173 



needed for problem solving. They also recommended that mission-linked research be 

 incorporated into the program to assure effective technology transfer. 



Getting at the question of optimum distribution requires establishing a frame of reference 

 for the question. For instance, if we were threatened with serious cut-backs in federal 

 funding for agricultural research, most SAES directors beUeve that the System and the 

 agricultural industries we support would be best served by protecting formula funds. 



We believe that the best opportunity for growth in the total program lies with increasing 

 funding for the NRI and selected special grants of national importance. This is especially 

 true with the endorsement of the new Administration for this program. As mentioned in 

 the answer to a previous question, we have a recurring experience at both the state and 

 federal level that makes us believe that the best method to acquire new money and to 

 sustain its re-appropriation over time, is to establish a clear, well-focused relationship of new 

 resources to recognized national issues of highest priority. 



Our conununity believes that the special grants which £u-e awarded competitively for efforts 

 which address national priorities are effective and provide useful focus on contemporary 

 issues. Our community recognizes the prerogative of members of Congress to seek support 

 for their constituencies. When this occurs, every effort is made to assure both quaUty and 

 productivity of such efforts through merit review and evaluation. As discussed elsewhere, 

 many believe increased use of contraact research should be made to provide a means for 

 the university community to help addressees the short-term critical needs of the food, 

 agriculture, and enviromnental communities. 



In summary, there is not a simple answer to the question of the optimum distribution of 

 funds. It is clear that the SAESs have a much broader mission, an expanded clientele and 

 a greater set of expectations for service than ever before. Also, there has been a very 

 substantial erosion of state funding for the SAESs resulting from the current economic 

 situation in the country. We are clearly under pressure to do inore with less. At the level 

 of many individual SAEs, both functional and institutional restructuring to meet this new 

 call are already underway. 



In the constraints of the present environment, our first goal would be to achieve modest 

 growth of funding for our most important programs, looking on them as an investment which 

 creates economic activity, rather than a drain on taxpayers. We are pleased that the first 

 coitununication from President Clinton indicates strong support for the use of science and 

 technology to maintain and stimulate economic recovery and growth. In his statement "A 

 Vision of Change for America", the President establishes a growth position for agricultural 

 research. We believe the SAESs, as part of a larger land grant university philosophy and 

 commitment, are ideally suited to develop and deliver the targeted products of research that 

 will support this national goal. 



12 



