cfTort. In restrospect it is resTrettablc that IDOE was not provided the 

 means to make a start. 



Tlie fifth goal, concerning modernizing and standardizing marine 

 data systems, lias been taken on by the National Oceanic and Atmos- 

 pheric Administration's Environmental Data Service, with funding from 

 IDOE. Standards lor data reporting, inventorying, and archiving are set 

 for all IDOE projects, and a data exchange procedure has been developed 

 which appears to be working effectively, both nationally and interna- 

 tionally. 



I'he sixth goal, pertaining to increased opportunities for international 

 sharing of the responsibilities and costs of ocean exploration, has been 

 addressed, if only partially, by the entire U.S. IDOE program. 



Progress has been made, under the IDOE banner, in five of these 

 six areas. Undoubtedly there is more that could and, w^e hope, will be 

 done, but we feel that, considering the financial resources a\ailable, NSF 

 has done an excellent job of promoting research activities which directly 

 addressed these goals, activities which would have been unlikely to occur 

 in the absence of IDOE, and which in many instances have already 

 produced results which will be of value in moving toward these goals. 

 At the same time, NSF's IDOE program has stimulated international 

 cooperation in ocean research. 



NSF was charged with a monumental task and given very limited 

 resources with which to accomplish it. We believe that in general the 

 allocation of these resources was done wisely, and that, within its budget- 

 ary constraints, the IDOE program has been satisfactorily responsive to 

 the original guidelines. However, had more funds been available, the 

 goal concerning ocean monitoring could have been addressed, and more 

 ])rogress could have been made toward developing the international 

 competence needed to permit sharing with other nations the responsibility 

 of ocean exploration. We are not aware of any serious effort to evaluate 

 the significance of these deficiencies and to estimate the costs and activi- 

 ties needed to address them effectively. This should be done as a basis for 

 determining feasibility and desirability. 



Arc those 'guidelines currently valid as expressions of national and inter- 

 national needs in marine science? 



They are. Events that have transpired since the guidelines were 

 formulated have generally served to reinforce their validity. The oil crisis 

 and the resulting realization, within the United States, of the need to 

 assess and exploit our offshore oil and mineral resources; droughts and 

 wheat crop failures which have made us increasingly aware of the 

 susceptibility of terrestrial food ])roduction to changes in climate which 

 are all too likely and too poorly understood; fishery failures which have 

 brought home to us that we cannot sit back and assume that the fish 

 will be there when the wheat isn't — all ha\-e ser\ed to give even more 



18 



