216 
in bureaucratic organization lead to the establishment of an elaborate 
organizational structure and decisionmaking procedure in Soviet ocean 
policy. 
In the United States, this structure includes 23 agencies in the 
executive branch and 16 committees in Congress that are concerned 
with ocean affairs.'’2 In addition there are many corporate, business, 
and private interests. Management and policymaking in the United 
States is correspondingly complicated, but does not seem to approach 
the multilayered organizational system encountered in the Soviet 
Union. Soviet institutional involvement in ocean affairs includes de- 
partments of the Communist Party at the central and local levels, 
ministries and agencies of the Soviet government, and outside advisors. 
Ocean management and policymaking is not the simple extension of 
the Communist Party line, but the result of multiple interactions within 
and between the party and government. Although this does not imply 
that the complexities of the ocean management problem are fully 
or adequately understood and reflected in Soviet policy, it does 
emphasize the existence of a number of diverse interests and institu- 
tions in the ocean field that participate at various levels of the deci- 
sionmaking process. 
Ocean policymaking and management in the Soviet Union involves 
the Political Bureau of the Central Committee as the supreme power, 
the Secretariat of the Central Committee, the Plenums of the Central 
Committee, and the Congress of the CPSU as organizations lower 
in the Communist Party hierarchy. In addition to the Communist 
Party, there is heavy government participation in ocean decisionmak- 
ing. Three ministries with their subsidiary administrations and institu- 
tions are directly and almost exclusively involved in ocean uses. Nu- 
merous other ministries have important indirect interests in the oceans 
field. A number of state committees take part in planning or various 
stages of oversight. Scientific research institutes under the ministries, 
higher educational institutions, and the Academy of Sciences system 
also promote their interests in ocean policymaking. Private individuals 
and interest groups, primarily ecological, must also be taken into 
account. 
The structure of Soviet ocean management and policymaking has 
not been constant over time. There have been countless reorganiza- 
tions in an attempt to improve system operations. Many of these 
changes parallel the overall administrative reorganizations in the Soviet 
Union. Others are a response to the expanded ocean activities and 
international concerns. The reorganizations can be viewed as similar 
to the phenomenon that Washington witnesses in ocean management 
which believes that “‘sweeping out old structures is tantamount to 
reform and progress.”’!? The periodic recurrence of reorganizations 
is testimony that they do not achieve their objectives. 
The U.S.S.R. has also been an active participant in international 
discussions on maritime policy, and the United Nations Law of the 
Sea sessions over the years have had a significant impact on Soviet 
ocean policy formulation. The U.N. proceedings can be seen as both 
a catalyst and as a context for Soviet institutional responses. 
ise otis ‘“‘National Ocean Institutions: Research Needs,’ Ocean Development and Inter- 
national Law Journal. 3 (2, 1975): pp. 155-170. 
'3Wenk, p. 332. 
