922 



37 



In the final analysis, the best alternative funding strategy if the 

 United States follows through on its intention to withdraw from UNESCO 

 would be to make the bulk of the funds available either directly to 

 researchers or through the disciplinary professional organizations. 

 Some portion of the funds might be reserved for the International 

 Social Science Council to make up any loss in subvention due to U.S. 

 withdrawal from UNESCO and also to undertake truly multilateral 

 activities. 



A logical new institutional focal point for funding international 

 social science research to be carried out by U.S. investigators would 

 be the Directorate of Biological, Behavioral, and Social Sciences (BBS) 

 of the National Science Foundation. While it is possible that BBS might 

 wish to evaluate grant applications and administer such additional funds 

 directly, there may also be some substantive and symbolic value in 

 establishing close collaborative relationships with the Social Science 

 Research Council (SSRC) or the Commission on Behavioral and Social 

 Sciences and Education (CBASSE) of the National Research Council. The 

 substantive benefit to the program of this approach would be access to 

 some of the leading U.S. social science scholars and the substantive 

 input they could provide in determining priorities and direction. They 

 could also provide assistance in strengthening social science research 

 capabilities in developing countries. Moreover, as nongovernmental 

 organizations, both institutions are probably better equipped to arrange 

 site access and other types of scholarly activities — particularly with 

 socialist and certain Third World countries — that might be difficult if 

 initiated by an agency of the federal government. Some portion of the 

 social science funds would need to be applied to staffing and overhead 

 if the SSRC or CBASSE were charged with these new administrative 

 responsibilities. 



Preliminary Findings 



1. Social science research needs UNESCO because of the links it 

 provides to researchers and facilities world-wide and because most 

 other international mechanisms are weak and underfunded. At the same 

 time, there is need for significant reforms in the focus, direction, 

 and management of UNESCO social science activities. If the U.S. with- 

 drawal is carried out, it will be particularly important to earmark 

 sufficient resources, about $1 million, through the National Science 

 Foundation — and possibly to channel them through the National Research 

 Council, the Social Science Research Council, and the Consortium of 

 Social Science Associations in support of international cooperative 

 social science research and training activities. Failure to do so 

 would represent a serious setback for an already precarious interna- 

 tional social science research environment. 



2. There has been minimal involvement of the U.S. social science 

 community in UNESCO projects. If the United States withdraws, inter- 

 ested scholars would still be able to obtain UNESCO publications and 

 attend meetings on an individual basis. 



