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. G. RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS 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. ILLUSTRATIVE BUDGET.-RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS FOR IMPROVED INTERNATIONAL S. & T. PLANNING AND PROGRAM REVIEW IN DEPARTMENT OF STATE FISCAL YEAR 1980 IV. COORDINATION AND OVERSIGHT 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. A. MODALITIES OF COORDINATION AND OVERSIGHT 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 White House machinery can initiate appropriate inter-agency study and, if required, carry the matter on for Presidential decision. In the provision of foreign policy guidance and information, the State Department distributes telegrams and airgrams originating at foreign posts to interested Washington agencies. Research reports are similarly distributed and significant policy changes and initiatives are subjected to a variety of formal and informal interagency clearance processes. These systems perform the necessary communication function, although there are difficulties. Distribution lists tend to favor agencies with which State interacts the most, for example, Defense, Commerce, Treasury, Agriculture. Sometimes legitimate agency interest is not perceived; in other cases developments may not be fully or adequately communicated because of their sensitivity or a lack of awarenes of their implications. Improvement can be made in this area. The formal mechanisms for transmittal by State of foreign policy guidance and information to other Washington agencies are well established, and, when specific agency programs are identified, they can be fairly effective. The flow of this kind of information is institutionalized and relatively easy to adapt to changing needs or priorities. Even where systematic arrangements exist, however, problems of information management arise relating to volume, economy, sensitivity, and usefulness to the potential end-user. While the institutionalized provision of foreign policy information and guidance can work reasonably well where the linkages between an activity and its foreign policy consequences are strong, this is not always the case where international science and technology activities are concerned. The implications of foreign policy developments for specific activities may not be fully recognized and failures to get the right information to the right people do occur, both in the distribution of messages by State and in their internal use by agencies. Large departments and agencies may not distribute foreign policy information to all internal units that need it. Thus, a telegram indicating a potentially significant change in the U.S. relationship with a given country may not get beyond the international affairs division in a given agency. While the agency leadership may be aware of the development and take it into account in its planning and operational thinking, program managers needing the information may not get it. This is a problem which will be difficult to resolve fully, although increased attention to it by both State and other agencies would help. For example, State should try to note implications for overseas science and technology activities of domestic agencies as clearly as possible in its messages. For their part, other agencies may need to reexamine their internal information distribution systems. Beyond this, there are several kinds of information needed to engage in well coordinated international science and technology activities. Obviously, there needs to be information available about existing activities and especially agreements-with each country and multilateral or international organization. Such information has not been available in the past and a practical system is needed to assure its ready availability to all agencies. Each agency should be able to find out what the totality of U.S. activities in science and technology are in a given country where it is contemplating a project. There is also a need for information about major foreign science and technology activities. The setting of priorities for reporting of various kinds from our foreign posts has presented difficulties for both State and other agencies. For some subjects-for example, trade finance and economies highly structured, formal interagency mechanisms are used to establish basic reporting requirements and relative prioritiesfor example, the comprehensive economic reporting program and the economic alert reporting lists. In other areas, more informal means are used. Careful consideration now needs to be given to requirements in the science and technology area. Another area where more information is urgently needed is at the initial phase of program planning. It is essential that State and the technical agencies learn of each others' plans at a sufficiently early stage to provide the input required to assure a well conceived and coordinated program. Field-Washington coordination-communications An important part of the Secretary of State's coordinating and oversight role is his formal responsibility for management of communication with foreign governments and with our posts abroad. The State Department's operation of telegraphic communications between Washington and the field enables all agencies to communicate rapidly and securely with officials overseas while helping to insure that Ambassadors and other senior officials are aware of major activities of other agencies in foreign countries. Some agencies use their own communications channels to their representatives abroad and there is a certain amount of private communication where sensitive matters are under discussion. Where this occurs agencies should coordinate significant policy messages with State. In the field Chiefs of Mission have, and should use, the Presidential authority to insure that they are informed about other agency activities. Science attachés The science attachés assigned to our major posts abroad are often the principal point of contact between our Embassies and foreign scientific and technical communities. They are also the principal point of contact at our posts for many of the technical agencies in Washington. Whether in representing U.S. policies and interests to the foreign science community or participating in the management of visits or engaging in other activities, the science attachés clearly have a coordinating role which should be fully used. To a considerable extent their contribution to coordination depends on the effectiveness of the backstopping they receive from Washington. Responsibility for this support is in OES, which is acting to establish a small science attaché support office to enhance the Department's capability to make optimum use of our science attachés. As noted earlier, there is a need to develop agreed criteria for reporting by science attachés; this office will work with other bureaus to insure that these criteria adequately reflect international science and technology concerns. Mechanisms for coordination relating to development assistance Science and technology cooperation and assistance have held a significant place in the development assistance programs of AID. Such activities as cooperative research and support of indigenous technical institutions are frequently an integral part of AID's project assistance programs. In addition to drawing on its own technical resources, AID also funds numerous projects carried out by the technical agencies. Coordination of development assistance activities including programs involving science and technology, is carried out through the Development Coordination Committee (DCC) and by its specialized subcommittees. The DCC coordinating processes and those described elsewhere in this report are mandated by separate legislation and reflect overlapping U.S. interests. Through their interaction U.S. policies affecting the needs of developing countries will be harmonized with other foreign policy objectives, global issues, security and economic interests. The operation of these two processes will be closely interrelated. The proposed Foundation for International Technological Cooperation (FITC) represents a new and innovative approach to the problem of mobilizing science and technology for development. The primary purpose of the Foundation will be to improve the availability and application of technology to problems of development, and to expand knowledge and skills needed to meet these problems. To serve this purpose, the Foundation would work with developing countries to improve their scientific and technological capabilities and to address with them critical problems of development and global concern. The Foundation may also have a responsibility for coordinating U.S. Government activity in this area. Use of the budgetary process Early awareness of the international activities which may have important foreign policy implications may be possible only through access to the planning and budgetary systems of a number of agencies. OMB, of course, has an overall coordination role which encompass all agencies and functions. The State Department is now consulted by many agencies as they develop programs which include significant international activities, for example, with the Department of Defense. In a few selected cases, normally acting under the direction of the NSC staff, arrangements have been made to review a portion of another agency's budget in order to provide foreign policy input, for example, with the Department of Energy (see appendix F). Such reviews have proved extremely beneficial in these areas, and State will study with OSTP, NSC, and OMB other potential areas of significant foreign policy concern for appropriate review. Use of the clearance process The most common method for obtaining the views of elements of the foreign policy and scientific and technical communities about plans and policy developments that may affect them is the circulation of documents for either formal or informal clearance. Though time consuming, this coordinating process is generally effective. The promulgation of procedures to implement section 708, title VII of Public Law 95-426 (Case Act amendment re advance consultation on all international agreements) will help fill a gap in information available to assure adequate coordination and to assess the foreign policy impact of agency plans. These procedures as drafted include provision for agencies to provide the Department of State, |