44 



• an imbalance between intramural and extramural R&D; 



• a lack of funding for ecological and social sciences, and for finding engineer- 

 ing solutions to environmental problems; 



• insufficient attention to long-term monitoring, data collection and manage- 

 ment, and interpretation. 



• the need for improved education and training of people. 



In general, the Administration believes that these criticisms are based in fact and 

 must be addressed. Consequently, it has already enacted a number of major changes 

 to rectify these apparent weaknesses in the environmental R&D structure and in 

 the links between science and policy. At present the Administration believes that 

 there is no compelling reason for a fundamental restructuring of the research agen- 

 cies or to create any new entities given the changes it has already initiated. These 

 changes need to be given an opportunity to work before taking further steps. 



The Administration has taken a number of steps that respond to these criticisms: 



• creating the Office of Environmental Policy (OEP); 



• creating the National Biological Survey (NBS); 



• signing the Convention on Biological Diversity; 



• creating the Environment Division in Office of Science and Technology Pol- 

 icy (OSTP); 



• elevating the Federal Coordinating Committee on Science, Engineering and 

 Technology (FCCSET), to the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC); 



• creating the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources (CENR) 

 within the NSTC, which builds upon the earlier efforts of the FCCSET Commit- 

 tee of Earth and Environmental Sciences; 



• creating the President's Committee of Advisors for Science and Technology 

 (PCAST); 



• proposing the elevation of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to 

 Cabinet status; 



• strengthening the links between science and policy through the CENR; 



• strengthening the assessment capabilities through the CENR; 



• enhancing support for environmental R&D, despite limits on discretionary 

 spending; 



• developing an environmental R&D strategy through the CENR; 



• expanding the scope of environmental R&D, through increased emphasis on 

 the socio-economic dimensions, impacts assessment, adaptation and mitigation, 

 and the development and utilization of science-policy tools in the Fiscal Year 

 1995 budget. 



The following section briefly describes Administration actions to specifically ad- 

 dress the major issues raised by the reports. 



Creating Federal Leadership for Environment and Natural Resources R&D 



Through all the steps listed above, the Administration has demonstrated its lead- 

 ership and commitment to a strong, integrated and comprehensive Federal program 

 of environmental R&D. 



In particular, the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources is leading 

 the effort to coordinate all Federal environment and natural resource research and 

 development activities, and improve the links between the scientific and policy com- 

 ponents of the executive branch. A unique aspect of the CENR is that subcommit- 

 tees are organized by key environmental policy areas. This subcommittee structure 

 was created recognizing that coordinated, interdisciplinary, multi-agency, R&D ef- 

 forts are required to respond effectively to complicated environmental problems. 



The strength of the CENR, and its subcommittees, is that it has active participa- 

 tion from all relevant agencies and offices of the White House, including OSTP and 

 OMB during all phases of the budget process. The CENR is not a top-down decision- 

 making entity of the White House; if it were, it would fail. The CENR will work 

 because there is buy-in at all levels of the agencies from program managers and 

 from agency heads. R&D priorities must, and will, explicitly take into account Ad- 

 ministration priorities, environmental statutes, and international Conventions. 

 Agency agendas that are consistent with the priorities of the interagency process are 



