45 



support of the principal cooperating intergovernmental or nongovern- 

 mental bodies on the recommendation of a U.S. agent. Another approach 

 is to invite one or more of the cooperating bodies, such as lUGS, to 

 serve as the channel for the totality of funds involved. Details of 

 program management and accountability would have to be worked out, as 

 well as procedures for coordinating work with UNESCO. In both of the 

 options, a strong U.S. focal point is necessary to provide guidance and 

 oversight. A further option is to provide the totality of funds 

 involved directly to a U.S. agent as, for example, USGS, for disburse- 

 ment to these international programs, or in general support of the 

 objectives of the programs, through whatever vehicle — multilateral or 

 bilateral — is considered most appropriate. If this route is chosen, 

 care must be taken not to dwarf the contributions of other countries. 

 A total U.S. contribution of $2 million per year is suggested for the 

 earth sciences area. 



Preliminary Findings 



1. The earth sciences programs are of reasonably high quality, and 

 some mechanism should be found to continue to support them during this 

 interim period. Those programs such as the IGCP, which are focused 

 more on the advancement of science, tend to have higher U.S. partici- 

 pation than those concerned with training and education. 



2. There is no single intergovernmental organization that can be 

 identified as an appropriate alternative for the totality of the earth 

 sciences program. As far as the IGCP is concerned, it is anticipated 

 that the United States will retain its membership; therefore, a direct 

 contribution to UNESCO through a trust fund arrangement is suggested. 

 However, in the UNESCO budget the IGCP program represents only about 30 

 percent of the total program within subprogram X.l and, in addition, 

 there is the natural hazards program to consider (X.2). The cooper- 

 ating organization with the broadest range of compatible interests is 

 the nongovernmental ICSU union, the International Union of Geological 

 Sciences (lUGS) . The Union may be willing to serve as a channel for 

 U.S. funding, but this will require a period of negotiation to deter- 

 mine their interest in such a role and to identify any constraints that 

 may exist. 



3. Programs such as the IGCP, interdisciplinary research on the 

 earth's crust, data/mapping, and earthquake risk are considered espe- 

 cially successful. One of the reasons for this is the involvement of 

 the concerned professional communities through nongovernmental organi- 

 zations. Programs that have an active, expert advisory mechanism tend 

 to be of higher quality than those that do not. 



4. Earmarking a portion of the funds to enhance U.S. backstopping 

 is absolutely essential. Increased management responsibilities can be 

 anticipated no matter which alternative is utilized. 



