1752 



was attributed such weaknesses of the bilateral science agreements as- 

 "undersubscribed rates of participation by U.S. scientists or lower 

 quaUty scientific participation. . . ." More generally, the study suggests 

 that ". . . bilateral scientific and technological links alone may no 

 longer be sufficient in a world increasingly interdependent in harness- 

 ing the fruits of science and technology and in solving the problems 

 they generate." Knezo gives it as the opinion of one author, Victor 

 Basiuk, that the absence of multilateral cooperative scientific relation- 

 ships with Europe imperils transatlantic security. On a larger scale, 

 Emilio Q. Daddario was quoted as urging a broad international con- 

 sensus on science policy.^** 



And the study concludes, mentioning the Organization for Economic 

 Cooperation and Development, the United Nations, and UNESCO, 

 with the suggestion that ". . . it may be to the common advantage 

 of science, U.S. foreign policy, and international cooperative 

 science policy for policjnnakers to consider incorporating some U.S. 

 science and technology exchange programs into these same cooperative 

 international mechanisms." ^^® 



ISSUE five: brain drain 



It is interesting that the international movement of technically 

 trained people, although clearly of deep concern to many govern- 

 ments, does not appear to have been the subject of either bilateral or 

 multilateral agreement among nations. Perhaps the main reason for 

 this apparent neglect is that except in totalitarian states where close 

 control is exercised over emigration, movement of persons is regarded 

 as a right of individual freedom; and, of course, in the case of the 

 Soviet Union, the interest of other nations in the emigration of persons 

 from that country has been disallowed as an "internal" matter. 



Dr. Whelan's comprehensive assessment in this study identifies the 

 many "pull" and "push" factors that motivate movement of scien- 

 tists from one country to another. Most of these are matters beyond 

 the reach of international agreements, bilateral or multilateral. 

 However, as the study makes clear, the analysis of brain drain and 

 the measurement of its consequences is a legitimate subject for multi- 

 lateral study, although probably not appropriate for bilateral agree- 

 ment except in unusual circumstances. It is a conclusion of the author 

 that a better understanding of the measures and consequences of 

 brain drain could motivate national action to improve adverse con- 

 ditions or differences in opportunity for personal advancement that 

 encourage trained people to move to other countries. At the same 

 time, multilateral — and in the case of the less developed countries, 

 regional — action is needed to support certain efforts which are beyond 

 the means of individual countries, as in the establishment of regional 

 science and technology centers geared to the low-technology problems 

 of development. 



3»8 Ibid., pp. 1023, 1032-1033. 

 399 Ibid., p. 975. 



