146 



Each new study has added compelling details to the condemning 

 body of evidence. But policy makers have done little to address 

 the root cause. Ten years have passed since the GAO first brought 

 attention to the crisis, reporting that 27 percent of Agricultural 

 Research Service (ARS) facilities operate at less than 70 percent 

 of capacity — a situation that remains unchanged. Three years 

 ago, congressional leaders signaled a readiness to act by approving 

 the Agricultural Research Facilities Planning and Closure Study 

 Commission in the 1990 farm bill. The Commission, modeled after 

 that set up to study military base closing, has never been 

 convened. 



As a student of and former participant in shaping public 

 policy, I have learned that the greatest challenge facing decision 

 makers is to pinpoint problems in an accurate and precise manner. 

 Too often, problem statements are left fuzzy as we scatter in all 

 directions frantically searching for answers. if only we would 

 spend half as much time building consensus on the definition of the 

 problem as we do in trying to construct solutions, we would stand 

 a much better chance of achieving lasting reform. With this lesson 

 in mind, I urge the Subcommittee to spend time defining the 

 parameters of the underlying problem in agricultural research that 

 has created the crisis in agricultural research. 



Determining the root cause. I submit that the facilities 

 crisis is first and foremost a manifestation of the struggle 

 between policy makers and the scientific community over the role of 

 planning in research. It is an outgrowth of the deeply held belief 

 that we cannot "plan" research. Indeed, many scientists argue that 

 scientific breakthroughs come about by "leaps into the dark by more 

 or less blind men [sic]." It therefore follows, or so the argument 

 goes, that policy makers should allocate research dollars with few 

 strings attached. The only check required in this process is a 

 competitive peer review to ensure some level of quality control. 



