the aggregate expenditures for marine science and 
technology tend to mask the trends in long-term 
R&D iinancing. Similarly, the logistical costs of re- 
search, e.g.. expenditures for the maintenance and 
operation oi ships and facilities, while they contribute 
to the research effort, are fixed costs that tend to in- 
crease over time, but which cannot be considered 
legitimately as increases in research effort. 
For practical purposes, funding for ocean-related 
R&D in terms of constant 1967 dollars has been 
nearly level since 1968 if the short-term increase in 
funding in 1971-72 is discounted (fig. 7-3). Ex- 
penditures for all activities included in the Federal 
Ocean Program followed a similar trend, with fund- 
ing in terms of constant 1967 dollars increasing 
slowly over the past decade (fig. 7-4). 
Structure of Marine Science and Technology—Perspectives of the Field 
Science is often categorized in quasi-independent 
elements: “basic” and “applied”; “mission-oriented” 
and “nonmission-oriented”; “big” and “little.” Sci- 
ence is aiso categorized by performer. Each cate- 
gory has a constituency, each has its patronage, and 
each plays an important role in the R&D continuum. 
0.8 
Current 
dollars 
Constant 
1967 
* dollars 
8200, 
ftongnnvnoonaususenrers,,, | gos "200eacvacqsa®™ 
0.2 
0 [eS ia SSE eect 
69 7 
1967 ‘73 75 71 
Figure 7-4.—Expenditures for the total Federal Ocean 
Program 1967-77 (billion dollars). 
The high cost of equipment, ships, and laboratory 
facilities have created a situation where only the Fed- 
eral Government and industry can afford to support 
marine science and technology. But industry re- 
sources are directed toward profit-making activities, 
and there are limits to Federal funds available for 
R&D. Thus, the issues in Federal support of ocean- 
related R&D often hinge on the allocation of the 
Federal ocean R&D budget among competing but 
complementary scientific activities. There are few 
benchmarks to determine how much basic or applied 
science is enough. Similarly, there are no precise 
performance standards to determine whether the 
cost effectiveness of university-based research is 
greater or smaller than Federal laboratory-based re- 
search. Equally difficult to decide is: what kind and 
how much research and development should be un- 
derwritten by the private sector vis-a-vis the Federal 
Government? 
Much of the controversy over the distribution of 
support between basic and applied science arises 
from the persistent concern by the general academic 
community that basic science is not receiving a fair 
share of the total R&D budget. If indeed there is a 
mismatch between the basic science budget and the 
total science budget, it may be partly because poten- 
tial applications often underlie the private and public 
support of basic science, yet the value of any given 
piece of work often does not become fully apparent 
until years after it is published. 
A comparison of total R&D expenditures (fig. 7-1) 
with basic research expeditures (fig.7—5) reveals that 
both rose continually during the 1960-76 period as 
measured in current dollars; in constant dollars, 
funds for both in 1975 were at about the 1965 level. 
This level for basic research was 12 percent lower 
than the peak year of 1968; for all R&D, the 1975 
level was 7.5 percent below 1968. In 1976, basic 
research expenditures rose 1.6 percent in constant 
dollars, while tctal constant dollar R&D expenditures 
rose 2.9 percent (fig. 7-1). 
The Federal component of R&D expenditures 
follows a pattern similar to the national. The 
Federal pattern, however, is somewhat more favor- 
able to basic research. In constant dollars, total 
Federal expenditures for R&D peaked in 1967, 
dropped 20 percent to a 1975 low, and then rose 
3 percent in 1976. Federal constant dollar support 
for basic research peaked in 1968, dropped 16 per- 
cent to the 1975 low, but rose only 1 percent in 
1976. The difference between the trends for all R&D 
and for basic research reflects the fact that industry, 
which provides over 40 percent of total R&D sup- 
port, continued to expand its activities in the applied 
“sciences and engineering. Meanwhile, the share of 
the R&D dollar allocated to basic research by the 
Federal Government, which contributed over two- 
VIi-4 
