872 



194 ANNALS NEW YORK ACADEMY OF SCIENCES 



evaluating results. We have precious few indicators about the outputs of 

 research and development programs, even the mature programs in ad- 

 vanced countries. We have even fewer reliable indicators about the 

 results of technical assistance efforts abroad (not to speak of the defense 

 area, in which often what is a technological success to one observer is a 

 failure to another observer). Since research and development projects are 

 means to ends— and, more generally, scientific and technological skills 

 are diffused throughout a society— evaluation is extremely hard. Indeed, 

 foreign policy itself is often viewed in terms of a continuing process in 

 diplomacy, rather than in terms of the merits of specific end-points of a 

 certain negotiation. Until we have at least somewhat better ways to 

 measure the impacts of the use of science and technology in pursuing 

 foreign policies, there will be little hope for substantially better integra- 

 tion of the policy domains. 



This last viewpoint leads to the final sub-topics in this part of the 

 outline (see p. 188). There are cross-cutting considerations with respect to 

 every science and technology policy that relates to foreign policy. When 

 we ask about giving technological aid abroad, we are faced with trade- 

 offs with respect to its impacts on technologically based trade (e.g., steel; 

 electronics; textiles). When we consider East-West relations, we are 

 aware of their impacts on North-South relations in both political and 

 technological terms (e.g., oil prices and supplies; arms trade). When we 

 ask for broader benefits from our science and technology activities 

 within foreign aid, do we emphasize basic human needs or economic 

 growth? If a global perspective showed that domestic economic policies 

 were short-sighted, would R&D policies have a bearing on possible new 

 directions? 



In general, we also must contend with subjects for which there is not 

 yet a solid "infrastructure of ideas" akin to the structure that, for exam- 

 ple, has existed for at least 20 years with respect to debates on national 

 security questions. As implied earlier, historical scholarship and con- 

 temporary policy-relevant research must be deepened a good deal more. 

 The few full-time professionals in this field must be supported and a new 

 generation of analysts must be trained so that the ideas and policies are 

 understood as profoundly as the problems merit. 



United States Patterns: Turning A Corner or Turning Away? 



We shall shift now to a quick review of the U.S. patterns in dealing with 

 these issues. I will sketch a few points in the spirit of a "national case 

 study," exploring the institutional factors in policy development. 



