillation.

Authors:  Tinuola B Ajayi; Christy D Remein; Ellen Childs; Emelia J Benjamin; Randall S Stafford; Angela Fagerlin; Mina K Chung
Journal:  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol       Date:  2020-10-08

7.  Administrative Discretion in Scientific Funding: Evidence from a Prestigious Postdoctoral Training Program.

Authors:  Donna K Ginther; Misty L Heggeness
Journal:  Res Policy       Date:  2020-03-14

8.  Investigating the US biomedical workforce: Gender, field of training, and retention.

Authors:  Anne E Winkler; Sharon G Levin; Michael T Allison
Journal:  Sci Public Policy       Date:  2019-08-13

9.  Late retirement, early careers, and the aging of U.S. science and engineering professors.

Authors:  Navid Ghaffarzadegan; Ran Xu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-12-26       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 10.  Changes in the National Cancer Institute's R01 workforce: growth, aging, retention, and policy implications.

Authors:  Melissa D Antman; Roman Gorelik; Amy Kennedy; Grace F Liou; Eddie N Billingslea; James G Corrigan; L Michelle Bennett
Journal:  J Clin Invest       Date:  2021-04-01       Impact factor: 14.808

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.