71 



unduly optimistic expectations as to ^vhat U.S. technical assistance 

 could accomplish. Congress was told that development of the under- 

 developed states would take a long time, but that it would need no 

 more assistance from the United States than a few better seeds, the 

 introduction of fertilizer, development of an educational sj^stem, and 

 other technical advances. Legislators were assured that annual U.S. 

 outlays for technical assistance would never exceed the initial request 

 of $45 million. Absent from the prevailing theory of economic de- 

 velopment was the understanding that to be effective, technical 

 assistance must be coupled with substantial capital and capital goods. 

 Little mention was made by the executive branch of the need for 

 legislation to undertake a coordinated long-range progi'am coupled 

 with extensive and repeated surveys and planning. No recognition 

 was given to the need to establish a research capability within the 

 country to tailor U.S. technical knowledge and skills to the require- 

 ments of the developing nations; and no authority was sought to 

 stimulate the appropriate training of assistance experts nor to provide 

 for strict guidelines in administrative oversight and program planning. 

 In short, the technical assistance hypothesis was presented simplis- 

 ticall^T-: technology delivered to the underdeveloped society is easily 

 grafted onto the society and economic progress follows automatically. 



Initial technical assistance programs suffered from mam^ weaknesses 

 which later had to be rectified by subsequent legislation, by the 

 grantmg of progressively larger appropriations, and by administrative 

 reorganization. The prevalent ex]oectation in 1950 that the technical 

 assistance to promote economic development could be accomplished 

 at modest cost to the United States underwent radical correction as 

 the 3^ears went by. In 1950, $25 million was appropriated for point IV 

 and $10 million was appropriated for ongoing programs of technical 

 assistance. In 1951 and 1952 when technical assistance programs came 

 under the jurisdiction of the INIutual Security Agency, approximately 

 $150 million was granted annually.^^ In 1967 $200 million was spent 

 by the Government on technical assistance activities.'° 



In contrast with the program chosen in 1950 for small technical 

 assistance projects and little or no capital assistance, American 

 foreign aid programs today recognize that economic development of 

 the less developed world will not occur without the extension of 

 large amoiuits of technical assistance as well as public capital for 

 investment m roads, education, public health, and public works. 

 The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, which led to the 

 creation of the Agency for International Development, provides for 

 a research and development capability in technical assistance, dis- 

 bursal of assistance fimds on a geographic instead of a project basis, 

 and mandatory preliminary surveys. 



Congress gave little consideration to the evaluation of scien- 

 tific and technical aspects of the plan. While the program en"\dsaged 

 (but not emphasized) by the State Department included technical as- 



29 U.S. Congress. Senate. Committee on Foreicn Relations. Technical Assistance Proerams. Hearings 

 before a Subcommittee of the * * * Feb. 17, 18, 21. 23, 24, Mar. 2, 3, 4, 1955. 84th Cong., 1st sess. (Wasliington, 

 U.S. Government Printing Office, 1955), pp. 30-31. «« 



s" U.S. Agency for International Development. Proposed foreign aid program, fiscal year 1968. Summary 

 presentation to the Congress. (Washington, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967), p. 296. 



