920 



Dr. Leland Haworth, Director of the NSF, described the scope of 

 international science activities in testimony before the Subcommittee 

 •on Science, Research, and Development of the House Committee on 

 Science and Astronautics in 1965. According to Dr. Haworth, the 

 Foundation's programs could be subsumed under four general headings: 



1. Cooperative programs like IGY, International Year of the Quiet Sun, 

 International Indian Ocean Expedition, and the Antarctic Program. 



2. Support of research that can be done better in a particular foreign country 

 or that can take advantage of certain geographical and environmental aspects of 

 that area. 



3. Support of science and science education in the developing countries which 

 are in support of foreign policy objectives. The activity is normally carried out 

 on behalf of the Agency for International Development. 



4. The "gray area" where support of foreign scientific activities falls in between 

 a normal extension of the Foundation's mission and the obvious support of foreign 

 policy objectives. "2 , 



Each of these areas, the Director continued, must be considered on 

 its own merits in terms of whether or not it should be properly a 

 Foundation activity and if so, what the extent of the involvement 

 should be. ^^^ 



Third: The broadening of NSF responsibility for formulating 

 international science policies and for taking joint initiative with the 

 State Department in designing programs to exploit foreign and 

 international cooperative opportunities presented by science and 

 technology. Testifying on this point before the Subcommittee on 

 Science, Research, and Development, Herman Pollack, Director, 

 Bureau of International Scientific and Technological Affairs, Depart- 

 ment of State, noted that proposed legislation — 



. . . reflects [the committee's interest in clarifying] a more active role for the 

 NSF in international affairs and support of international scientific activities. 

 "The Department of State welcomes this intent and would welcome a more active 

 -Tole for NSF in the international field. "< 



Pollack suggested that the Foundation should be authorized to 

 engage in international scientific activities for their own sake and 

 "for reasons other than whether [they] promote , . . science or science 

 education in the United States . . . ." An expansion of authority would 

 enable the Foundation and the State Department to: 



. . . seize opportunities in the so-called gray areas which thus far have proven 

 difficult to act upon. Thus it should make possible the inauguration of new bilateral 

 and multilateral scientific relationships which could prove to be of overriding 

 advantage to the Unites States. •'* 



Summarizing its 1965 investigations of the Foundation's international 

 scientific activities and responsibilities, the House Subcommittee 

 reported : 



National foreign policy recognizes the Nation's scientific activities as an 

 ^important element in foreign relations. Yet the role of the NSF is still to be 

 -crystallized.'*'* 



Expansion o^ NSF Authority jor International Exchange Programs 



Subsequently, Rep. Emilio Q. Daddario, Chairman of the Sub- 

 committee on Science, Research and Development, introduced 



'" U.S., Congress, House, Committee on Science and Astronautics. Qovernment and Science: Review of the 

 Notional Science Foundation: Hearings, 89th Cong., 1st sess., Pt. 1, 1965, p. 787. 



133 U.S. Congress, House, Committee on Science and Astronautics, The National Science Foundation, Its 

 Present and Future: Jteporl, 89th Cong., 2d sess., 1966, p. 93. 



'3< U.S., Congress, House, Committee on Science and Astronautics, Subcommittee on Science, Research, 

 and Development, A Bia to Amend the National Science Foundation Act of 1950: Hearings, 89th Cong., 2d 

 •sess.. Aprill966. p. 27. 



I" Ibid., op. 33-34. 



"9 The NSF: Its Preseitt and Future, op. cit., p. 92, 



