137 



THE PRESENT R&O SYSTEM }») 



Over the years, many federal laix)raiorie.s wrrr established in response 

 to specific environmental concerns Today, however, these laboratories do 

 not meet the nation's needs D. Allan Bromley, Assistant to the President 

 for Science and Technology, recently described the need to rethink the mis- 

 sions of federal research laboratories 



There arc over 700 federal laburjturics. and wc invest over $10 billion a year 

 in them. They embrace an astonishing breadth and depth ol' science and tech- 

 nology, including some of the best science and technology to be found any- 

 where in the world. Many of these laboratories were established in the im- 

 mediate post-World War 11 period, and they originally had vcr\- specific missions 

 and objectives. Many of these original missions were satisfied years ago. so that 

 the laboratories are having to adjust their programs to remain in close touch 

 with evolving national needs. As components of the federal R&D enterprise, 

 federal laboiatorics engaging m environmental R&D must redefine their mi.'i- 

 sions in the context of evolving national needs."' 



WEAKNESSES OF THE PRESENT SYSTEM 



Ten or twenty yeats ago, questions about whether current land and water 

 use could be maintained in the foreseeable future received relatively little 

 attention. A "catch up, clean up" approach dominated the environmental 

 protection agenda. Little attention was paid to developing an integrated, 

 forward-lcwking R&D system that would identify trends, anticipate prob- 

 lems, and address root causes instead of symptoms.'? 



As a result, two decades later our R&D system remains diffuse, re- 

 active, and focused on shon-range, end-of-the-pipe solutions. Mechanisms 

 to coordinate and integrate the products of environmental research conducted 

 by federal, state, academic, and nongovernmental institutions are weak. Until 

 recently, pollution reduction and prevention have received relatively little 

 attention. We have difficulty developing the comprehensive information 

 necessary to evaluate the state of the environment, the subtle ^^-ays in which 

 it is changing, and the opportunities to help human populations become 

 more resilient. Limitations in our ability to coordinate, assess, and dissem- 

 inate research information hamper the public and private sectors' efforts 

 to attack environmental problems. Finally, research to date on the inter- 

 national aspects of environmental conditions has received a relatively low 

 priority in the federal government.-' A number of organizations, such as 

 Resources for the Future and the World Resources Institute, have invested 

 in international research on the social and ecological consequences of U.S. 

 environmental policy-, but relatively little has been done directly by federal 

 agencies. 



