Page images
PDF
EPUB

some areas of metallurgy, some areas of solid-state physics, astronomy, and many specialized instrumentation fields such as high-resolution electron microscopes. If this attrition in the American leadership of science and technology continues, I think it will have disastrous effects on our entire society.

THE BASIC PROBLEM

Are these difficulties merely a reflection of Federal fiscal problems which will pass if the Vietnam war is ended? I think not. I fear that the problem is more basic

The scientific establishment of the country is facing these severe, unsettling effects as a result of changing national interests, as well as the mounting government expenditures arising from the Vietnam war and the crisis in our cities. The difficulty has been made even more acute by a growing unwillingness on the part of some members of Congress to support university-based research through the Department of Defense. This exists because some legislators, resenting the anti-war attitudes prevalent on many campuses, have used cuts in research budgets as a way of expressing their dissatisfaction with campus activities; and, ironically, others have tried to reduce Defense Department academic research because they fear that DOD money is corrupting the universities.

Unfortunately, the impact of the anti-university and anti-science sentiment in the Congress is not restricted to programs sponsored by the Department of Defense. The National Science Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, the Atomic Energy Commission, and the space agency, as well as many other agencies that sponsor R & D activities, have had their research support cut more severely than other parts of their budgets. The nation is planning to spend an additional twenty billion dollars on highway programs while three hundred million dollars is being squeezed out for research support.

A SOUND STRATEGY FOR SCIENCE

Much of this difficulty arises, I believe, because we do not have a sound strategy for science. Most of the R & D support of the past 20 years has been based on Cold War incentives-that is, military requirements and the space race. Less than two billion dollars of the approximately fifteen billion spent on research and development by the Federal government in 1967 was undertaken to support other goals, and more than half of this remainder was for health-related activities.

It has been our nation's good fortune that most of the fundamental research supported for security and space reasons was generally useful. Even most of the exploratory research and some of the specific equipment developments undertaken for these special reasons have had a much more general utility. The transistor, the high-speed computer, the jet aircraft, and the communication satellite are but four of the many examples of the developments that evolved from defense or space work.

But this pattern of support has resulted in a seriously lopsided research program. For example, the fields of chemistry and the social sciences have been regularly underfunded. The National Science Foundation, the agency that should have corrected these imbalances, has never been supported adequately. Those few Federal programs that have been created to help, understand, and cope with the great social and technological problems of our times are not very well conceived or very well managed. The pollution control program, for example, is too gadget-oriented, too short range, and lacks an adequate exploratory research base on which to build a sounder effort. The programs oriented to the many tough problems of the cities are similarly deficient. This difficulty arises, I suspect, because the agencies responsible for the related action programs are under great pressure to get quick results. What is more, they too are underfunded and, additionally, have not tradition of research support to guide their efforts.

TOWARD A DECENT SOCIETY

Regardless of the current mood and attitudes, progress toward a decent society in the future will continue to depend upon a strong scientific program and its related educational activities, and so we must seek ways to remedy the present situation.

Given the present antagonisms and the considerable skepticism about the value of continued high-level research and development activities, I have con

cluded that the only solution is to reorganize and strengthen the Federal mechanisms for planning and supporting research and development.

Dr. Donald Hornig, the President's Science Adviser, also is considering such possibilities for he talked about the creation of a Department of Science in a recent speech to the American Chemical Society.

In the past, those of us who have studied the problems of science policy generally concluded that the more diffuse multiagency arrangements currently employed serve the nation better than would a single Department of Science, into which were consolidated all Federal research and development activities. I still feel that a single agency with the responsibility for all Federal activities would be a poor arrangement. In fact, I believe it would be a mistake even to concentrate the responsibility for all basic research in a single agency. But given the present situation, one which I am certan will persist unless we have another major military confrontation, we must create more effective mechanisms for planning and managing the government's scientific activities.

The reasons for supporting scientific activities have been repeated so often that they have begun to sound like clichés. Nonetheless, I don't believe we can escape the fact that a continued high level of research and development is essential for many vital national purposes.

THE KEYS TO THE FUTURE

Basic science and technology remains the keys to the future. For without them, we will not solve the innumerable national and international problems which challenge our well-being and the peace of the world. The rapid solution of the urgent problems of urban and community redevelopment, mass transportation, the creation of new industry, the implementation of effective disarmament—all require highly technical information. Effective population control, food production, maintenance and improvement of health, elimination of air and water pollution-problems which threaten our very existence-demand the broad application of biological and chemical skills.

Even though for the moment the military technologies have matured, we cannot write off the need to maintain a strong military research and development program. It is clearly prudent to maintain a sufficiently high level of military research and development to insure that we will not suddenly be confronted by a decisive new technology in the hands of a potential enemy. Furthermore, the only basis on which it is possible to judge someone else's claims for a new military development is on the basis of knowledge obtained through onr own research and development activities.

Only because of our own efforts to develop an effective anti-ballistic defense system are we in a position to make a reasonable evaluation of the Soviet system—an evaluation, incidentally, that allows us to be quite certain that the Soviet system will be almost totally ineffective against the sophisticated American missiles. Unfortunately, up to now the reaction to the lessening of suspicions and tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union has not been to stop the large-scale development of weapons, but rather to slow down the research effort to provide the basic knowledge which would make us strong in the future.

The United States long ago launched on a course of creating a decent society: a society that provided both for the material and psychic needs of all of its citizens; a society that provided a rewarding and challenging opportunity for all of its members; a society that was committed to preserving its physical beauty and its resources for future generations; and a society that was committed to freedom and justice for all. I think the present turmoil at home and abroad should be regarded as part of the movement towards those goals rather than as reason for despair. Our national resolve should be to strive hard for them. As engineers and scientists, as teachers and entrepreneurs in scientific fields, we have a key role to play in moving the world ahead as well as providing for our security. It is this fact which is inadequately appreciated.

The solution of many problems requires, as I have already implied, a greater knowledge of individual and group behavior, research in areas to which too little attention has been paid. They also require new techniques in the natural and social sciences whose creation depends on a continuing flow of new knowledge, and the continuing availability of large numbers of young, well-educated research scientists, engineers, and technologists. Such solutions will also provide the basis for new industries that will employ our growing population and enrich our economy.

TO REMAIN A VITAL NATION

We need a recommitment to an aggressive, vital scientific program a rededication motivated by the true need of our society, the need to be continuously inventing our future if we are to remain a vital nation.

There is today no effective process by which our nation can really focus on its problems and needs. There is no single entity of government that even has the responsibility for planning and monitoring the broad range of R & D activities that are required to support the national goals. No wonder there is so little understanding of the purposes of the country's research efforts.

The Office of Science and Technology, which I once headed, attempts to identify and coordinate important areas of R & D and to give some balance to the national effort. It succeeds to a certain degree in this effort. But since it is not an operating agency it can neither support the programs adequately before the Congress nor insure their quality after they are initiated. The National Academy of Science and the National Academy of Engineering have provided much of the long-range guidance that has been available for science planning, and this work has been of very great value, but neither continuous enough nor broad enough in scope.

Incidentally, there now exists a focal point in the Congress for reviewing science programs. The House Science and Astronautics Committee has been developing the capability to review and integrate the Federal R & D effort for the Congress. Through the efforts of Congressmen George P. Miller [Dem., Calif.] and Emilio Q. Daddario [Dem., Conn.] we have seen a major improvement in the congressional aspect of Federal R & D management.

The most important single need in our nation is to develop a more rational process for forecasting social trends and for developing plans to deal with the problems and needs that are identified. While this process would include planning for R & D, it should extend considerably beyond this to indicate resource allocation for all public endeavors. Dr. Hornig's proposed new agency, a Department of Science if you will, could be given the responsibility for these programs as well, though it might be more effective to create a national resources planning council to carry out this function.

It would seem quite appropriate to use the National Science Foundation as the core for a new R & D agency. In addition to its present responsibilities, it should be given a responsibility for basic and exploratory research in the environmental and urban areas, in education, and in other fields that are currently inadequately supported, paralleling the more mission-oriented activities that are now undertaken by specific agencies.

A STRONG MANDATE

The new agency should be given a strong mandate to stress the development of the social and human sciences and the technology needed to do the forecasting and resource allocation studies that I mentioned earlier. It might also have the responsibility for developing an analysis and forecasting system, and possibly operating it, to support the executive and legislative branches of the government. I would also consider as a possibility the transfer of the responsibility for the support of high education from the Office of Education to the new agency, so that one agency of the government would be concerned with all of the many aspects of Federal assistance to universities—including facilities grants, support of special educational activities, student assistance, and the sponsorship of academic research.

The four responsibilities that I propose for the new agency-the sponsorship of programs of fundamental and applied science, the sharing with other governmental agencies of support of exploratory research related to the numerous governmental missions, the forecasting and resource allocation planning efforts, and the support of the nation's universities are closely related and should all profit from inclusion within a single entity. Only by an arrangement of this nature which constantly reminds us of the tasks ahead will we succeed in reestablishing a proper national priority for science, and thus insure that the scientific and technical capabilities of the nation are adequate and properly focused.

CORPORATE GROWTH AND CHANGE

Coming full circle to this Technical Information Center, I have been speaking of the need for improved organization and support of our technical and scientific resources in government. This need is no less important in our great industries, whose corporate growth and whose ability to manage change depend upon their ability to use research and development to further corporate objectives. As in other areas of corporate strategy, the availability of timely and accurate information in fields relevant to the company's product interests is fundamental to sound planning, to product development, and to the directions of technical effort. Serving as it does the whole corporation, including the Celanese divisions as well as the research laboratories here in Summit, the Technical Information Center represents a vital link between research and the market place. It is part of the cement that strengthens and extends the company's technical reach.

Given the problem of allocating scarce technological resources within Celanese, and an almost limitless range of possibilities for corporate R & D, the Technical Information Center can play a crucial role in determining the optimum use of Celanese scientific talent. It can be an important link to basic research in the universities, and in providing essential support both for the R & D process and to the individual scientists and engineers of Celanese. In our leading industrial research laboratories, the modern, well-staffed Technical Information Center has been recognized as an indispensable nerve center that connects corporate brain power to its muscle and bone structure.

THE COMPANY'S FUTURE

I applaud Celanese management for taking the farsighted step of creating this splendid Technical Information Center we dedicate today. I encourage its clients the scientific staff here in Summit and elsewhere-to make full use of this important new information center. Finally, I congratulate Dr. A. E. Brown [President, Celanese Research Company] and his associates on this happy occasion, for their contributions will, I am sure, have a telling effect on the company's future.

APPENDIX I

WHEELER, HARVEY. THE CONSTITUTIONALIZATION OF SCIENCE. [SANTA BARBARA, CALIFORNIA. CENTER FOR THE STUDY OF DEMOCRATIC INSTITUTIONS], NOVEMBER 1968.

[The following excerpt is the final section of Mr. Wheeler's paper in which he suggests several ways by which the constitutional accountability of science can be insured. As used in this paper, the term constitutionalization of science concerns the massive institutional and social implications of the developmental and technological applications of science. The subject is of concern because of the increasing realization that without direction, science and technology can be utilized for purposes which have serious potentials for causing harm to society.] Let us summarize the state of the argument to this point: science has reached a new stage of development posing new problems for society. They cannot be solved by instituting a Leibnitzian academy, by professionalization or by departmentalization. Only constitutionalization will suffice. But what will this entail? Suppose we attempt to insure the constitutional accountability of science through a new public corporation.

IX. THE CONSTITUTIONALIZATION OF SCIENCE

1. A PUBLIC CORPORATION

How would this work? Perhaps the A.E.C., Telstar and the T.V.A. will serve as examples. A public corporation for developmental science can be chartered and given its constitution. Civilian control can be installed and charged with the discharge of several functions that are not now performed at all. Most obvious is the need to provide us with an ombudsman for science. He would serve not only in response to public complaints but also for complaints raised by scientists themselves, from inside the establishment, so to speak. An ombudsman for science should be given positive, as well as negative, or corrective functions. That is, in addition to investigating alleged evils he should also be charged with seeing that the scientific enterprise achieves its publicly approved goals. This would require a special system of adjudication, complete with its own review courts, and this will be more fully discussed later.

To approach science in this way requires thinking in terms of a new branch of constitutional theory, for it implies an "architectonic" conception of the politics of science. The intellectual endeavors of individuals must be thought of in broad political terms, rather than merely in terms of the narrow desires of those who wish to pursue knowledge for its own, or their own, sakes. This requires taking fresh thought about problems such as representation, which we thought the 18th century had put to rest for all times. If there is to be a new kind of public corporation for science, if it is to be under civilian control, and if the public will is to make its voice heard and responded to, then there must be some way for that will to find expression. This raises the "legislative" question of how to furnish science with responsible policy-forming and goal-establishing functions. We know that the scandalous scientific boondoggling of the recent past must be prevented. Scientists themselves have publicized certain unsavory aspects of "big science:" the space program and the Mohole project, are examples. For it is clear that in addition to the fact that science may harm us, it is also true that scientists seem prone to make incredibly bad judgments about the conduct of their own affairs. Hence, science must be provided with a legislature. It must be one especially designed for science because we have already seen that our present legislative organs are inadequate for the task. Moreover, in order for civilian control to work there must be participation by citizens as well as by scientists.

« PreviousContinue »