Relation of the Federal Government to Research 



227 



be i>erforined by some central planning agency close 

 to the Executive; (c) the subjectivity introduced by 

 the Bureau in the process of elaborately refining data 

 might imperil the reputation of a primary collecting 

 agency for authoritative accuracy; and (d) unless ap- 

 propriations were increased such research might draw 

 off funds indisjDcnsable for basic reporting. (2) That 

 the Bureau should do such research, because (a) it 

 has closest knowledge of the data; (b) such research 

 is necessary to keep the Bureau's statisticians, who 

 malce decisions about definitions, tabulations, etc., alive 

 to uses of the data; (c) sucli research has as an im- 

 portant byproduct the discovery of inadequacies in 

 tlie present basic statistics; (d) stimulating work of 

 tliis character, conferring some personal prestige, is 

 necessary if the Bureau is to retain the social scien- 

 tists necessary to guard and improve the data; and (e) 

 the expense would be slight, considering the added 

 value which such research might give to basic data 

 which already have cost millions of dollars. The writer 

 favors the second argument, and believes that such re- 

 search in an agency like the Bureau of the Census would 

 be wholly compatible with research in a central plan- 

 ning agency as well. 



Finallj', actual work of the Bureau with respect to 

 the first type of research — to find ways of improving 

 the collection and tabulation — was reviewed with con- 

 siderable illustrative detail. Obstacles to such work 

 in a Government agency are (1) lack of encourage- 

 ment by the administrative head; (2) lack of qualified 

 personnel; and (3) lack of funds. It was indicated 

 with respect to (1) that administrative support for 

 such research was now present in the Bureau of the 

 Census, though this had not always been the case, and 

 that the situation with respect to (2) was gradually 

 improving, as shown in part II of this Section. The 

 main obstacle is (3), lack of funds. The Bureau is 



})aying the penalty of past neglect of such research, 

 because requests for funds for this purpose are now 

 new requests rather than requests for the continuance 

 (if a long-established function. The Bureau, in get- 

 ting research funds, must jump three hurdles- — the Sec- 

 retary of Commerce, the Bureau of the Budget, and 

 Congress. In each case, there is a tendency to approve 

 established past appropriations more or less auto- 

 matically and to question new appropriations — espe- 

 cially in the face of demands for general budgetary 

 1 eductions. 



The Director of the Census has one less, hurdle to 

 jump than the chief of a small statistical division sub- 

 ordinate to a bureau which has regulatory functions, 

 and therefore has more freedom. But if the chief of 

 A Statistical division subordinate to a I'egulatory bu- 

 leau can "sell" his bureau head on the needs of re- 

 search, the chances of getting funds are likely to be 

 more favorable than in case of a purely statistical bu- 

 leau — since there are indirect as well as direct sources 

 of revenue, as discussed in part I of this Section. If 

 the liead of the regulatory bureau is not a supporter of 

 research, however, a statistical division within such 

 bureau may be in a weaker position than a purely sta- 

 tistical organization like the Bureau of the Census. 



In spite of lack of funds, the Bureau of the Census, 

 as was shown, has made some progress in promoting 

 investigations which look to the improvement of its 

 data. The most conspicuous work at the present time 

 involves the Census of Agriculture. But this was made 

 possible by outside funds, and some divisions, notably 

 tlie Geography Division and the Division of Popula- 

 tion, have been handicapped so seriously as to jeop- 

 ardize the 1940 census. Perhaps the most important 

 development in the Bureau with respect to this type 

 of investigation is not so much the actual output as 

 the healthy growth of attitudes favoring it. 



GENERAL SUMMARY 



This Section constitutes a case study of selected prob- 

 lems involved in the production of social science data 

 in one Government agency — the Bureau of the Census. 



Though the Bureau of the Census is one of about 90 

 Federal agencies compiling and publishing statistics, 

 it is preeminent because of its size and the general- 

 purpose character of its work. Some of its problems 

 are common to all agencies in the social science field. 

 Others of its problems are a function of the particular 

 historical conditions out of which the Bureau of the 

 Census grew. 



Part I provided a background for the subsequent dis- 

 cussion. Two significant sets of facts were set forth: 

 (1) The Bureau of the Census, first established as a 

 permanent agency in 1902, is heir to a century of 

 American traditions which tended at times to empha- 



size the political, as distinguished from the scientific, 

 aspects of the decennial census; and (2) the Bureau 

 has not shared widely in the vast growth of statistical 

 services in the past generation. These services have 

 been allocated to new statistical agencies growing up 

 in the various subject matter fields. Thus the Bureau 

 of the Census has been in an insecure position for get- 

 ting funds — preference often being given to agencies 

 serving solely the needs of some special-interest group. 

 In the face of these handicaps, the contribution of the 

 Bui'eau of the Census to the American leadership in 

 making the social sciences objective is all the more 

 remarkable. 



Part II reviewed the needs of and support given by 

 consumers of census data. The vast increase in de- 

 mand, both by the Government and laymen, for data 



