alternative arrangements whereby essential U.S. scientific collabora- 

 tions could be maintained. It is important to note that the issue 

 posed was not whether the United States should or should not withdraw 

 from UNESCO. The Academy had already expressed the view that, on 

 balance, U.S. science gains more than it loses from participation in 

 UNESCO science programs. This report, therefore, makes no statement on 

 the fundamental question of withdrawal. The present approach is one of 

 helping to minimize the costs of a decision that was made, not on the 

 basis of scientific considerations, but on a range of other, largely 

 political, factors. Also, although it is recognized that UNESCO as an 

 institution could benefit from some reform, particularly at the manage- 

 ment level, this report does not, to any significant degree, deal with 

 that issue. 



The growth and diversification of science and the rapid expansion 

 in the number of participants in international activities has created 

 a tremendously complex situation that is straining the capabilities of 

 international institutions for cooperation. In the science area there 

 is a vast array of organizations, intergovernmental and nongovernmental, 

 dedicated to the promotion of international cooperation . In large 

 part, this stems from the universality of the scientific enterprise 

 itself and the need to share and confirm research findings world wide, 

 an inherent feature of scientific progress and global cooperation. The 

 development of the UN system of specialized agencies has been an impor- 

 tant complement to the many nongovernmental organizations that have 

 emerged within individual professional communities. UNESCO, in parti- 

 cular, has fostered contacts and interactions with such organizations, 

 most notably in the science area, with the International Council of 

 Scientific Unions (ICSU) and its individual disciplinary unions. 2 

 It is possible, therefore, to begin to identify a number of potential 

 alternative organizations based largely on existing patterns of coop- 

 eration with UNESCO as a partial response to the problem. However, as 

 will be amplified in the following chapter on strategic considerations, 

 there has not been either time or resources in this study to consult 

 with these organizations to determine their capability and/or willing- 

 ness to serve in this capacity. This has to be a major concern, in 

 terms of the viability of the proposed alternatives. Since the time 

 frame of the present report relates primarily to FY-86, other alterna- 

 tive options that are outlined feature support to UNESCO for specific 

 activities, particularly for the major intergovernmental programs, and 

 increased resources to national agencies to be utilized for facilitating 

 U.S. participation in UNESCO programs within their areas of competence. 



The present study emphasizes the need to inquire more deeply into 

 the objectives, consequences, and benefits of U.S. participation in 

 intergovernmental science programs. and relationships between inter- 

 governmental and nongovernmental organizations. The absence of an 

 overall strategic policy framework for U.S. participation in interna- 

 tional science is a severe handicap. There is a need to clarify the 

 various means of intergovernmental scientific and technological coop- 

 eration and to reach common understandings on the most imaginative, 

 productive ways of utilizing our intellectual and financial resources. 

 This is an important issue not only for the United States, but also for 



