1046 



36 SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNOLOGICAL COOPERATION 



research funds, and thus inevitably contentious. The effect of the re- 

 cent distribution of the NSF's international budget among research di- 

 visions will for that reason certainly have a chilling effect on interna- 

 tional cooperation, even when international projects could in prin- 

 ciple be fully competitive scientifically. 



It is also worthwhile noting not only the difficulty but also the im- 

 portance of making the "domestic" agencies of the U.S. government 

 conscious of the international framework in which R&D is actually 

 embedded. The potential practical payoffs are obvious: U.S. R&D can 

 benefit from work in other countries, much more of which is now 

 equal to U.S. R&D in quality, and more frequently there will be paral- 

 lel work of direct relevance to U.S. R&D objectives and increasing 

 opportunities for cost sharing or for faster progress toward R&D 

 goals. 



There is another, perhaps more important but unfortunately only 

 philosophical, reason: the fact that the results of American R&D di- 

 rectly and indirectly affect people in all countries. They have no voice 

 in setting R&D objectives in the United States even though they have 

 an interest in the outcomes of the world's largest R&D enterprise, nor 

 can any process be imagined in the near future (at least) that could 

 provide such a voice. But that only emphasizes the desirability of de- 

 veloping over time much greater sensitivity in the United States to the 

 international nature of the R&D enterprise and to the societal effects, 

 not limited by national borders, it engenders. Rarely is any thought 

 given, and certainly only rarely in an organized, conscious way in the 

 government, to the international effects of the R&D being supported. 

 The conscious encouragement of greater involvement in international 

 programs and cooperation by U.S. domestically oriented agencies 

 can, in the long run, serve to increase understanding of the interna- 

 tional dimensions of everything the United States does in science and 

 technology. 



Of course, all the obstacles do not reside within the government, 

 though the process difficulties within government do have their reso- 

 nance in the scientific community. Realization of the difficulties in 

 funding international cooperation or experience in trying to satisfy the 

 difficulties is often an effective disincentive for scientists to invest the 

 time required to bring cooperative projects to the point at which they 

 could be considered in the research competition. In many cases, of 

 course, the opportunities and appropriateness, because of special 

 equipment, skills, or the nature of the subject, make the effort to over- 

 come the difficulties worth the candle. But, in marginal or less clear 

 cases, the disincentives loom large. 



