Page images

For this it looks to the domestic agencies and technically qualified outside consultants. This activity is also important for long-range planning since such planning can only be built on reliable knowledge about existing programs and activities.

The evaluation process described above must be closely related to the resource allocation process. Domestic agency funding decisions are based on an assessment of the scientific and technical merits of a given program and its priority within available resources. Where international science and technology agreements need to be undertaken for primarily foreign policy purposes, alternative funding arrangements will be examined.


An essential component of long-term planning will be the effort to anticipate new developments in domestic technology which could have important implications for future U.S. foreign policy.

Scientific and technical staffs of domestic agencies working on domestic programs together with the agencies' international staffs are often able to identify opportunities for international cooperation. But, there does not seem to be a systematic effort to identify emerging new technologies and to explore their implications for U.S. foreign policy objectives. The establishment of the FITC can make a major contribu

tion here.


Knowledge of foreign developments in science and technology can make an important contribution to the strength of U.S. domestic programs, as well as providing information of significance for foreign policy.

We learn about important new foreign developments through a variety of means. Exchanges in the private sector-for example, scientist to scientist and international scientist gatherings are generally considered adequate to keep the United States abreast of significant developments in the area of basic science. On the technology side, technical agencies seem able generally to stay abreast of foreign scientific and technological developments in their own fields.

The industrial and commercial sectors have less confidence in the adequacy of information. Better communication between Government and industry would be helpful in this regard.

U.S. collection assets in science and technology historically have tended to focus on military-related areas, and this has become even more prevalent because of resource constraints. Principal collectors of nonmilitary information are the U.S. scientific attachés who, because of their small number and the variety of tasks assigned to them,

It is worth noting that, whereas no organic ties exist between the Department of State and the domestic agencies, AID operates under executive authority delegated to the Secretary of State, who has statutory responsibility for continuous supervision and general direction of economic assistance. Consequently, relations between the Department of State and AID are different in character from those between State and the domestic agencies.

have had limited capabilities to report on significant foreign developments. The domestic agencies, on the other hand, have become through their activities abroad an important source of information on foreign developments in their respective areas.


Long-term planning

1. The newly created OES policy assessment staff will develop procedures to improve the flow of information on planning and objectives between State and other agencies. It will seek ways of involving other agencies activity in the work of this office and explore the establishment of a fellowship program with the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

2. The Department of State will seek to broaden its utilization of outside expertise by: (a) Creating subject to approval in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, a Department of State Public Advisory Committee for Science and Technology, (b) increasing the use of studies and analyses prepared by scientists and other specialists in the nongovernmental community, and (c) studying the feasibility of alternative approaches, such as a contractual relationship with a Rand-type institution.

3. The Department of State will make use of CISET as a forum for the review and evaluation of long-range planning which has broad interagency significance. The Department will ask agencies with major international programs to inform the Chairman of CISET of steps they could take to strengthen joint long-range planning activities.

4. The Department of State will seek to establish small pilot programs with a few key domestic agencies where programs affect foreign policy objectives to explore possible approaches to systematic joint long-range planning activities. As part of this process, an effort will be made to identify the foreign policy implications of selected agency activities and relate these to foreign policy objectives and priorities in a country and regional framework. The effort will also try to identify emerging technologies and explore their implications for U.S. foreign policy objectives, as well as to promote joint evaluation of ongoing international scientific and technological activities. These programs will consist initially of small state-technical agency task forces to identify and analyze alternative approaches to meeting the above objectives.

5. The Department will work closely with the appropriate staff agencies of the Congress, such as the General Accounting Office (GAO), the Science Policy Research Division of the Congressional Research Service (CRS) and the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment (OTA). The Department will also draw upon the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, the Institute of Medicine, the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and similar organizations as possible sources of aid in planning and evaluation.

Program initiation and funding

6. Each domestic agency engaged in major international activities will be encouraged to develop an overall strategy with appropriate criteria and clearly defined objectives for its international activities.

This will be undertaken on a pilot basis with a few agencies selected for the potential impact of their activities on foreign policy objectives. 7. Criteria to measure new initiatives against U.S. foreign policy objectives should be established on a selective country-by-country basis, and where appropriate, regional basis. OES, in cooperation with the NSC. OSTP, OMB, as well as relevant technical agencies, and other concerned Bureaus in the Department of State should take responsibility for developing such criteria.

8. No new program should be initiated for which funding is not existent or clearly attainable. It is important, therefore, that the planning process establish a solid framework of objectives in a timely manner and identify financial and manpower questions at the earliest stages.

9. State will work with OSTP, OMB, AID, FITC, and other interested agencies to develop a policy for funding international science and technology programs. This will be based on a careful study of the following categories:

-funding international activities undertaken primarily in support of domestic agency missions;

-funding international activities of foreign policy significance; -funding as part of development assistance;

10. Consideration will be given to a periodic conference among the agencies engaged in major international science and technology activities, to occur at an appropriate point during the annual budget cycle, which could provide information on major agency international program elements. The conference, called by the Department of State, would seek to insure rational planning and avoid program duplication. Program review

11. A systematic evaluation and review of selected U.S. Government international science and technology activities and agreements on an interagency basis is needed. This should include the domestic science. and technology agencies as well as the foreign policy agencies engaged in development aid. The proposed Foundation for International Technological Cooperation (FITC) could play a key role in this respect. 12. Each science and technology agreement should include specific plans for interim evaluations and periodic reviews and should address the matter of termination either by explicit provision for automatic termination or a clear expression of mutual expectation of termination in order to avoid easy renewal.

13. Reviews, at a minimum, should be conducted when an agreement is scheduled for renewal or termination or when political circumstances warrant a reevaluation. The annual report called for in section 503(b) of the statute should summarize the reviews carried out during the reporting year and their results.

14. The Department of State will provide more assistance to its overseas posts in the preparation of field evaluations. Such assistance will include provision of explicit guidance, consultation between the Department and field science and technology officers, and regional conferences for post science and technology officers.

Impact of new technologies

15. A key function of the OES functional offices and the policy assessment staff will be to maintain close contact with the governmental


and private science and technology sectors in exchange of information about new technologies and to assess their impact on foreign policy. A program to carry out this function will be developed in OEC and will include initially a pilot program designed to examine foreign policy implications of new technologies.

16. The Department of State will ask domestic agencies to review, and where necessary, strengthen the relationship between elements of their agencies engaged in technology development and those concerned with the planning of international activities. Each such department and agency will be requested to provide the chairman of CISET its action on this recommendation for the followup report to the Congress.

17. The CISET framework will be used as appropriate to address the question of early identification of new technology with foreign policy implications. Such activities as programmatic reviews should utilize program personnel and resources of relevant technical agencies. Monitoring of foreign science and technology

18. Reporting requirements will be periodically reviewed to insure that they adequately reflect the priority interests of the Government for information on foreign science and technology developments. OES will be the focal point for preparing, updating, and circulating reporting priorities to science counselors and attachés abroad with the concurrence of the geographic bureaus of the Department and in consultation with other agencies.

19. The Department will review the workload of science and technology officers posted abroad to assure that the requirements for science and technology information in connection with U.S. foreign policy goals are taken into account.

20. OES will work more closely with U.S. Government organizations possessing a research and analysis capability, such as the Central Intelligence Agency and the Bureau of Intelligence and Research in the Department of State, in the identification and analysis of foreign science and technology developments and science policy.


The recommendations contained in this report will be implemented in a phased way. In many cases they will be tested on a pilot basis. Thus, the initial stage of implementing the provisions of title V can be carried out within existing personnel and budgetary resources.

The time available for the preparation of this report has not permitted the development of complete proposals for operating under the new mandate contained in the act. Therefore, we do not have a firm basis on which to project estimates of personnel and funding requirements. However, the following chart provides illustrative estimates of resources which might be required to carry out some of the activities discussed in the preceding pages. These estimates are not based on completed assessments of the scope of activities to be undertaken. As we gain experience and develop firm plans for implementing the provisions of title V, we will prepare the related estimates of resource requirements. These will be considered in the established executive branch budget review process and presented to the Congress in accordance with the regular authorization and appropriation procedures.


[blocks in formation]


The rapid expansion in numbers and the greatly increased scope and importance of international scientific and technological activities has required adaptation of existing governmental coordinating relationships and modalities and the creation of some new ones. The task is complex. It involves the gamut of North/South and East/West problems and the impact of global issues on our economic, political, and security relationships with other States and international organizations. In recognition of this, section 503 (a) of Public Law 95-426 requires that the Secretary of State be informed and consulted before any agency takes any major action, primarily involving science and technology, with respect to any foreign government or international organization. Section 504 places on the Secretary of State primary responsibility for coordination and oversight of such activities. The following describes the principal modalities through which the executive branch coordinates its efforts in its international science and technology activities. It identifies some of the difficulties and problems and lists measures which should lead to improved performance.


Information flow-Policy guidance

A fundamental requirement for effective cooperation is good communications; there must be a consciously designed system for assuring policy guidance and a flow of information between all concerned agencies and branches of Government. When problems arise requiring Presidential policy decisions, the existing NSC mechanism is used to obtain the required views from all affected agencies, to develop policy options and to take necessary implementing action. Similarly, when issnes affecting several agencies develop which may require policy adjustment-for example, those associated with technology transfer-the

« PreviousContinue »