This report is a product of the Defense Science Board (DSB). The DSB is a Federal Advisory Committee established to provide independent advice to the Secretary of Defense. Statements, opinions, conclusions, and recommendations in this report do not necessarily represent the official position of the Department of Defense. Attached is the report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on the Capabilities of Non-DoD Providers of Science and Technology, Systems Engineering and Test and Evaluation. This Study was requested by the Under Secretary of Defense (AT & L) in the Fall of 1998. The Terms of deterence directed that the Task Force make recommendations on: Non-DoD sources of Science and Technology and Systems Engineering - Processes tor out-sourcing of Science and Technology and System Engineering.

In recent years, substantial efforts have been initiated to develop new drugs, vaccines, and other medical interventions against biological agents that could be used in bioterrorist attacks against civilian populations. According to a new congressionally mandated report from the Institute of Medicine and National Research Council of the National Academies, to successfully develop these drugs, vaccines, and other medical interventions against biowarfare agents, Congress should authorize the creation of a new agency within the Office of the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Defense. The committee recommended that Congress should improve liability protections for those who develop and manufacture these products, to stimulate willingness to invest in new research and development for biowarfare protection. Giving Full Measure to Countermeasures also identifies other challengesâ€"such as the need for appropriate animal models and laboratories equipped with high-level biosafety protectionsâ€"that will require attention if DoD efforts to develop new medical countermeasures are to be successful.

This document contains the final report of the DSB study on Defense Acquisition Reform (Phase II). The Phase I report firmly acknowledged the need to adopt commercial practices as a way of doing business, and developed a set of reform initiatives designed to accelerate the required changes. The thrust of the Phase II effort was to further define these areas by examining specific industry segments, identifying specific combatant commands for increase responsibility in the requirements process, and further identification of the barriers to the adoption of commercial practices. The Task Force concludes that: mature jet engines, microelectronics, software, and space systems can and should be procured and supported in a fully commercial environment; USACOM and CENTCOM should be given increased technical cadres to further their capability to participate in the requirements process; and it is feasible to eliminate may of the barriers to adoption of commercial practices without sacrificing the public trust in spending public funds.

An expert explains why the security needs of the twenty-first century require a transformation of the defense industry of the twentieth century. New geopolitical realities—including terrorism, pandemics, rogue nuclear states, resource conflicts, insurgencies, mass migration, economic collapse, and cyber attacks—have created a dramatically different national-security environment for America. Twentieth-century defense strategies, technologies, and industrial practices will not meet the security requirements of a post-9/11 world. In Democracy's Arsenal, Jacques Gansler describes the transformations needed in government and industry to achieve a new, more effective system of national defense. Drawing on his decades of experience in industry, government, and academia, Gansler argues that the old model of ever-increasing defense expenditures on largely outmoded weapons systems must be replaced by a strategy that combines a healthy economy, effective international relations, and a strong (but affordable) national security posture. The defense industry must remake itself to become responsive and relevant to the needs of twenty-first-century security.

Globalization-the integration of the political, economic and cultural activities of geographically and/or nationally separated peoples-is not a discernible event or challenge, is not new, but it is accelerating. More importantly, globalization is largely irresistible. Thus, globalization is not a policy option, but a fact to which policymakers must adapt. Globalization has accelerated as a result of many positive factors, the most notable of which include: the collapse of communism and the end of the Cold War; the spread of capitalism and free trade; more rapid and global capital flows and more liberal financial markets; the liberalization of communications; international academic and scientific collaboration; and faster and more efficient forms of transportation. At the core of accelerated global integration-at once its principal cause and consequence-is the information revolution, which is knocking down once-formidable barriers of physical distance, blurring national boundaries and creating cross-border communities of all types.