671 



The significance of technology in diplomatic relations generally^ 

 and with specific reference to the developing countries, has been sub- 

 stantially documented in the present study. Yet, the membership of 

 the proposed Council, as advanced by the Peterson Report, would 

 consist of the Secretaries of State, Treasury and Agriculture, the 

 President's Special Trade Representative, the President of the Export- 

 Import Bank, the Director of the Peace Corps, the President of the 

 (proposed) U.S. Development Bank, the Director of the (proposed) 

 U.S. International Development Institute, and the President of the 

 (pending) Overseas Private Investment Corporation. It does not ap- 

 pear that provision was made for a strong input from the scientific 

 and technological .sectors of the Government and its advisory system. 



The proposed U.S. International Development Institute would have 

 four principal areas of concern : ( 1 ) research on the population prob- 

 lem; (2) research at home and abroad on problems and teclmologies 

 of development, but emphasizing local institutions in developing coim- 

 tries; (3) training [and strengthening the training function in 

 developing countries] in vocational, commercial, agricultural, indus- 

 trial, scientific, and professional skills; and (4) support of social 

 development. The Institute would concentrate on a limited number 

 of specific problems, it would work principally and increasingly 

 through private channels, and it would seek to develop self-sustaining 

 and continuing programs in its field. 



In substantiation of the second area, research, the report said : 



New technologies are urgently needed to provide breakthroughs in a variety 

 of fields essential to broad-based development. They must be adapted to the needs 

 of the developing countries and related to programs and local institutions that 

 can ensure practical applications and evaluation of results. The successful com- 

 bination of the development of new seeds for rice and wheat, and the programs to 

 apply them, are a model. The United States should strongly support similar long- 

 range efforts in agriculture, health, education, and other fields through national, 

 regional, and international projects."^ 



The report gave some attention to the need for more coherence in 

 aid programs — 



(Bringing coherence to the work of international development organizations is 

 essential to the success of the new approach to foreign assistance we recommend. 

 The various international institutions do not now make up a system. A wide area 

 of overlapping and sometimes competing responsibility exists. The same is true 

 for the individual programs of the industrial countries. . . . Constructing an 

 effective international system and establishing international development pri- 

 orities in concert with others would do much to advance what must be a global 

 enterprise, (p. 26) 



However, in seeming contradiction with the above, the report said : 



The recommended program for reorganizing foreign assistance calls for much 

 smaller field representation than now exists. The [proposed] U.S. International 

 Development Bank and the [proposed] U.S. International Development Institute 

 will need regional representatives and in some cases country representatives, but 

 the principal operating decisions will be made in Washington, (p. 36) 



A succinct assessment of the Peterson Report, generally favorable, 

 was offered by John Franklin Campbell, formerly staff assistant to 

 the Under Secretary of State. He interpreted the report to signify 



i3« U.S. President's 'Task Force on International Development. "U.S. Foreign Assistance 

 in the 1970's : A New Anproach." Report to the President From the Task Force on Inter- 

 national Development. March 4, 1970. (Washington. U.S. Government Printing Office, 

 1970), especially pages 4, 29-30, and 34. (Peterson report.) 



