fashions, forces, and interpretations, uncertainty 

 will continue about trends. 



The response of NOAA, as indicated above, 

 deals with the basic versus applied classification 

 problem. It also deals with other administration 

 problems in viewing barriers to optimum support. 

 For example: 

 The "optimum" level of support depends on 

 the management level at which the optimizing is 

 done. At the laboratory or research division, 

 the allocation for basic research may appear 

 quite inadequate but at higher levels this alloca- 

 tion may appear to be approximately optimum. 

 It depends on the legal, policy, budgetary, and 

 management constraints at the various levels. 

 In addition to the constraints internal to the 

 Federal Government, there are external con- 

 straints such as the number and quality of orga- 

 nizations competing for these researchers. The 

 optimum level of support therefore depends on 

 the constraints that are to be relaxed or 

 changed. 



An additional variable, or constraint, here is the 

 definition of basic research. NOAA support of 

 research into fundamental atmospheric process- 

 es and characteristics can be called applied re- 

 search because of NOAA's mission to improve 

 weather forecasts. In some other agency, such 

 as the National Science Foundation, the same 

 research may be called basic research because 

 it is considered to be an advancement of scien- 

 tific knowledge. 



Within budget constraints on the long term, it is 

 currently felt that NOAA has achieved a rea- 

 sonable balance among basic research, applied 

 research, and operations. On the short term, 

 funding can be a barrier to support of special 

 basic research programs that NOAA believes 

 should be pursued. Availability of the required 

 scientific capabilities can also be a barrier on 

 the short term. 



Research on Human Beings 



Recently, research vitally affecting human 

 beings and their condition has attracted attention. 

 Legislation, regulations, hearings, and related ac- 

 tions have been generated by desires to control 

 research using human subjects, including children, 

 prisoners,-* and patients. Similar attention has 

 been given to the protection of privacy of persons 



involved in research and research on the human 

 fetus. Just as the technology affecting abortion 

 and conception has brought birth control and 

 population questions to the level of intense public 

 debate in Government, so too these other avenues 

 of research stimulate debate regarding regulation. 



The concern here is whether these laws or regu- 

 lations have, in any way, become barriers or inhi- 

 bited basic research. The most restrictive act 

 (Section 213 of P. L. 93-348— The National Re- 

 search Act, 1974) prohibited "research conducted 

 or supported by the Department of Health, Edu- 

 cation and Welfare (HEW) in the United States or 

 abroad on a living human fetus, before or after 

 the induced abortion of the fetus, unless such re- 

 search is done for the purpose of assuring the 

 survival of such fetus." The act called for a Na- 

 tional Commission for the Protection of Human 

 Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research. 

 In the National Research Act creating the Com- 

 mission, support of research on the fetus was 

 prohibited for 4 months until the Commission 

 reported its recommendations. The Commission's 

 1975 report recommends application of a number 

 of restrictions on the conduct of such research.'' 

 The ethical issues considered by the Commission 

 are perplexing and complex. While the restrictions 

 on research apply only to federally funded work, 

 these federally established ethics or regulations 

 will undoubtedly apply to any work and inhibit a 

 variety of previous practices. Much earlier, in 

 1966, the Public Health Service required and NIH 

 issued regulations about the use of human sub- 

 jects. These regulations were stimulated by a his- 

 tory of misuse in behavioral research on human 

 subjects; this misuse also prompted the 1967 "Pri- 

 vacy and Behavioral Research" report of the 

 Office of Science and Technology.'' The regula- 

 tions required that organizations conducting re- 

 search using human subjects organize review 

 boards designed to protect human subjects in all 

 areas of research. It became mandatory that any 

 projects involving human beings were not eligible 

 for funding until approved by such boards. Now 

 agencies other than HEW, such as NSF and 

 ERDA, require similar review before funding 

 such projects. A recent study conducted by the 

 Survey Research Center at the University of Mi- 

 chigan for the National Commission reported that: 

 The existing review process was viewed more 

 favorably than unfavorably by most research 

 investigators and review committee members. 



"Reseurch Involving Prisoners, report of the National 

 Commission for the Protection of Human Sutijects of Biomed- 

 ical and Behavioral Research (HEW: Washington, 1976). 



^Report and Recomniendalions — Research on the Fetus. 

 HEW Publication No. (OS) 76-127 (HEW: Washington, 1976). 



^ Privacy and Behavioral Research, a report of the Executive 

 Office of the President, Office of Science and Technology. 

 February 1967 



BARRIERS TO OPTIMUM SUPPORT AND CONDUCT OF BASIC RESEARCH BY THE MISSION AGENCIES 287 



