11 



difficulty which in a way is extraneous to nationality. It is true that 

 giving advice across national boundaries is a difficult business, but the 

 difficulty may reside in the fact that the beleaguered underdeveloped prac- 

 titioner has not yet acquired the capacity to respond to scientific feedback. 

 Where it is well done, science knows no boundaries. It seeks through theo- 

 retical treatment to illuminate alternatives with only a secondary interest 

 in what disposition is made of the alternatives so illuminated. Certainly 

 it took researchers and practitioners in the United States some time and 

 considerable grief to learn to relate to each others' special competencies. 

 If the practitioner in the underdeveloped world wants sympathy or more time, 

 that's one matter. The far greater discrimination would be to attempt to 

 shield him - out of some misplaced sense of national sovereignty - from the 

 beneficient disruption which good science, neutral science, can provide. 

 When and where the underdeveloped practitioner's own nation is able to develop 

 vigorous domestic research capacity, relations will develop more naturally 

 without the need to take refuge behind issues of sovereignty which may be 

 more spurious than abiding. 



The question of how much research should be generated domestically 

 is a more complex one. It might be argued, for instance, that most of the 

 required techniques can be imported. This point of view holds that research 

 scientists in the advanced nations have already turned up a backlog of rele- 

 vant technology. Development costs on this backlog have already been met, 

 giving the underdeveloped nations access at little or no cost. It is far 

 better for them to invest their time drawing upon this existing backlog, 

 rather than attempting to replicate it. Every generation and every regional 

 group needn't repeat the discovery process on its own. Sure, the under- 



