The domestic agency, in turn, benefits from the foreign policy perspective that Department of State officers can provide, or which their employees can obtain from a Washington or foreign assignment with the Department of State. The Department of State is studying staffing requirements to support a program of interagency exchanges in international science and technology.

The Department of State is examining the establishment of a program to familiarize ambassadors and other senior officers with the scientific and technological subjects most relevant to their overseas mission.

RESOURCE REQUIREMENTS

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. Under current administration budget and employment policies, any additional resource needs would have to be accommodated within the current budget planning levels of the Department of State. In addition, the recently enacted "Leach amendment" to the Civil Service Reform Act mandates statutory limitations on the total number of civilian employees in the executive branch, with the result that September 30, 1979 employment will be about 20,000 below the level estimated in the President's 1979 budget. Therefore, in the period ahead even small increases in any area become difficult or impossible without additional 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, we have provided illustrative estimates which 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.

II. INTRODUCTION

This report on science and technology in international affairs is submitted in accordance with section 504 (e) of the Public Law 95-426, the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 1979, which calls for a report "on the implementation of the responsibilities of the Secretary under this title." These responsibilities include "coordination and oversight with respect to all major science or science and technology agreements and activities between the United States and foreign countries, international organizations, or commissions of which the United States and one or more foreign countries are members." 1

A large number of U.S. Government agencies take part in these agreements and carry out these activities. Consequently, this report

1 The full text of title V ("Science, Technology, and American Diplomacy") of the statute is contained in appendix A.

T

has been prepared with the participation of these agencies-see appendix B-using the Committee on International Science, Engineering and Technology of the Federal Coordinating Council for Science, Engineering and Technology as the mechanism for coordination.

In addition, the Department of State officials responsible for the drafting of the report have consulted Members of Congress, their staff, prominent members of the nongovernmental science and technology community, leaders of industry, and U.S. embassies abroad.

The Department of State expresses its appreciation to all those who participated in the preparation of this report for their invaluable

assistance.

The Department of State's analysis of the provisions of Public Law 95-426 relating to science, technology, and foreign policy indicated that the impact of this legislation would be most strongly felt in three principal areas:

Long-term planning related to the interaction of science, technology, and foreign policy;

The procedures and mechanisms for the interagency coordination of international scientific and technology activities of the U.S. Government; and

The types of training and personnel procedures needed to support the implementation of the legislation.

The report is therefore divided into three sections, each dealing with one of the above topics. Each was felt to constitute a sufficiently well-defined cluster of issues to merit separate discussion in a separate section of the report. This separate treatment of the three themes should not obscure the close and manifold linkages between them.

The Department recognizes the importance of the existing institutions and modalities which have already been established to coordinate U.S. Government activities in international science and technology. The overall approach of this report is to use existing institutions to the maximum extent possible and to avoid duplicating functions that are already well performed elsewhere in the Government. The Development Coordinating Committee, for example, represents a functioning mechanism for approaching the developmentrelated issues addressed in this report. Full utilization of such institutions is vital to the effective discharge of the responsibilities set out in title V. Where new or revitalized mechanisms are needed, they should be introduced as part of a careful, phased approach initially concentrating on areas where foreign policy considerations are particularly important.

The emergence of science and technology as a major consideration of U.S. foreign policy is now widely acknowledged.3 Science and

2 See appendix C for a summary of the views of selected U.S. embassies and missions on issues related to title V.

Neither the statute nor this report attempts to state precise definitions of "science" and "technology." The report covers both science and technology, as they are commonly understood. The only areas which have been excluded are those relating to intelligence sources and methods (in accordance to section 503 (c) of Public Law 95-426) and those relating to specific military applications. The latter have been discussed in a number of reports to the Congress required by other legislation, including the August 1978 report on the impact of the transfer of military-related technology required by section 24 of the International Security Assistance Act of 1977.

It is recognized, however, that it is normally technology which is more closely linked with foreign policy. The maintenance of the historic commitment of the United States to the free exchange of scientific ideas and freedom of travel and expression for scientists is a basic assumption of this report.

technology are at the heart of the economic development process and of international trade; they are the key to meeting national security requirements, to satisfying the world's vastly increased demand for food and mineral resources and to pursuing the goals of nonproliferation and disarmament. While much international activity in science and technology is carried out by universities, professional associations, nongovernmental organizations and private industry, the Government is involved to a considerable extent in the funding of such programs, and, of course, Government regulations and policies clearly influence international activities of the private sector.

The international activities of the Government relating to science. and technology are now so extensive and varied that almost no department or agency is unaffected. In the last 20 years, new technical agencies have become major components of Government, deeply involved in the planning and initiation of both domestic and international programs of fundamental significance. The decision of President Carter to propose a Foundation for International Technological Cooperation demonstrates the importance which this administration assigns to science and technology as elements of international relations and has been fully taken into account in preparing this report.

With the widening circle of agencies involved and the growing complexity of interaction, it is not surprising that new problems have arisen. The requirements of public policy and of efficient use of our resources demand that serious efforts be undertaken to assure a reasonable consistency between our foreign policy and other national goals. Indeed it would be a mistake to draw a sharp distinction between domestic and international aspects of science and technology. The National Science, Engineering and Technology Policy and Priorities Act of 1976 lists as the first priority goal for U.S. science and technology,

"fostering leadership in the quest for international peace and progress toward human freedom, dignity and well-being by enlarging the contributions of American scientists and engineers to the knowledge of man and his universe, by making discoveries of basic science widely available at home and abroad, and by utilizing technology in support of United States national and foreign policy goals."

This statutory language serves as a reminder that domestic and foreign policy considerations are closely entwined. Domestic agricultural research, for example, can crucially affect the world's food supply as well as the U.S. balance of payments and the prosperity of American farmers. Energy research is critical to world stability and U.S. security as fossil fuel reserves become increasingly inadequate to cover growing demands. Space technologies have provided spinoff benefits in many fields, some of them with strong foreign as well as domestic policy implications.

Recognition of the importance of science and technology to foreign policy is not new to U.S. foreign policymakers. Both congressional

A catalogue of such activities is in appendix D. The activities are carried out underGovernment bilateral or multilateral agreements or, in many cases, under agreements between U.S. agencies and their foreign counterparts. A partial listing of such agreements, showing their enormous diversity and scope, is in appendix E.

and executive branch concerns have generated a series of studies of the relationship between science, technology, and foreign policy, of which the Berkner Report commissioned in 1949 was the precursor. Among more recent studies, those by the Murphy Commission, by Dr. T. Keith Glennan, and the report prepared by Dr. Franklin Huddle of the Congressional Research Service for Chairman Zablocki of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs are indispensable for understanding the issues raised in this report. Recently an interagency panel studied the nature and extent of U.S. bilateral relationships in science and technology and how they are initiated and carried out. The findings of this panel have influenced significantly the content of this title V report and it is our hope that they can soon be made available to Congress and the public.

The Department of State views this report as only the first step in what we intend to be a continuing process of improving our ability to apply national resources in science and technology in support of our foreign policy goals. There are several complex issues raised by title V, such as the establishment of more definite criteria for evaluating international scientific and technological activities which require further interagency study. The Department intends to submit a followup report to the Congress in about 6 to 9 months-June to September 1979 in which these and similar issues will be dealt with more fully and a status report provided on the actions and recommendations set forth in this report. Plans for the preparation of the first Presidential report to the Congress, stipulated in section 503 (b) of the act will also be described in the followup report.

III. LONG-TERM PLANNING

A. INTRODUCTION

In section 501 (4) of Public Law 95-426, Congress has stated that, "the effective use of science and technology in international relations for the mutual benefit of all countries requires the development and use of the skills and methods of long-range planning.' More broadly, Public Law 94-282, the National Science and Technology Policy, Organization and Priorities Act of 1976 calls for the maintenance of,

"central policy planning elements in the executive branch which assist Federal agencies in . . . anticipating future concerns to which science and technology can contribute and devising strategies for the conduct of science and technology for such purposes." It is clear that Congress intends long-range planning to be an essential component of policy formulation relating to the interaction of science, technology, and foreign policy.

Two other sections of Public Law 95-426 are relevant to long-range planning, and, indeed, to the entire range of issues dealt with in this report. In section 502 (1) the Congress has stated that,

"technological opportunities, impacts, changes, and threats should be anticipated and assessed, and appropriate measures should be implemented to influence such technological developments in ways beneficial to the United States and other countries."

This language underlines the intimate relationship between planning and evaluation. While the latter must equally be a part of ongoing operations, it is discussed principally in this section of the report. Finally, section 501 (3) of the statute states that:

"... in the formulation, implementation and evaluation of the technological aspects of U.S. foreign policy, the U.S. Government should seek out and consult with both public and private industrial, academic, and research institutions concerned with modern technology."

While the primary focus of this report is on activities carried out within the executive branch, the Department of State appreciates. the fundamental role played by the private sector in furthering the interests of the Nation in international science and technology and, as noted below, intends to devote increased attention to exchanges of information and ideas with the nongovernmental scientific and technological community.

B. CURRENT LONG-TERM PLANNING RELEVANT TO INTERNATIONAL SCIENCE. AND TECHNOLOGY ACTIVITIES

Science and technology are now widely accepted as significant components of U.S. diplomacy. They are, for example, important elements of the North/South dialog, East/West relations and relations with our allies. It is also recognized that systematic, long-term planning is essential if we are to insure that the international activities of the U.S. Government are conducted in a manner which insures maximum benefit to the United States and other countries.

Technical agency long-range planning

It is difficult to characterize the nature and level of long-term planning activities in international science and technology in view of the diversity of the various agencies which play a role in this area. In general, domestic agencies do not have staffs uniquely devoted to this aspect of long-range planning; rather they integrate the activities of program planners and project managers and international affairs staff personnel for long-term planning purposes. For example, NASA in its overall planning activities develops 5-year plans in each of its program offices. In this connection, NASA's International Affairs Division works closely with the key officials in each of the program offices to provide advice on the international implications of proposed projects and to identify opportunities for international cooperation.

Substantial research and analysis is undertaken by agencies and their contractors and consultants which bears on longer term U.S. objectives in the foreign policy area to which science and technology are relevant; however, it tends to be fragmentary and ad hoc. It generally is not undertaken in a framework designed to deal explicitly with longer range foreign policy problems.

Interagency planning

Recent interagency examination of critical problem areas, such as those carried out under the aegis of the National Security Council and the Office of Science and Technology Policy-for example, technology

5 Inless stipulated otherwise, whenever "international activities", or "agencies" are mentioned in this report, they are understood to be those of the U.S. Government.