COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS

DANTE B. FASCELL, Florida, Chairman

JOHN J. BRADY, Jr., Chief of Staff STEVEN K. BERRY, Minority Chief of Staff

(III)

FOREWORD

This eighth annual report prepared by the Department of State pursuant to section 503 of Public Law 95-426 (the Foreign Relations Authorization Act for fiscal year 1979) is the best compilation in this series of data on international scientific activities of the U.S. Government. We appreciate the effort of the Congressional Research Service of the Library of Congress in providing an insightful analysis of how well the report satisfies the legislative requirements, and we support the findings and recommendations contained in this year's critique, which was prepared by Ms. Genevieve J. Knezo.

There are several changes that the committees would recommend for improving the Title V report in future years. The committees are concerned that the report was submitted several months late, thereby reducing its usefulness for Congressional oversight of these vital programs. Another shortcoming is the unevenness of the descriptive material. Bilateral science and technology agreements with certain countries are highlighted in Chapter 4, while discussions of other agreements (e.g. Brazil, for which the Administration requested State Department funding in fiscal year 1988) are totally omitted. Further, the reader would be greatly aided by judicious cross-referencing between Chapter 4 and the more in-depth, specialized subject chapters that follow.

While the report does provide, albeit unevenly, a wealth of descriptive material, it frequently fails to address the foreign policy implications of science and technology agreements. This shortcoming is apparent in the report's cursory coverage of several topics of obvious relevance to policy-making: a surge of activity in fiscal year 1986 under U.S.-U.S.S.R. bilateral science and technology agreements; the ramifications for foreign science and technology activities of the White House's Committee on International Science, Engineering, and Technology (CISET), whose creation and plans merited coverage in the previous Title V report; the implication for the U.S.-Brazil relationship in computer sciences of Brazil's restriction on importation of computer technology; and the interagency ferment concerning renewal of the U.S.-Japan S&T agreement.

Funding data from this report are particularly valuable in helping to assess the relative roles of the many and varied international cooperative science and technology activities which Federal agencies are pursuing. However, the information on funding of science and technology activities remains inconsistent throughout the report. Comprehensive budgetary information also assists in reviewing overall foreign policy, as opposed to studying a host of unrelated foreign policy-related decisions. We recognize the difficul

ties in assembling reasonably consistent data from Federal agencies, but encourage continued effort in more complete reporting of the funding data required by Title V.

Funding is only one aspect of decisionmaking, however. The Title V text, which highlights major accomplishments, milestones and other activities throughout the year, is critical to congressional oversight and analysis of the costs and benefits that cannot be measured solely by the number of dollars expended. In this regard, the organization of the text of the report has improved with each edition in this series.

The value of this report to the Congress is, without question, far greater today than when Title V was enacted. Lawmakers foresaw that the increasingly competitive world of science and technology would require important decisions on the part of the U.S. policymakers. As the U.S. strives to maintain leadership in many science and technology areas, complex factors such as loyalty to allies, parity of access in international research efforts, and the role of cooperation in "big science" must be analyzed carefully. This Title V report provides the Congress and the American people with an overview to balance these and other factors.

The views expressed in this report are those of the executive branch and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology or of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives. The committees do, however, commend those who contributed to this eighth Title V submission.

DANTE B. FASCELL,

Chairman, Committee on Foreign Affairs.
ROBERT A. ROE,

Chairman, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology.

LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

THE WHITE HOUSE, Washington, DC, June 17, 1987.

To the Congress of the United States:

In accordance with Title V of the Foreign Relations Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1979 (Public Law 95-426), I am transmitting the Administration's eighth annual report of the international scientific and technological activities of U.S. Government agencies during Fiscal Year 1986. This report was prepared by the Department of State with information provided by relevant technical agencies, consistent with the intent of the legislation.

Science has always been an international enterprise. Today, as the rate of scientific discovery accelerates, the international character of science is even more pronounced than in the earlier decades of this century. Scientific progress and technological innovation underpin U.S. economic growth, trade and our high standard of living. Our Nation's global competitiveness in the 21st century will depend on maintaining our comparative advantage in science and technology. If U.S. science and technology (S&T) is to remain the world's best, its participants must have full access to developments and scientific results produced elsewhere. In parallel, most countries see S&T expertise and capability as a key to their economic development and long-term competitiveness. They increasingly seek an S&T relationship with the United States to further their national goals. Accordingly, S&T cooperation is playing an increasingly prominent role in the conduct of our foreign relations and diplomatic initiatives throughout the world.

The Administration's international science and technology policy serves four primary objectives: (1) to strengthen the Nation's scientific and technological enterprise; (2) to enhance commercial relations and establish new trading partnerships; (3) to promote our foreign policy goals and improve our international relations; and (4) to protect and, where possible, enhance our national security. We believe that all of the industrialized countries of the world have a responsibility to apply a portion of their economic and manpower resources to basic research to advance human knowledge and ensure humankind's continued ability to meet the challenges of the future. In international scientific agreements, we are working with our global partners to emphasize and implement the principles of equity and reciprocity of access to research and training facilities, experimental sites, information, and data. As specific agreements are negotiated or renewed, we strive to incorporate specific assurances that intellectual property rights will be protected. Such protection exemplifies the general principle of maintain