362 



28 OCEANOGRAPHY IN THE NEXT DECADE 



between individual investigator awards and large project support 

 and the establishment of guidelines for the large, global change 

 projects. 



Agency Responsibility to Basic Science 



The vitality of basic ocean research in the United States re- 

 sides principally in its academic institutions. The board recom- 

 mends that federal agencies with marine-related missions find 

 mechanisms to guarantee the continuing vitality of the underly- 

 ing basic science on which they depend. In some agencies, the 

 best mechanism is direct funding of individual investigator grants,- 

 in others, consultation and collaboration work well. NSF and, 

 secondarily, ONR should retain primary responsibility for the vi- 

 tality of the basic science, with NOAA becoming increasingly in- 

 volved. Also, mission agencies such as EPA and the Department of 

 Energy (DOE) must share more fully in this responsibility. It is par- 

 ticularly important to encourage the involvement of mission agen- 

 cies in sampling and monitoring programs pertaining to long-term 

 global change issues. At present, a disproportionate share of the 

 funds is provided by NSF. As these programs expand, resources 

 for individual investigator grants could be reduced if other agen- 

 cies do not assume responsibility for some of the funding 



Responsibility of Academic Institutions 



Through the years, academic oceanographic institutions evolved 

 different organizational structures ranging from typical academic 

 departments to large comprehensive institutions that operate multiple 

 ships and shared facilities. As the benefits of cooperation became 

 evident, arrangements for the cooperative use of ships and some 

 other facilities have developed. The board recommends that aca- 

 demic oceanographic institutions find additional ways to achieve 

 cohesiveness among the institutions and a sense of common sci- 

 entific direction. It is essential that this cooperation be achieved 

 at both the administrative and the working-scientist levels so that 

 the interactions are based on the needs of science as well as the 

 needs of the institutions. The board also recommends that aca- 

 demic institutions, individually or through consortia, take a greater 

 responsibility for the health of the field, including nationally im- 

 portant programs. In particular, the large, long-lived global change 

 programs could benefit from institutional responses that are of 

 longer duration and more stable than those of individual scien- 



