636 



reasons would be a severe and damaging step backward. The benefits of 

 cooperation, far outweigh the associated technology transfer risks. 

 The United States has much to gain from magnetic fusion cooperation 

 and little technological leadership to lose. 



Since the current substantial level of international cooperation 

 and its associated flow of fusion research and development information 

 do not seem to be unduly impeded by these limitations, future ventures 

 in international cooperation presumably can also be arranged without 

 unduly burdening them. 



FLOW OF FUNDS BETWEEN PROGI<AMS 



Another aspect of implementation is the degree to which the funds of 

 one country will be allowed to flow into cooperative projects. For 

 the United States, if the financial contribution is to buy U.S. 

 equipment and services that are contributed to the project overseas, 

 then there ought not to be much difficulty aside from general 

 budgetary constraints. Or, if the overseas project had an arrangement 

 similar to that of the Joint European Torus (JET), with U.S. personnel 

 part of the project staff and with good access to the information 

 developed in the project, then again the only difficulty would be that 

 associated with general budgetary constraints. 



On the other hand, if the proposition is to send cash abroad to be 

 spent by others in other countries for the overseas project, then one 

 might expect the U.S. Congress to be reluctant to provide more than 

 modest funds. Officials of the EC and Japan seem likely to take the 

 same position. However as cooperation grows, more liberal attitudes 

 should be encouraged so that funds might flow more easily in both 

 directions with some latitude in the exact balance. 



Nevertheless, investments in fusion projects of other countries can 

 sometimes yield needed information and experience for far less money 

 than would be required to produce that information and experience in 

 the national program. The Japanese investment in Doublet III in the 

 United States is a good example. 



EQUITABLE SHARING OF BENEFITS 



Benefits are of two kinds. The first kind consists of available staff 

 positions in a joint project and cunounts of design and equipment 

 fabrication work to be done by contractors. The ancient rule of 

 international collaboration is that one gets back in the form of these 

 benefits a proportion approximately equal to one's share of the total 

 investment. 



Benefits of the second kind comprise the information and 

 technological know-how and experience that flow from the project. 



