COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY ROBERT A. ROE, New Jersey, Chairman GEORGE E. BROWN, JR., California ROBERT S. WALKER, Pennsylvania CLAUDINE SCHNEIDER, Rhode Island DON RITTER, Pennsylvania RON PACKARD, California ROBERT C. SMITH, New Hampshire HARRIS W. FAWELL, Illinois D. FRENCH SLAUGHTER, JR., Virginia LAMAR SMITH, Texas JACK BUECHNER, Missouri CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut DANA ROHRABACHER, California STEVEN H. SCHIFF, New Mexico TOM CAMPBELL, California HAROLD P. HANSON, Executive Director DAVID D. CLEMENT, Republican Chief of Staff *Ranking Republican Member. (II) FT J151 1989 COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS DANTE B. FASCELL, Florida, Chairman LEE H. HAMILTON, Indiana PETER H. KOSTMAYER, Pennsylvania EDWARD F. FEIGHAN, Ohio TED WEISS, New York GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York MORRIS K. UDALL, Arizona JAMES MCCLURE CLARKE, North Carolina JAIME B. FUSTER, Puerto Rico WAYNE OWENS, Utah HARRY JOHNSTON, Florida ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American Samoa DOUGLAS H. BOSCO, California FRANK MCCLOSKEY, Indiana WILLIAM S. BROOMFIELD, Michigan BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York ROBERT J. LAGOMARSINO, California JIM LEACH, Iowa TOBY ROTH, Wisconsin OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine HENRY J. HYDE, Illinois DOUG BEREUTER, Nebraska CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey MICHAEL DEWINE, Ohio DAN BURTON, Indiana JAN MEYERS, Kansas JOHN MILLER, Washington DONALD E. "BUZ” LUKENS, Ohio BEN BLAZ, Guam ELTON GALLEGLY, California AMO HOUGHTON, New York PORTER J. GOSS, Florida FOREWORD Much of the history of mankind is the record of his ingenuity and creativity applied to the physical world around him. Today's scientific advances and sophisticated technology are the fruit of man's innovative spirit. In that process, science and technology have become the absolute foundation of modern society. We will never again live in an era when this is not true. With the advent of each year and decade, this will only become a more pervasive reality. Thus science and technology are basic determinants in our nation's equation for creating the new wealth of America and sustaining its economic growth and the continuing rise of its standard of living. We are now a planet of interrelated and interdependent nations with one global economy. In that new economy, science and technology are primary components of our relationships with other nations. They are pivotal points of both cooperation and competition. They are the grounds on which we can cement strong and positive commitments with other members of the world community. The State Department's Science and Technology Counselors are critical links in these international science and technology efforts. Their expertise in both the technical and the diplomatic aspects of international science and technology policy makes their understanding and advice invaluable to Members of the Congress and especially to our two Committees. Science, Technology, and American Diplomacy 1989 was submitted to our Committees by the President pursuant to Section 503(b) of Title V of Public Law 95-426, the Foreign Relations Authorization Act, Fiscal Year 1979. Title V was enacted because of the conviction of many in the Congress that science and technology were among the strongest cards that the U.S. could play in its diplomatic relations. The intervening ten years have served to reinforce this view, as virtually all the nations of the world-rich and poor, developed and developing, East and West-have come to look to science and technology as the key to environmentally sustainable economic development. During the same time, the Title V report itself has become an increasingly useful and utilized reference tool both in the United States and overseas. This edition-the tenth in the series-is an improvement over last year's and demonstrates an effort to balance the vast amounts of data on the Federal Government's international S&T agreements (presented in summary_form via a set of tables in the appendices) with information on the Secretary of State's implementation of the Act (contained in the five main chapters). P.L. 95-426 required that the President transmit annual recommendations to Congress on: (1) personnel needs, standards, and training to fulfill the intent of law; (2) the continuation of existing bilateral and multilateral activities and agreements primarily involving science and technology (S&T) activities (with an analysis of their foreign policy implications and technological benefits for the parties involved); (3) the adequacy of funding for these activities; and (4) plans for routine evaluation of the activities. We note, however, that this Report, like some of its predecessors, does not offer recommendations on these four measures: personnel, funding, implications for foreign policy of science and technology agreements, and plans for evaluation. We recognize the magnitude of the task of compiling the information that appears in this Report, but P.L. 95-426 specifically requests a level of evaluation that is not evident in this Report, but should be. In 1988, both the Congress and the Administration pursued measures to improve protection of U.S. intellectual property rights (IPR) and to provide symmetrical access in international S&T activities. In response to concerns over U.S. industrial competitiveness, the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 added another requirement to the report-namely, an analysis of “equity of access by U.S. public and private entities to public (and publicly supported private) R&D opportunities and facilities in each country which is a major trading partner of the U.S." This year's report is the first to contain data on "symmetrical access". Although President Bush's letter of transmittal focuses on these issues, and the body of this report contains numerous references to them, the analysis of equity of access by U.S. public and private entities to our trading partners' R&D opportunities and facilities suffers from a lack of continuity. It might be helpful for the reader to know that key references to IPR and symmetrical access appear in the following discussions: In Chapter 1, under a policy section on "Trends in S&T Cooperation", legislative language on symmetrical access to technological research (Section 5171 of the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988) is printed. Chapter 3, which covers selected U.S. bilateral relationships, discusses IPR negotiations, albeit inconsistently. For instance, there is a comprehensive update of the IPR problem in S&T negotiations with India, but there is no mention of the issue in the context of the U.S./Japan S&T agreement. Future editions of the report should cover these topics for each of our major trading partners. Chapter 5 also contains a brief section on the Administration's efforts at fulfilling section 5171 of the Trade Act. Although acknowledging both the complexities involved in presenting a comprehensive assessment of IPR and symmetrical access in S&T agreements and the fact that this is a new requirement for the report, we would urge that future reports pay even closer attention to this provision. We would also suggest that future reports take direction from the wise words of President Bush in the letter of transmittal: The challenge facing us in the years ahead is how to maintain and expand an open, mutually beneficial world system of exchange and cooperation in science and technology without undercutting our national competitiveness or jeopardizing our security interests and responsibilities. |