- 8 - 498 Now let me say a few words about the Science and Technology Information and Utilization Corporation, which Title IV of the bill would set up. The purposes expressed for the Corporation are admirable, and I hope that in whatever legislation is finally adopted, the Congress will express its determination that there should be in the executive branch some such focal center to concern itself with the effectiveness of scientific and technical information services from a broad national point of view. I also commend the wisdom of Title IV in not attempting to centralize control over the wide diversity of information activities of the various agencies. Though some countries have indeed opted for a very high degree of such centralized control, nearly all the studies to which I referred earlier have considered the pluralistic management of information services in the United States to be a source of strength and have recommended retaining it. I agree strongly with this conclusion. Title IV does, however, gather together under the Corporation two kinds of activities: first, the dissemination of data, program information, and reports from all Federal agencies, now performed by two entities, the Smithsonian Science Information Exchange and the National Technical Information Service; and second, the programs of the Office of Science Information Service, which undertake both research on information services and their use, and stimulation of non-governmental services in all areas of science and technology. While the first functions might well be combined, I question the wisdom of including the second in the same administrative framework. Programs designed to acquire knowledge and stimulate efficiency in all types of information services are apt to suffer if they are operated by an agency that also has the responsibility of supplying from day to day a small number of information services of very particular kinds. I have similar misgivings about having the Science and - 9 - effective than an arrangement whereby the Board would have a small full-time staff of its own, and would report directly either to the Secretary (if a Department of Research and Technology Operations is established), or to the Council of Advisors on Science and Technology or to such other office as may be established for a science advisor. The latter alternative reporting to what would be essentially a reconstituted Office of Science and Technology would be, I think, distinctly preferable. For the proposed Department of Research and Technology Operations would still fail to include many present agencies that have extremely important scientific and technical information activities for example, the Department of Defense and the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. It would be unwise to let the thinking of a distinguished board on broad national policies run the risk of being identified with the special interests of a particular department. SUMMARY: Let me summarize my position on issues related to Title IV. believe that a body like the Science and Technology Information and Utilization Board described in the bill is very much needed, to supply perspective and policy advice to the Federal government as a whole. But I believe that in order for such a body to function most effectively, it should be attached, not to a new Corporation, but to a government-wide coordinating body like the last Office of Science and Technology. Separate from this, but in close relation to it, there should be a coordinating committee of agency representatives. A staff of modest size should be provided to support the work of these two groups. In addition, the Office of Science Information Service should be explicitly assigned the responsibility of providing a resource of knowledge about information science and technology for use by these two groups and by the various agencies; as a part of this service, OSIS should periodically compile quantitative indicators of the condition and health of scientific and technical communication activities in the nation. OSIS should probably remain within the National Science Foundation, but the description of its functions originally given in the National Defense Education Act should be replaced by one making explicit mention of the research, monitoring, and stimulation activities I have described above. 10 Although I have devoted essentially all of my remarks I could say on these has already been said, more authoritatively (The Attachment follows) -3 OVERVIEW Attempts to better the social and economic well being of the United States and its citizens cannot afford to overlook or wave aside the question of how the nation uses (or fails to use) its valuable technical information resources in -policy planning -operating the country's science and technology enterprise -designing major social programs with their increasing technological content. Primary responsibility lies with the federal government for -managing and coordinating federal technical information activities But the government has not had notable success in carrying out these functions in the past because of -daily concerns overshadowing the need for forward-looking policies -federal agencies often being unwilling to defer their own immediate interests for common purposes -neglect of technical information problems that cut across organizational boundaries -insufficient attention to the user. How can the federal government surmount these difficulties and become a more effective force in the future? This key issue forms the main subject of the following report. (The report is not concerned with the operation of specific information systems and services.) The Review Group that prepared the report is unanimous in its conviction that a major redirection of technical information activities is needed at the present time. The excessive concern with document handling, where it exists, has to give way to greater recognition that |