754 



sane cioe there is a mere evidenc convergence of problecs faced within 

 all countries. Useful knowledge of what is being done elsewhere is best 

 obtained by those concerned with the same issues in this country. 



3. Realistically, a policy to obtain governnent-wide funds for SiT 

 activities fron: a single appropriation is unlikely to develop adequate 

 funding resources over tine cotraensurate with the opportunities. Certainly, 

 it is unlikely to be a satisfactory route for meeting the President's 

 conciit^ent to increa<;e the total of American funds devoted to assistance 

 for developing countries. UTiatever long-range possibilities there r.ay 



be for ISTC funding, they are unlikely to be large .enough to encocpass 

 substantial support for programs in the domestic agencies. 



4. An attcp.pt to restrict agencies only to those developr.ent- 

 related programs that are funded by AID or ISTC does not reflect growing 

 pressure both from within departments and agencies, and fron some parts 

 of the Congress, to see more effective application of agency resources 

 to development objectives. The existing situation is already beyond the 

 simple pattern of earlier years; several agencies now have the statutory 

 authority to seek their o\m funds for development prograns. DOE, NASA, 

 NSF, part of HEW and perhaps others have the authority, though with few 

 formal programs. Many agencies are interested however, with pressure 

 likely to grow. 



Thus, a preferred management strategy has substantial disadvantages. 

 Is there a satisfactory alternative? The simplest logical alternative 

 is to have separate budgets in agencies for development-related S&T 

 activities. That could avoid the problems of single-source funding, but 

 would have serious costs as well: 



1. Greater difficulty of central oversight, planning and rigorous 

 evaluation of individual budgets and programs, and of the overall 

 development-related budget of the government; 



2. Danger of independent agency activities overseas, at times with 

 contradictory aims, with inadequate control or coordination; 



3. Possibility of allowing narrow programs that may be scientifically 

 justified within a discipline or within an agency but inappropriate from 

 broader development considerations; 



i. Questionable statutory authority in some agencies, and uncertain 

 reaction of Con^resbionai or other interest groups. 



Both processes have important problems, but those associated with 

 funding from a single appropriation which is the present policy, seem 

 increasingly inadequate to the overall goal. Moreover, single source 

 funding does not have the fle.xibility that will increasingly be required 

 on the basis of either scale or quality of effort. 



