929 



International Advisory Conunittee on Earthquake Risk and its regional 

 subconunittees. The UNESCO program provides an opportunity for U.S. 

 earth scientists to visit hazard-prone areas, study and evaluate 

 disaster patterns and risks, and aid in the development of mitigation 

 techniques, which could have a potentially beneficial domestic use. In 

 the absence of formal U.S. membership in UNESCO, U.S. involvement in 

 the natural hazards program is bound to decline, particularly since the 

 program is exclusively under UNESCO management. U.S. ability to observe 

 hazards assessment and mitigation activities under UNESCO auspices in 

 other countries and to participate in information exchange programs 

 might also prove to be more difficult. 



In terms of program management, the earth sciences activities are 

 not immune to the bureaucratic cumbersomeness that characterizes UNESCO 

 activities in general. There is frustration at the comparatively small 

 amounts of money that are available for actual project work as opposed 

 to administration. Moreover, there is evidence that those programs 

 with a strong scientific advisory mechanism, such as IGCP, tend to be 

 of higher scientific quality than those solely directed at the staff 

 level. 



Alternatives 



It is difficult, if not impossible, to identify a single alter- 

 native organization, either intergovernmental or nongovernmental, 

 through which to channel resources to permit continued U.S. association 

 with UNESCO earth sciences programs. There are many organizations 

 doing important work in international geology and natural hazards. 

 This report, however, has focused on identifying channels that provide 

 association with present UNESCO activities. Three intergovernmental 

 organizations involved in various aspects of the UNESCO earth science 

 program — the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) , the Interna- 

 tional Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) , and the United Nations Disaster 

 Relief Organization (UNDRO) — are specifically mentioned in the program 

 and budget document. About a dozen nongovernmental bodies are also 

 mentioned, the majority of which have some formal or informal linkages 

 to organizations associated with ICSU. 



Since it is expected that the United States will retain its formal 

 membership in the IGCP, it may be possible to utilize the Funds-in-Trust 

 arrangement to continue U.S. support for this program. On the other 

 hand, the funds could be provided directly to lUGS. Perhaps the Union 

 would also be willing to serve as an alternative channel for supporting 

 other earth science activities. Earmarking funds for international 

 organizations, whether intergovernmental or nongovernmental, would 

 require a U.S. management mechanism such as the U.S. Geological Survey 

 (USGS) of the Department of the Interior. This would be particularly 

 important in the first year of nonmembership in UNESCO to facilitate 

 the transition to a different support system. 



In summary, a preferred option would involve a combined approach of 

 direct support to UNESCO to compensate for loss in program support 

 (including overhead at a level presumably to be negotiated) , plus 



