source of other foods and pharmaceuticals. Marine biology might 
also be expected to contribute to improved techniques for depollution 
and sewage disposal (see secs. 3 and 6.4). Far more important, food 
from the sea can be used to improve world health, especially in under- 
developed countries. The foreign policy of the United States since 
the end of World War II has been committed to the view that U.S. 
prosperity and peace depend crucially upon improving living stand- 
ards in the world at large, with particular emphasis on improving nu- 
trition and health. 
Specific estimates made by NASCO for improvements in near-shore 
sewage disposal and recreation are based upon extrapolation of present 
prices paid or imputed to recreational expenditures in seashore areas 
and upon cost reductions in sewage disposal. The estimates, at least 
on a gross basis, appear conservative. In particular, benefits from 
improvement in near-oceanographic environment are likely to extend 
well beyond recreational opportunities or cost reduction in sewage dis- 
posal. However, this depends on just how much people are willing to 
pay for improvements in their general living environment; for exam- 
ple, elimination of offensive odors or unsightly vistas. The ready and 
widespread Congressional acceptance of Great Society programs with 
similar orientations suggests that public valuation of these improve- 
ments is quite high. Probably the best argument for expanding the 
oceanographic effort in this area, in fact, is the potential complemen- 
tarity with other Government programs for eliminating pollution, 
beach conservation and establishing seashore parks. An expanded 
oceanographic effort in relevant study areas (e.g., biology of estuarial 
regions and physics of wave action) would seem to be essential and 
proper support activity for these programs. Given this complemen- 
tarity, the rather modest level of present expenditure at $10.5 million 
and the seemingly high benefits, some expansion of present programs 
relating to the near-ocean environment seems well justified (see secs. 
3 and 4.8). 
By contrast, considerable doubt surrounds any positive estimate of 
benefits to the United States from improvement of navigation and 
similar activities except for avoidance of rocks and shoals. There 
are good technical reasons for believing that the $364 million of bene- 
fits attributed to improved ocean navigation in the NASCO report 
are grossly overstated.® In short, the present level of nondefense ex- 
*The NASCO report fails to consider interactions between different estimates. 
For example, direct savings in ship-construction costs, navigation costs, turn- 
around times, maintenance expenses and loading and unloading are all reported. 
It is reasonably clear, though, that the total required size of the ship fleet would 
be greatly affected by reported improvements in operating and maintenance pro- 
cedures. Operating and maintenance costs would be reduced as the size of the 
fleet is reduced. Direct percentage reductions applied to present fleet and cost 
figures can therefore be misleading. 
61 
