1649 



sion also expressed concern over cuts which the program had suffered 

 in recent years as part of a general retrenchment occasioned by 

 budget and balance-of -payments problems. 



The author concludes her treatment of the Fulbright-Hays program 

 with some questions: 



Would the quality and effectiveness of scientific participation in the program 

 be improved if: (1) A science advisory apparatus were established in the Bureau 

 of Educational and Cultural Affairs or in the Committee on the Exchange of 

 Persons to provide for better coordination between the requirements of scientific 

 scholarship and diplomatic objectives? (2) the Bureau of Educational and Cultural 

 Affairs undertook more comprehensive information gathering on the program, 

 and sponsored more research and evaluation to improve program operations, 

 continuity, and long-range in-country planning? and (3) field responsibilities were 

 shifted from the cviltural affairs officer to an official more familiar with the require- 

 ments of educational and scientific exchange, such as an educational officer or 

 science attache? ^"^ 



Further, in reference to the related problem of attracting qualified 

 and needed personnel in certain technical fields to serve overseas, 

 especially in the less developed countries — she asks : 



In view of the difficulties encountered in finding scientific and technical per- 

 sonnel to serve in the developing countries, would the objectives of the Fulbright- 

 Hays program in these areas be better served if special inducements were made tc 

 obtain qualified personnel willing to serve in technical assistance capacities; or if 

 foreign government expectations for technical assistance were satisfied through 

 other U.S. Government programs? '^^ 



NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION PROGRAMS "^ 



Most of the Nation's programs for sending U.S. nongovernmental 

 scientists abroad are supported by the National Science Foundation 

 and administered either directly by the Foundation or by the National 

 Academy of Sciences with NSF funds. These programs have grown 

 in both number and importance since the Foundation was established 

 in 1950; they are responsible for sending more senior nongovernmental 

 scientific and technical personnel abroad than any other U.S. pro- 

 grams. (In the fiscal year 1970, for example, 886 recipients of NSF 

 travel awards carried out activities in 75 countries for a total of 3,214 

 workdays; State Department programs sent 293 nongovernmental 

 scientists and technicians to 64 countries for a total of 1,781 workdaj^s.) 

 NSF obligations for international scientific activities totaled about 

 $118 million in the fiscal year 1974; no cost breakout for programs 

 which send nongovernmental technical personnel abroad is available 

 but most NSF international activities involve exchanges. 



The purposes of NSF overseas programs are as diverse as their 

 geographic distribution is widespread. 



Some programs support the accumulation of information to advance American 

 science, or science for its own merits; some promote educational advancement of 

 American and foreign scholars; some facilitate international cooperative research 

 programs; and some serve political objectives through bilateral scientific com- 

 munication. Those programs are increasing in number and importance, with 

 respect to U.S. commitments for both science and foreign affairs.'"* 



»i /bid., p. 915. 



'"2 Ibid. 



"3 This section focusps mainly on the section entitled: "Conclusions: Some Illustrative Questions of 

 Policy" at the end of the (iti page treatment of the subject in the basic study. The reader is referred to the 

 latter (vol . II, pp. 'Jlii-'.i81) for details of the varied NSl' exchange programs themselves. 



"< Knezo, op. cit., p. [il'J. 



