670 



— The question of international technology transfer — the delivery and applica- 

 tion of scientific and technological knowledge, methods, and techniques fronL 

 one nation to another — is one which the United States should give very 

 searching consideration in its formulation of a more effective science policy. 



— . . . It is unlikely that indiscriminate efforts to transfer technology will 

 be effective ; technology, to be useful, must be related properly to local 

 environment and cultural and economic restrictions. 



— . . . Much greater emphasis must be placed on the transfer of research 

 and development capabilities, rather than of technology itself. 



— . . . An enlarged program of educational assistance in areas of science and 

 technology should be made an essential element in our foreign aid program."* 



President Nixon's message on foreign policy for the 1970s made 

 reference to two studies of foreign assistance. One of these, conducted 

 by a task force under the chairmanship of Rudolph A, Peterson, presi- 

 dent of the Bank of America, dealt exclusively with U.S. aid policy. 

 The other, a report by the Commission on International Development, 

 chaired by Lester B. Pearson, former Prime Minister of Canada, was 

 made to the President of the International Bank for Reconstruction 

 and Development (World Bank) and discussed generally what the 

 rich countries and the poor countries ought to do to help the poor 

 countries. 



REVIEW OF U.S. TECHNICAL AID PROGRAM 



The Peterson Report, March 4, 1970, told the President that "For 

 the first time in history, it appears feasible to approach this world 

 problem [i.e., international development] on a worldwide basis." The 

 report called for a less prominent and obtrusive role for the United 

 States in extending aid to developing countries. It urged greater 

 partnership with developing countries, with the aided countries carry- 

 ing out more of the strategic planning. It urged repeatedly that bi- 

 lateral assistance should be reduced and multilateral assistance in- 

 creased. The goal should be the achievement by the aided countries of 

 a self-sustaining posture of development. To implement the proposed 

 change in emphasis of the U.S. aid program, the task force recom- 

 mended the establishment of four institutions. These were (1) a U.S. 

 International Development Bank, (2) a U.S. International Develop- 

 ment Institute, (3) the Overseas Private Investment Corporation 

 (OPIC) which the task force noted had already been authorized by 

 the Congress, and (4) a U.S. International Development Council. 



The Peterson Report strongly emphasized the funding of aid, and 

 devoted less attention to the functional role of technology in the field 

 of foreign assistance. For example, the International Development 

 Council was proposed to correct an executive deficiency which the task 

 force described as follows : 



Presidential interests in international development are not adequately served 

 by existing decisionmaking machinery. International development does not re- 

 ceive enough emphasis in the determination of U.S. trade, investment, financial, 

 agricultural, and export-promotion policies. A number of departments and 

 agencies have competing interests and responsibilities in this general area, with 

 the result that too many isisues go to the President for resolution. Furthermore, 

 opportunities to take initiatives in policies toward developing countries are 

 sometimes lost. 



"* U.S. President's Task Force on Science Policy. "Science and Technology : Tools for 

 Progress." The report of the President's Task Force on Science Policy. April 1970. (Wash- 

 ington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1970), pages 40-42. 



