Japanese/ US space budget comparison

frjlr@... (Charles Radley wrote)...

>The question is, does NASA spend more money and/or effort into things which
>will get us to the High Frontier than NASDA/ISAS ? i.e. things which are
>interesting and useful. That is a much more difficult question to
>answer.
>
>Cleary the vast majority of the money NASA spends and the "stuff" NASA puts
>into orbit, are useless pork which contribute nothing to getting us to the
>high frontier. Can we say the same things about NASADA and ISAS
>?....possibly to some extent, but nothing like the scale of NASA.
>
>I submit that the PERCENTAGE of money NASDA/ISAS spends on USEFUL things is
>a lot higher than NASA, although I really have no quantitative data to
>support that, I do not know much about the breakdown of NASDA/ISAS
>expenditures.
>
>My intuition is that expenditures of NASA and ISAS/NASDA on useful things
>is pretty close. The nice thing about NASADA/ISAS is that they are a lot
>smaller than NASA, so do not have anything like as much overhead and
>beurocracy, so is probably a more pleasant environment to work in, and
>hence probably more productive per dollar.
>
>The question still remains unanswered, and hence is an interesting one.

Hmm.. I'm surprised no one answered this, or pointed to a source of
data.. Just as a point of comparison:

Year 2000 budget for Japanese space program was about $1.9 B (the
"about" has to do with relative exchange rates), including both NASDA
and ISAS. The budget breaks down roughly as
10% space science
11% space transportation
18% Space Station
25% Earth Observation
9% Microgravity and Commercial research
11% Telecommunications
16% Other

In the US, including just the US civil space program, the total
budget was around $13.6 B, about 9X higher than Japan. (Note, this
does not include commercial or DoD expenditures). The breakout is
20% space science
25% space transportation
17% Space station
15% Earth Observation
2% Microgravity and Commercial research
4% Telecommunications
17% Other

This is from the Aug 2001 "Aerospace America" Magazine (the non-
technical publication of the AIAA).

A couple of things to note in this -- the percentages are
surprisingly similar in many areas. However, some areas like
Microgravity and commercial research (including research directly
supporting commercial ventures), the Japanese and US expenditures are
roughly the same level, since the US total is 9X that of the Japan
budget total (2% x 9 = 18%). One of the differences is that research
directly supporting commercial activities is much more frowned upon
in the US, whereas this is more acceptable in Japan. Similarly,
Japan places a higher premium upon Earth Resources for oceanographic
investigation (to support the fishing industry), whereas in the US,
this is less emphasized overall, and is supported through private
industry somewhat more than through government research (including
ventures like Ikonos, Digital Globe, Orb Image, etc.)

The US also spends quite a bit more on space science, both as a
percentage in absolute numbers -- roughly 20X as much in total. Space
Transportation in the US is higher, as driven by the Space Shuttle,
which I would note will also be used by NASDA for their ISS work, as
well as some HTV flights (about 1 every 3 years, if memory serves).

Which one of these budget has a greater "PERCENTAGE of money spent on
USEFUL things" is left up to the reader. I'm not sure where to put
things like space science and commercial research.

Charles also said ...
>The nice thing about NASADA/ISAS is that they are a lot smaller than NASA,
>so do not have anything like as much overhead and beurocracy, so is
>probably a more pleasant environment to work in, and hence probably more
>productive per dollar.

Hmm.. from my understanding the overhead and support budgets are in
that "other"category, so to first order both organizations are about
the same in overhead. From my admittedly limited direct experience,
Japanese aerospace organizations have much more bureaucracy and close
control of their workers, and typically have somewhat worse working
conditions. They get more "paper" out of each employee, but usually
not more work and definitely not more new knowledge. Their system
works, but is even more hierarchical and bureaucratic than NASA (NASA
at least has a tradition and some cultural acceptance of mavericks
and breaking through the system to get things done). Is this more
pleasant? Hmm.... YMMV...