904 



18 



form of periodic accountability could be required. At the very least, 

 a strong focal point in the U.S. government will be extremely important. 

 Mechanisms for program support to UNESCO will require clarification of 

 the possibilities and limitations involved, particularly in terms of 

 the U.S. role in program planning and implementation. 



4. Cooperating Organizations . Subject to acceptance by cooper- 

 ating organizations, it is relatively simple to propose alternative 

 interim arrangements for those activities and programs for which well- 

 established mechanisms of collaboration are in place, as is the case 

 with ICSU, IBRO, ICRO, etc. One special situation is the Intergovern- 

 mental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) , in which the United States can 

 retain full membership even in the event of withdrawal from UNESCO. 

 Other arrangements are primarily based on the current active advisory 

 and managerial roles played by international nongovernmental scientific 

 organizations (NGOs) in UNESCO-sponsored activities. However, there 

 may be serious problems in planning new global observational programs 

 that require intergovernmental cooperation and oversight. 



5. Need for Consultations . The suggestion or designation of 

 another intergovernmental or nongovernmental organization to act in 

 the interim, on behalf of U.S. scientific interests requires careful 

 negotiations and understandings that are agreed to by all sides 

 involved. This will be a complex process in which the issues will 

 need to be clarified over time. Also, there is as yet no way to judge 

 how colleagues from other countries will react to U.S. proposals for 

 alternative mechanisms of support for UNESCO science programs. 



6. Role of ICSU . With respect to NGOs, the International Council 

 of Scientific Unions (ICSU) might be considered the most logical candi- 

 date to facilitate U.S. participation in some well-established programs. 

 ICSU could, for instance, be asked to oversee some $1.5 million of U.S. 

 funds in order to ensure continuing U.S. participation and support of 

 current UNESCO-sponsored activities in Major Program VI (Natural Sci- 

 ences) . There are possibilities of doubling this level if ICSU were 



to assume additional responsibilities with respect to the International 

 Hydrological Program, the Man and the Biosphere Program, and certain 

 aspects of the earth sciences activities. ICSU's willingness and 

 capacity, structural and administrative, to assume this level of 

 responsibility, however, will need to be thoroughly considered and 

 discussed by all parties. In the longer term, ICSU represents an 

 important, existing potential for enhancing international science 

 cooperation. 



7. U.S. Management Responsibilities . It is tempting to try to 

 identify a single U.S. government agency to provide oversight, manage- 

 ment, and funding for U.S. participation in the science activities of 

 UNESCO. The National Science Foundation (NSF) is one obvious possi- 

 bility, although the NSF has not been especially active in the area of 

 multilateral science cooperation. Also, some adjustments in existing 

 NSF procedures would have to be made. In addition, there are some 



