to build scientific and technical aspects of national programs. As 
has been discussed earlier in the report (see sec. 8), ICO was re- 
markably successful in meeting these objectives. 
Examining the relationships between agencies and ICO, the Panel 
came to the conclusion that ICO can serve effectively in the role of 
transmitting information among various agencies and providing help 
on questions of policy coordination and detailed technical planning, 
involving the several agencies. For example ICO has been fairly 
successful in coordinating and disseminating information on ship 
schedules, but it has been unable to carry out detailed technical plan- 
ning for major programs such as the proposed stepwise buoy pro- 
gram (see app. II). 
Furthermore, ICO has been unable to develop new missions tran- 
scending the limited missions of individual, participating agencies. As 
a result there is no National Oceanographic Program in the sense 
of the whole being greater than the sum of individual parts defined 
by existing agency missions. A minor exception is the Sea-Air Inter- 
action Laboratory, which is yet to develop. In the Panel’s view the 
biggest deficiency has been the failure to define a national goal for 
development of biological resources beyond the rather narrow concept 
of commercial and sport fisheries (see sec. 2). The Panel does not 
believe the ICO could undertake the Federal function of setting na- 
tional policy. 
Role of External Advisory Groups 
The present program in oceanography has been heavily influenced 
by reports of the Committee on Oceanography of the National Acad- 
emy of Sciences-National Research Council. The Academy’s Commit- 
tee on Oceanography resulted from the feeling of an informal commit- 
tee of marine scientists within the Government that oceanography 
needed support. The Academy’s committee has since served as a lead- 
ing advocate for oceanography. However, it should be recognized that 
an outside group cannot really change national policy when it involves 
more than the current missions of agencies. 
10.4. ORGANIZATION FOR THE FUTURE 
If one examines present agency activities against the four govern- 
mental functions defined in section 10.2 quite clearly the Government 
is doing very well in meeting its responsibilities in supporting pro- 
grams of research and education. NSF and ONR have developed 
strong support for academic activities in oceanography, although these 
need to be broadened beyond oceanographic institutions (see secs. 4.11, 
5.4, 9). On the whole the Panel believes that both NSF and ONR 
have discharged their duties well. Beyond the provision of ships, lab- 
87 
