This is an archived USAID document retained on this web site as a matter of public record.
Administrator J. Brian Atwood
National Academy of Sciences
Washington, D.C., March 12, 1997
U.S. Agency for International Development
Thank you, Dr. Alberts, and members of the Academy for
inviting me to talk with you. We are neighbors, but like many
Americans today, even though we are right across the street, we
do not often get a chance to talk, so I very much appreciate this
opportunity.
Incidentally, I'm sure you noticed that our neighbor down
the street, Alan Greenspan, went up to the Hill a few weeks ago
-- and the stock market went crazy for a day or two.
I don't mean to sound self-serving, but I will note here that I
was recently able to testify before three different Congressional
committees two weeks ago without creating as much as a ripple
on the Dow Jones.
No, the words of the USAID Administrator are not likely to
affect the financial markets. But they are watched carefully by
the governments of developing nations. We still have an impact
on other donors. We can still influence the behavior of much of
the world by our actions and by our inactions.
That is one of the reasons I wanted to meet with you today
to discuss science and technology in the context of international
development and humanitarian cooperation.
We share an important mission. The Academy's charter is
to further science and technology for the general welfare of the
American people. USAID's charter is to take the fruits of
science and technology to the farthest reaches of the globe -- to
places where most of the world's people live, where poverty,
disease, environmental disasters and hunger are all too
commonplace.
Despite the dire conditions in which most of the world's
population still lives, we have made tremendous strides over the
past 50 years in tackling some of the world's greatest challenges.
These achievements in bettering people's lives are largely the
result of investments by the international community in scientific
interventions.
Results from this investment can be seen in areas as
important as children's health, family planning, agriculture and
the environment.
Children and Health
In the past half-century, infant mortality has been reduced by
one-half worldwide.
Our work with the International Center for Diarrheal
Disease Research in Bangladesh pioneered the use of Oral
Rehydration Therapy as a usable and cost-effective treatment
for the dehydration that was once the world's leading killer
of children. As a result, the lives of 1 million children are
saved each year, and diarrhea has moved to the number two
spot on the list of deadly but preventable childhood diseases.
We supported research that first demonstrated that children
were dying because of Vitamin A deficiencies -- we also
supported intervention trials that have proven that at least 30
percent of the 13 million children who die from common
childhood diseases in developing countries could be saved by
increasing the Vitamin A and other micronutrients in their
diets.
We have helped to eradicate polio from the Western
Hemisphere. This has involved research aimed at stabilizing
the polio vaccine, and the development of new technology
that makes possible the delivery of the vaccine to far-flung
populations. With concerted effort, in the next few years,
polio will join smallpox as the second disease to be
eradicated worldwide, saving the American people the $230
million we spend annually on immunizing our own children
against polio.
Our social science research programs determine critical data
for appropriate case-management. For example, in Nepal,
USAID-supported research demonstrated the effective use of
a widely available oral antibiotic for the management of
childhood pneumonia. This research led to standards of care
adopted by WHO for worldwide management of acute
respiratory infections in children.
Family Planning
In the family planning field, we have funded the
development and distribution of a variety of contraceptive
methods, giving couples in developing countries a real
choice. The results are dramatic: In countries with USAID
family planning programs, the number of children the
average woman bears in a lifetime has decreased from six to
three. According to a recent Rockefeller Foundation report,
our global population is 500 million fewer people because
we made these investments.
We have been in the forefront of every advance in family
planning, expanding the choices available and helping to
meet the unmet needs of more than 100 million people
worldwide. U.S. S&T investments have been critical to the
development of appropriate contraceptives that are safe,
reliable and acceptable to users.
To stem the epidemic of globally transmitted diseases, our
programs of research to prevent AIDS and other sexually
transmitted infections have demonstrated the value of a
strategy that aims both at changing high-risk sexual behavior
and at early detections and treatment of infections. The
odds are enormous. In Nigeria alone, estimates range from
1 million to 3.5 million people infected with HIV. We are
seeing the first evidence of a slowing of the AIDS epidemic
in countries from Thailand to Uganda. Our behavioral
research programs bring the benefits of technology advances
to the people who need them.
USAID-supported health research has produced important
breakthroughs, such as low-cost single-use syringes, low-cost diagnostic technologies to detect AIDS antibodies and
hepatitis B viruses through blood screening. The vial
monitors introduced last year for polio vaccines allow health
workers to know whether vaccines have been exposed to too
much heat and are no longer viable.
Agriculture
And, in the war against world hunger, food production
doubled and tripled in many developing countries as a result
of the Green Revolution. According to the Millennium
Institute, yields have increased worldwide about 2.1 percent
per year since the mid 1970s. Research funded by USAID at
the international agricultural research centers and in
cooperation with U.S. universities and private companies
prevented famine and malnourishment in many lands.
This research has led to important innovations such as the
development of natural pesticides and biotechnological
improvement of crops. For example, genes for natural
insecticides (against mosquitoes or moths) have been discovered
and are now inserted genetically into potatoes, sweet potatoes,
rice, maize and other crops.
We have been a major funder of a worldwide network of
agriculture research institutes. Results at one of these, the
International Rice Research Institute, created high-yield rice that
is adding $30 billion every year to the economies of Asia. We
have aided in the development of sorghum and millet that are
resistant to weeds, a critical consideration in Africa where these
crops predominate. And we are supporting research on the new
agricultural technologies that will enable us to overcome drought
and pest infestations.
In addition to advancing U.S. competitiveness, investments
in international agriculture research brings other direct
benefits to the U.S. IFPRI estimates that for every $1
invested, in international wheat research, the U.S. has
received $190 in return in direct products, new seeds, and in
new markets.
Environment
The U.S. has led the way in the application of appropriate
renewable energies. Our pathbreaking work in support of
biomass cogeneration, for example, has resulted in over 300
megawatts of installed capacity around the world, offsetting over
2 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions annually. By leading
the way in the use of agricultural wastes as a clean fuel resource,
USAID has made a lasting contribution to economic development
and economic growth in India, Central America and elsewhere.
Concrete actions in the areas of health, population,
agriculture and the environment serve mutually to reinforce each
other. And, as has been thoroughly documented by many
independent institutions, including your own, the leadership
which the U.S. has provided to these efforts has had wide and
lasting effects on the lives of millions, and has deeply influenced
the programs of other donors as well as our partner countries.
These achievements were possible because we made long-term investments in science for humanity over many years.
Where would we have been without our investments in
science and technology? What would the world look like had we
not made these investments?
To predict what would have been is somewhat like trying to
count the disasters that have been avoided. Yet we only have to
look at projections from 17 years ago that warned of the
impending disasters.
During the Carter Administration, our government released
a report -- called Global 2000 -- that instigated a national debate.
The Report 17 years ago projected devastating effects for the
peoples of the world due to rapid population growth, exploitation
of our natural resources, and extensive degradation of our
environment. Despite dangerously low levels of funding in
science and technology in the developing world, we have dodged
the global catastrophes on the scale envisioned in the Global 2000
report -- but not by much. We have many challenges, but we
have avoided the dark world painted in Global 2000 that
envisioned unbridled population growth, rampant disease and
pollution, and destabilizing political and refugee crises.
Given our progress thus far, there are some who would
think that we have "won." That our investments in the past will
protect us for what comes next. You and I know that this is
false. The international community must recognize that investing
in science and technology today is just as important as it was 30
years ago. The private sector "gets it." Businesses maintain
large portfolios of research and development investments. Why?
In simple terms, investments in science and technology yield
companies high returns over the long run, increase competitive
advantage and prepare for the uncertainties of the future.
Why then does the international donor community not get it?
Why are we falling so short?
Consider the recent trends :
Resources for world-wide public sector agricultural research
have declined dramatically. Long-term funding for core
research at the international agriculture research centers has
dropped from approximately 270 million dollars to about
190 million this decade. Research staffs have been cut by
almost 50 percent.
Investments in population research also declined
dramatically. In particular, contraceptive research has
dropped by over 40 percent since 1993. The U.S. has led
this decline.
Research on developing country health problems, including
infectious diseases, has also been on a steady decline. This
drop is particularly ominous when you consider that of all
health research funds spent globally, only 5 percent of these
funds are devoted to investigating health problems of
developing countries -- but 95 percent of the burden of
disease is in developing countries.
On behalf of our children, we must sound the alarm. Our
investments in science and technology have suffered along with
the decline in our development budget. We are jeopardizing our
earlier investments by not paying attention to the future.
The work to overcome development challenges is as much in
the U.S. national interest as it is an expression of American
national values. Hunger, for example, sets off cycles of
instability, migration, and in the worst case, war. Projections
indicate that in the next 20 years, there will be two billion more
people to feed. How will we void the consequences of not
feeding them?
New advances in agricultural biotechnology offer a number
of opportunities to address these continuing challenges:
-- genetic manipulation of crop plants can increase yields while
decreasing reliance on chemical pesticides
-- genetic manipulation of important subsistence crops offers
the potential to more quickly develop new varieties which
offer precise improvements in nutritional quality
-- development of inexpensive and efficient genetically
engineered vaccines and diagnostics for important livestock
diseases will discourage the cross-border movement of
diseases, particularly in areas where regional trade is
increasing
-- and even more recent developments point to the use of
important tropical crop plants, such as bananas, as delivery
systems for human vaccines.
Currently, the U.S. is the world leader in the development
of biotechnology-based products for agriculture. Continuing
USAID support that engages U.S. institutions encourages further
U.S. leadership in the technology and offers potential
opportunities to develop biotech-based products for the emerging
markets of the developing world.
Diseases, particularly infectious diseases, are emerging as a
global biological threat. A New York Times article last week
pointed out that chaos breeds disease and disease breeds chaos.
The author declared that disease is winning the wars in Africa.
The article quotes Uganda's President Museveni:
"It is not hard to find the winner in the Sudanese war, or in
any war in Africa: it is the microbes that always emerge
victorious. Infectious disease flowers in conditions of
anarchy. Measles, cholera, malaria, AIDS, sleeping
sickness, leprosy. "If you leave Africa undeveloped, it
becomes a conservation center for epidemic diseases."
America does have compelling national security interests in
many parts of the world: a whole new set of biological national-security issues: environmental destruction, explosive population
growth, the rapid spread of age-old diseases and the emergence of
entirely new diseases. Ignoring these new threats with little
devoted to preventing them will do nothing but set us back as
much, if not more, as we have gained.
Environmental challenges facing one nation increasingly
impact the citizens of other nations. Nowhere is this more
apparent than in China. Given its massive size, population, and
rapid economic growth, no other developing country matches
China's ability to alter the global environment.
During her testimony last month, Secretary of State
Madeleine Albright cautioned Congress not to underestimate the
importance of our relationship with China, and the need to
integrate, not isolate, the world's most populous nation. She
said, "The best way for the United States to pursue the interests
we share with China, and those where our views diverge, is
through a consistent policy of engagement." I couldn't agree
more.
The Secretary's visit to Beijing on her first overseas trip and
Vice President Gore's upcoming visit later this month indicate the
importance of engaging with China so we can discuss areas of
concern like human rights while maintaining a productive
relationship.
What I am about to say is a personal view. It is a
controversial view. It even contradicts current law. I will be
criticized by some for saying it, but I believe it is now time for
us to engage in a development cooperation partnership with
China. Not just because it will benefit China, but because it will
benefit us. We cannot afford not to. We don't need to give them
money, but we do need to share ideas.
Just as we must not ignore the effect developing economies
have on our own, it is also unwise to ignore the impact that
environmental actions -- or inactions -- in the developing world
have on the air we breathe and the water we drink.
Let me cite a few examples relating to China that should
concern all of us.
China's dependence on coal will make it the world's number
one emitter of greenhouse gases by the year 2020 unless the
current trend is altered. The low-quality coal used by China
results in acid rain that exacerbates environmental
degradation throughout Northeast Asia.
China's lack of wastewater treatment pollutes the world's
seas, affecting marine life and fisheries. An estimated 80
percent of the country's industrial and domestic waste is
discharged untreated.
And, China's demand for exotic wildlife products for use in
traditional medicines threatens the existence of many
endangered species.
Clearly, China's environmental challenges are huge. The
U.S. has an opportunity to engage with China to solve
environmental and industrial questions of common concern, and
USAID can play an important role. The Agency's highly
successful U.S.-Asia Environmental Partnership program, or US-AEP for short, helps Asian nations address their environmental
problems in a way that promotes cleaner technologies while
supporting U.S. exports to a highly lucrative market that creates
high-tech jobs for Americans.
We share this globe with China and in the next decade we
will either see tensions increase as China wrestles with its internal
problems. Or, we will see China become a real partner in the
international community, a partner that follows the rules and
seeks to answer its own problems by cooperating with them. We
need to engage if we want to pursue the option of integration and
cooperation. And science and technology can open China to the
solutions it needs to find. It can also open the Chinese society to
democracy.
Last May, the Development Assistance Committee of the
OECD donor nations -- the wealthy, industrialized countries --
agreed on development goals for the year 2015. The goals it
chose were ambitious. They included:
Cutting the proportion of people living in extreme poverty in
half;
Reducing maternal and infant mortality by two-thirds;
Providing reliable family planning to millions who desire it,
and
Reversing the global degradation of the environment.
These are indeed ambitious goals. But they are achievable
goals. Moreover, they are necessary goals: either we achieve
them, or we pay the price of failure.
That price will be high; we will measure it in pain and
strife, in famine and fear, in chaos and death.
We will measure it in millions of women who die in
childbirth.
We will measure it in lives that are blighted or ended by
measles, polio, whopping cough, and diphtheria.
We will measure it in megacities where people bathe in filth
and drink from sewage.
We will measure it in dying forests, in barren fields, in
ruined fisheries.
We will measure it in new diseases and everyday ill-health.
We will measure it in a thousand preventable wars, in social
cruelties, in injustice, in oppression.
This will be our payoff. A Hobbesian world, where life is
"nasty, brutish, and short." This will be our harvest if we fail to
invest today.
It doesn't have to be this way. We face a choice. We must
decide whether
we want the next 50 years to produce something
akin to the progress made in the last 50 years in these areas -- or
whether we are willing to stand by and watch the human race lose
ground.
President Clinton's budget request for Fiscal Year 1998
represents a turn around in the long downward trend of USAID
funding. He is asking for a 476 million dollar increase.
This is far from enough to make all the investments we
need, but it is a beginning.
I do not have to persuade the members of this Academy of
the importance of these investments. You know. Many of you
are a part of the past achievements, the current efforts, and the
hope for future breakthroughs.
Science and technology in America, and indeed around the
world, are exploding with new discoveries, new techniques, new
communications tools, new materials. Some of these could lead
to the kinds of breakthroughs that have given millions of people
many years of longer life, better health, and greater opportunity.
Information technology can move information and knowledge
from the cities of the industrial world to the villages of the
developing world.
But these advances did not just happen, as you in this room
know only too well. They were the results of years of toil -- and
investment. There were no guarantees then that we would
succeed in all these things and there are none now.
In the Academy's recent report "Preparing for the 21st
Century":
education should become our number one priority:
the recent trend of disinvestment in science and engineering
research should be reversed
scientific and engineering research should be used more
effectively in decision-making for public policy
I could not agree more. We must continue to invest in
research not only for the expected products of that research but to
ensure our capacity to capture, recognize and use the
unanticipated results...the benefits that flourish from a creative,
innovative society. If we continue to shrink our research
pipeline, our children will definitely suffer.
Their quality of life, their ability to have the tools to address
these challenges will be determined in large measure by how we
meet the global challenges of today. If we fail to provide
leadership, if we turn our backs on the opportunity to make a
difference in that future, we will be held accountable by future
generations. So I call upon this Academy and scientists
everywhere to heed these warnings and to join the effort to repair
our sinking research capacity.
This is an archived USAID document retained on this web site as a matter of public record.
 |
Last Updated on: July 18, 2001
|
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
