Foreign Technology: Collection and Dissemination of Japanese Information
Can Be Improved (Letter Report, 09/30/93, GAO/NSIAD-93-251).

Japan is often cited as a case study in the role that government can
play in successfully collecting and disseminating information on foreign
technology to both industry and government.  After World War II, Japan
solidified its technology base by importing foreign technology to
supplement its own research and development.  Such efforts have helped
make Japan's economy the second largest in the world.  This report
focuses on U.S. and Japanese organizations that collect and distribute
foreign technology information to customers in government, industry, and
academia. GAO (1) describes the Japanese government's process for
performing these tasks and contrasts it with the U.S. government's
process; (2) presents the views of Japanese officials on the elements of
successful foreign technology collection and dissemination; and (3)
assesses the efforts of U.S. government organizations with offices in
Japan that are doing this work.

--------------------------- Indexing Terms -----------------------------

 REPORTNUM:  NSIAD-93-251
     TITLE:  Foreign Technology: Collection and Dissemination of 
             Japanese Information Can Be Improved
      DATE:  09/30/93
   SUBJECT:  Interagency relations
             Information gathering operations
             Information dissemination operations
             Foreign governments
             Technology transfer
             Scientific research
             Data collection operations
             International cooperation
             Agency missions
             International relations
IDENTIFIER:  Japan
             
******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO report.  Delineations within the text indicating chapter **
** titles, headings, and bullets are preserved.  Major          **
** divisions and subdivisions of the text, such as Chapters,    **
** Sections, and Appendixes, are identified by double and       **
** single lines.  The numbers on the right end of these lines   **
** indicate the position of each of the subsections in the      **
** document outline.  These numbers do NOT correspond with the  **
** page numbers of the printed product.                         **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
** A printed copy of this report may be obtained from the GAO   **
** Document Distribution Center.  For further details, please   **
** send an e-mail message to:                                   **
**                                                              **
**                                            **
**                                                              **
** with the message 'info' in the body.                         **
******************************************************************


Cover
================================================================ COVER


Report to the Chairman, Subcommittee on Defense Technology,
Acquisition, and Industrial Base, Committee on Armed Services, U.S. 
Senate

September 1993

FOREIGN TECHNOLOGY - COLLECTION
AND DISSEMINATION OF JAPANESE
INFORMATION CAN BE IMPROVED

GAO/NSIAD-93-251

Foreign Technology

(396048)


Abbreviations
=============================================================== ABBREV

  AOARD - Asian Office of Aerospace Research and Development
  ARO-FE - Army Research Office, Far East
  DOD - Department of Defense
  DOE - Department of Energy
  DTO - Defense Technology Office
  JETRO - Japan External Trade Organization
  JTEC - Japanese Technical Evaluation Center
  MITI - Ministry of International Trade and Industry
  NSF - National Science Foundation
  ONRASIA - Office of Naval Research, Asia
  SEMATECH - Semiconductor Manufacturing Technology consortium
  STRIDE - Project Science and Technology Reporting for Information
     Dissemination Enhancement

Letter
=============================================================== LETTER


B-254219

September 30, 1993

The Honorable Jeff Bingaman
Chairman, Subcommittee on Defense Technology,
 Acquisition, and Industrial Base
Committee on Armed Services
United States Senate

Dear Mr.  Chairman: 

In response to your request, we examined selected U.S.  and Japanese
organizations that collect and disseminate foreign technology
information to users or customers in government, industry, and
academia.\1 Specifically, we (1) identified the Japanese government's
process for performing these functions and contrasted it with the
U.S.  government's process; (2) ascertained Japanese officials' views
on the elements of successful foreign technology collection and
dissemination efforts; and (3) assessed the efforts of U.S. 
government organizations with offices in Japan that are performing
these functions.  Our findings are summarized below, and appendix I
provides details on the roles of the various U.S.  organizations in
Japan.  We are also providing information on the efforts of two U.S. 
government-sponsored organizations located in the United States (the
Japanese Technical Evaluation Center and the Semiconductor
Manufacturing Technology consortium) to collect and disseminate
foreign technology information.  (See app.  II.)


--------------------
\1 The "users" or "customers" of the information collected by these
organizations are those individuals or groups, usually within the
home agency, that the organizations' missions require them to provide
the information to. 


   BACKGROUND
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :1

U.S.  government officials and industry representatives often cite
Japan as a good example of a country whose government has played a
key role in collecting, analyzing, and disseminating foreign
technology information to both its industry and government.  Among
other things, such efforts have helped make Japan's economy the
second largest in the world.  After World War II, Japan solidified
its technology base by importing foreign technology to supplement its
own research and development efforts. 

Japan's primary industrial technology agency is the Ministry of
International Trade and Industry (MITI).  MITI's mission is to
further industrial research and development in Japan, and it has been
active since the early 1960s in supporting Japanese industry. 
Despite these government efforts, many Japanese government officials
and industry representatives said that Japanese companies are the
primary collectors of specific information on foreign technologies. 

Current literature indicates that Japanese research and development
capabilities have been growing stronger, and Japanese government
industrial policies have been targeting knowledge-intensive
technologies as well as substantially increasing government and
industry investments in new technologies.\2 Japan has several efforts
underway to create new technologies and products, including (1)
developing special technology capabilities in areas, such as
aircraft, that will position Japanese firms as key subcontractors or
program partners in international programs\3 and (2) combining
existing industries such as biotechnology and energy.  Many Japanese
technological capabilities now match those of the United States and
in some cases have surpassed U.S.  capabilities. 

Most U.S.  firms have relied on indigenous technology for their
industrial development.  The U.S.  government has not developed a
focused system for collecting foreign technology information and
disseminating it to industry and academia, despite their increasing
interest in obtaining this information.\4 Rather, the U.S. 
government's approach to monitoring foreign technology information is
largely a result of its focus on military technology and supporting
basic research and development.  Several U.S.  government
organizations, most of which are defense-related, have offices in
Japan to collect foreign technology information and disseminate it to
their home agencies.  These include the Defense Technology Office,
the research offices of the three services, and the Environment,
Science, and Technology Office in the American Embassy in Tokyo. 


--------------------
\2 Japan-U.S.  Economic Issues:  Investment, Saving, Technology, and
Attitudes, Congressional Research Service (Feb.  2, 1990). 

\3 David B.  Friedman and Richard J.  Samuels, "How to Succeed
Without Really Flying:  The Japanese Aircraft Industry and Japan's
Technology Ideology," in Regionalism and Rivalry:  Japan and the
United States in Pacific Asia, J.  Frankel and M.  Kahler, eds. 
(Chicago, IL, forthcoming 1993). 

\4 Some large U.S.  corporations have established research and
development operations overseas in order to monitor foreign
technology information, and some companies obtain this information
via consulting firms. 


   RESULTS IN BRIEF
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :2

The Japanese and U.S.  governments' approaches for collecting and
disseminating foreign technology information are organized and funded
differently.  The Japanese government has an extensive, centrally
coordinated process and uses considerable resources to collect and
disseminate foreign technology information primarily for commercial
purposes.  This process is characterized by (1) extensive networks
between officials and researchers in government, industry, and
academia that provide information and (2) a methodical process of
consensus building regarding what technologies should be monitored
within a competitive, commercial framework.  Experts collect
information in specific areas of interest, which is targeted to the
needs of the users, and then use extensive and multiple channels to
disseminate the data.  MITI facilitates and coordinates government,
industry, and academic activities, including research and development
programs and foreign technology information collection efforts, by
providing technology information and significant funding for these
activities. 

The U.S.  government, on the other hand, has a decentralized process
that includes various civilian and defense agencies' offices and
laboratories in the United States and overseas that collect
information to support their differing missions.  In 1990, we
reported that 62 U.S.  federal civilian and military offices and
divisions within 6 departments and independent agencies monitor
foreign technology information.\5 We assessed 10 of the U.S. 
civilian and defense offices in Japan that collect and disseminate
foreign technology information.\6

The missions of the defense organizations, in particular, place
little, if any, importance on providing information to industry and
academia.  Moreover, most of these U.S.  government organizations in
Japan are military-oriented, and most of the U.S.  resources are
expended by military activities.  No central U.S.  agency has a role
similar to MITI's, and coordination among these U.S.  civilian and
defense offices is limited.  Collectively, the U.S.  government
organizations in Japan have fewer resources than the Japanese
government does in the United States for foreign technology
collection and dissemination activities. 

Japanese government and private sector officials stressed the
importance of determining and providing the foreign technology
information that customers want and need.  Other elements of a
successful system that they identified include (1) maintaining a
cooperative government-industry relationship, (2) treating technology
monitoring as an integral part of an organization's operations, and
(3) locating operations in the target country. 

Only a few of the 10 U.S.  civilian government and defense
organizations in Japan that we reviewed have reevaluated and revised
their missions with regard to science and technology collection and
dissemination to reflect changes in the international arena.\7
Further, some of the U.S.  organizations have not identified the
demand for and usefulness of the information they collect and
disseminate to potential customers in government, industry, and
academia.  To some extent, this problem also exists regarding the
organizations' current, mostly internal agency customers.  In
addition, the U.S.  organizations' efforts are limited by the lack of
(1) coordination of activities among the various civilian and
military offices and (2) appropriate background and language skills
for some of the information collectors. 


--------------------
\5 Foreign Technology:  U.S.  Monitoring and Dissemination of the
Results of Foreign Research (GAO/NSIAD-90-117, Mar.  21, 1990).  See
also Foreign Technology:  Federal Processes for Collection and
Dissemination (GAO/NSIAD-92-101, Mar.  23, 1992). 

\6 With a few exceptions, such as intelligence organizations, we
assessed all of the U.S.  government organizations in Japan that
collect and disseminate foreign technology information.  The
Department of Commerce is not included in this study, since officials
from its office in Japan, the U.S.  and Foreign Commercial Service,
told us that they do not collect foreign technology information to
any significant degree. 

\7 One organization that has changed its mission is the Asian Office
of Aerospace Research and Development.  Officials from the Air Force
Office of Scientific Research told us that the mission of the Asian
Office, which was recently reestablished in Tokyo, has been changed
to include monitoring more applied technology, which may be useful to
industry, as well as the basic technology that they have
traditionally focused on. 


   THE JAPANESE AND U.S. 
   GOVERNMENTS HAVE DIFFERENT
   APPROACHES FOR COLLECTING AND
   DISSEMINATING FOREIGN
   TECHNOLOGY INFORMATION
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :3

The Japanese government plays a more significant and intense role in
guiding the national research and development effort for economic
competitiveness than the U.S.  government.  In addition, Japan spends
a lot of money to collect, analyze, and disseminate foreign
technology information to its government, industry, and academia. 
MITI (1) establishes organizations that carry out specific research
and development programs; (2) provides funds (subsidies) and/or
information, such as data on foreign technology policy and research
capabilities, to government and private sector organizations for
research and development projects; (3) coordinates
government-industry policies, for example, by routing information
toward those who will benefit from it; and (4) facilitates technology
diffusion and transfer. 

The Japanese government primarily collects foreign technology
information through MITI-sponsored organizations.  In response to
requests from government organizations, industry, and academia, the
Japan External Trade Organization (JETRO), MITI's primary information
collection organization, collects foreign technology information
through its extensive network of offices in Japan and overseas and
disseminates it to requesters primarily for commercial purposes.\8

Overall, JETRO has 1,200 staff in a total of 107 offices worldwide. 
About half of the staff is located in its 31 offices in Japan, with
the other half in 76 offices in 57 countries.  The Japanese
government provided about $182 million towards JETRO's fiscal year
1992 budget.  JETRO officials told us that they could not identify
the amount of additional funds that JETRO receives from private
sources.  JETRO employs 187 staff in 8 offices located throughout the
United States, but JETRO officials told us that they could not
determine the total budget for these offices.  However, through other
sources, we found that JETRO's New York office alone has an annual
budget of $8 million and 80 staff.  JETRO's staff is supplemented by
staff from several other government and industry organizations. 

According to both Japanese government and private sector officials,
however, private companies in Japan, not the Japanese government, are
the primary collectors of specific information on foreign
technologies.\9 They said this is true particularly for large firms,
such as Nippon Electronics Corporation, that have extensive, in-house
capabilities to monitor and disseminate foreign technology
information within the company.  A State Department official told us
that U.S.  and foreign firms can operate relatively inexpensively in
the United States, compared to operating in Japan.  According to a
U.S.  Embassy official, Japanese businessmen are voracious consumers
of technical information.  In addition, the Japanese government and
private sector have relatively easy access to U.S.  technology
information, because (1) many Japanese, including scientists and
engineers, speak and read English and (2) much of the U.S.  research
and development is done in an open university system. 

In contrast, the U.S.  government has not developed an extensive,
centralized system for collecting and disseminating foreign
technology information.  Total staff and budget figures for U.S. 
government organizations that collect and disseminate foreign
technology information worldwide are not readily available.  There
are 62 civilian and military offices and divisions within 6
departments and independent agencies that monitor foreign technology
information.  U.S.  efforts are primarily oriented toward the
military in terms of the number of organizations and the way
resources are expended.  Seven of the 10 U.S.  government
organizations in Japan that we assessed were military organizations,
and about 72 percent of the U.S.  funds are spent for these military
activities.  The U.S.  civilian and defense organizations in Japan
have from 1 to 32 staff members working on foreign technology
collection and dissemination activities.  A total of 86 U.S. 
personnel are working on such activities at these organizations in
Japan.  The organizations' fiscal year 1992 operating budgets ranged
from $301,000 to $1.06 million and totaled $6.2 million. 

In February 1993 testimony,\10 we stated that a host of federal
offices and laboratories in the United States collect information on
foreign science and technology.  The organizations collect and assess
the information for different purposes, which are determined largely
by their missions.  Although the U.S.  Department of Commerce is the
closest counterpart to MITI,\11 neither it nor any other U.S.  agency
performs MITI's role of coordination.  In addition, cooperation among
the U.S.  organizations that collect and disseminate foreign
technology information is not currently required.  As a result,
cooperation among the U.S.  civilian and defense organizations in
Japan is limited. 

Although it is not part of their mission, some U.S.  government
organizations in Japan also provide the information that they collect
to industry and academia.  Other U.S.  organizations, primarily
intelligence organizations, restrict access to their analyses. 
Although U.S.  experts have reported increased interest in foreign
technology information by U.S.  companies, they said that many
companies still do not actively seek out this type of information on
their own or through consultants.  According to a U.S.  electronics
industry association representative, the companies often do not
recognize the strategic value of the information and, therefore, are
unwilling to pay for it.  Even for those companies that are
interested in obtaining the information, setting up foreign
technology collection operations is very costly, particularly in
Japan.  Only a few large U.S.  corporations have such operations in
Japan.  In addition, the U.S.  government and private sector have
difficulty obtaining access to Japanese technology information, since
(1) many Americans do not speak or read Japanese and (2) much of
Japan's research and development is done in industry laboratories. 

U.S.  and Japanese government and private sector organizations have
similar techniques for collecting and disseminating foreign
technology information, although the Japanese perform these
activities on a much larger scale.  Representatives of U.S.  and
Japanese organizations attend symposiums and international
conferences, collect technical literature, visit laboratories and
individual scientists, and participate in or sponsor international
researcher exchanges and collaborative research and development
efforts.  Japanese officials emphasized that establishing and
maintaining informal networks with other Japanese and foreign
scientists was useful.  U.S.  and Japanese officials use journals,
reports, newsletters, databases, facsimiles, and workshops to
disseminate information. 


--------------------
\8 To advance its overall mission to support trade between Japan and
other countries, JETRO also promotes imports in Japan, industrial
cooperation, and international exchange. 

\9 Japan also has networks of related companies and financial
institutions, called keiretsu, that provide a means for information
exchange as well as risk-sharing and mutual problem-solving.  See
Competitiveness Issues:  The Business Environment in the United
States, Japan, and Germany (GAO/GGD-39-124, Aug.  9, 1993). 

\10 Science and Technology:  Federal Efforts to Collect and Analyze
Information on Foreign Science and Technology (GAO/T-RCED-93-8). 

\11 Japan-U.S.  Economic Issues:  Investment, Saving, Technology, and
Attitudes, Congressional Research Service (Feb.  2, 1990). 


   JAPANESE VIEWS ON THE ELEMENTS
   OF A SUCCESSFUL SYSTEM
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :4

Japanese government and private sector officials cited four elements
that they believe contribute to a successful system for collecting
and disseminating foreign technology information:  (1) targeted data
collection, (2) a cooperative government-industry relationship, (3)
treatment of foreign technology monitoring as an integral part of
their operations, and (4) establishment of operations in the target
country. 


      TARGETED DATA COLLECTION
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :4.1

One important element of an effective information collection and
dissemination effort cited by the Japanese is that it be
demand-driven.  In other words, the needs of the users of the
information must be identified and met in order to be successful. 
For example, JETRO regularly uses inquiries to survey its customers'
needs and determine the best dissemination method.  JETRO, among
other activities, gathers information for private companies on
technologies and markets, based on specific requests for information,
in much the same way that a consulting company would tailor
information to a client's strategic and operational needs. 

In contrast, the majority of the U.S.  government organizations in
Japan have not identified the demand for and usefulness of the
information they collect and disseminate to potential customers in
government, industry, and academia.  To some extent, this problem
also exists regarding their current, mostly internal agency
customers.  For example, the Environment, Science, and Technology
Office in the American Embassy has not recently done research to
identify customer and potential customer needs as well as the
appropriateness of its reporting format. 

A study done by a large Japanese consulting company suggested that
the U.S.  business and scientific communities are not interested in
Japanese technology information, even if it is provided in
English.\12

According to an Embassy official, this lack of a demand-pull from
U.S.  industry may explain why the U.S.  government has a relatively
small effort to provide such information.  Department of Defense
(DOD) officials told us that U.S.  companies may not be interested in
the information collected by government organizations because much of
the information is not analyzed.  However, a U.S.  company official
said that U.S.  companies may not solicit this type of information
from the U.S.  government because they do not want to indicate which
technologies they are interested in.  In fact, according to a
National Technical Information Service official, some large companies
purchase the Service's entire database tape and do their own issue
searches to hide their specific area of interest. 


--------------------
\12 Scientific and Technical Information Transfer Between Japan and
the United States, Mitsubishi Research Institute (Oct.  1992). 


      A COOPERATIVE
      GOVERNMENT-INDUSTRY
      RELATIONSHIP
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :4.2

According to Japanese officials, the Japanese government and industry
have a very effective government-industry relationship that
contributes to the flow of foreign technology information among
various organizations.  Officials from a U.S.  company agreed with
this observation.  In addition, Japanese company officials said that
one of their most useful methods of obtaining information is
participating in government-sponsored research and development
projects where several Japanese companies are involved.\13

A State Department official told us that there is a more cooperative
government-industry relationship in Japan than in the United States,
because the Japanese government does not restrict the flow of
information to the private sector as much as the U.S.  government
does.  He said that the Japanese government has fewer security and
copyright restrictions on information due to its more informal
process of disseminating information.  For example, the Japanese
government provides information to Japanese industry associations
that condense and repackage the information.  According to the
official, U.S.  industry associations are not usually as focused on
collecting and/or disseminating such information, but are primarily
concerned with lobbying the Congress and the executive branch. 


--------------------
\13 Officials from a U.S.  company said that foreign technology
information is also obtained from negotiating a coproduction
agreement, even when the company decides not to do the project. 
Coproduction is overseas production based on government-to-government
agreement that permits a foreign government or producer to acquire
the technical information to manufacture all or part of a U.S.-origin
defense article. 


      AN INTEGRAL PART OF
      OPERATIONS
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :4.3

Another effective element cited by the Japanese is that organizations
treat foreign technology monitoring as an integral part of their
operations.  Rather than having separate, specific offices for this
activity, researchers, scientists, and others throughout the
organizations monitor foreign technology information.  For example,
the Japanese research and development consortium for superconductor
technology expects all its researchers to stay abreast of foreign
technology developments in their field as part of their work.  In
contrast, the U.S.  Semiconductor Manufacturing Technology consortium
(SEMATECH) has one separate office that collects foreign technology
information and disseminates it to its internal programs and member
companies.  However, according to a SEMATECH official, U.S. 
government and private sector organizations generally cannot rely on
scientists and engineers to collect foreign technology information on
their own, since many do not have Japanese language skills and some
of the technical information is only available in Japanese. 
Therefore, SEMATECH's foreign technology collection office routinely
works with its internal and external customers to ascertain their
information needs. 


      OPERATIONS LOCATED IN THE
      TARGET COUNTRY
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :4.4

According to representatives from a Japanese company, one of the best
foreign technology information collection methods is to use a
research/consulting firm located within the target country.  In
addition, foreign partners and subsidiaries often can provide
information on operations in other countries.  U.S.  company
representatives told us that their company's affiliates in Tokyo
observe foreign technical developments as they occur and thereby
serve as an important part of their foreign technology monitoring
system.  However, many U.S.  companies do not have affiliates or
foreign technology monitoring operations in Japan largely because of
the high cost. 


   REEVALUATING MISSIONS CAN
   ENHANCE THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
   U.S.  GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS
   IN JAPAN
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :5

Our review showed that the U.S.  civilian government and defense
organizations in Japan that we reviewed were not operating as
effectively as they could.  Many of the organizations' missions do
not reflect changes that have occurred in the international arena,
such as technological advancements in Japan and the end of the cold
war.  Further, some of the U.S.  organizations have not identified
the demand for and usefulness of the information they collect and
disseminate to potential customers in government, industry, and
academia.  To some extent, this problem also exists regarding the
organizations' current, mostly internal agency customers.  In
addition, the U.S.  organizations' efforts are limited by the lack of
(1) coordination of activities among the various civilian and
military offices and (2) appropriate background and language skills
for some of the information collectors. 

Figure 1 shows the different missions of the U.S.  civilian
government and defense organizations in Japan as well as their funds,
staff, and reporting requirements. 



   Figure 1:  U.S.  Government
   Organizations in Japan That
   Collect and Disseminate Foreign
   Technology Information

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

   Figure 1:  (Cont.)

   (See figure in printed
   edition.)

Note:  This does not include U.S.  intelligence efforts in Japan. 

\a Pacific Rim countries include Japan and China. 

\b These figures were reported by each organization and may not be
comparable. 

\c The upper bounds of the budget was $1 million if all planned staff
were hired.  They were not. 

\d This figure is an estimated cost for fiscal year 1993.  A figure
for fiscal year 1992 was unavailable. 


      FAILURE TO REEVALUATE AND
      REVISE MISSIONS
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :5.1

Due to the important foreign technology and policy developments and
increased technological capabilities overseas, many U.S.  government
and private sector officials recognize that foreign technology
information is often a key element to strengthening the economic
competitiveness of U.S.  industries.  Some officials suggested that
the U.S.  government could help by providing useful, unclassified
foreign technology information to users in industry and academia. 
However, the traditional federal role has focused on military
technology development and is generally limited to supporting basic
science and mission-oriented research in various federal agencies. 
In addition, since the U.S.  government has focused on military
technology, most of the U.S.  organizations in Japan that collect and
disseminate foreign technology information are defense organizations
that place little, if any, importance on providing information to
industry and academia. 


      LACK OF RESEARCH ON CUSTOMER
      AND POTENTIAL CUSTOMER NEEDS
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :5.2

The primary missions of the U.S.  organizations in Japan are to
respond to their individual agency needs, and these needs are being
identified and met, at least to some extent, with regard to their
current, mostly internal agency customers.  The organizations are (1)
identifying the general technical areas that need to be monitored and
(2) evaluating how useful some of the information is to their
customers.  For example, the Office of Naval Research annually
reviews one-third of its technical programs, including assessing the
information that its foreign offices in Japan and Europe are
disseminating.  The Office of Naval Research held a one-time Peer
Review in 1992 to evaluate the effectiveness of its foreign offices'
science and technology information collection efforts.  As a result
of this review, several aspects of its foreign offices, such as how
they are staffed, will change.  In addition, an Army Research Office
official told us that some of the U.S.  organizations in Tokyo
perform assessments in response to the needs of their customers.  For
example, a number of U.S.-Japan workshops have been organized on
issues of direct interest to DOD research laboratories. 

However, although some organizations' approaches to identifying and
addressing customers' needs appear to be more effective than others,
little information is available regarding the specific needs of the
organizations' current, internal agency customers.  For example, some
of the organizations have not done research to identify the most
effective reporting format or channels. 

Some organizations also disseminate information to industry and
academia on their own initiative.  The Office of Naval Research's
Asian Office in Tokyo is responsible for studying, assessing, and
reporting to the Office of Naval Research on basic science and
technology developments in Japan and other Asian countries.  A
scientist in this office has developed a list of interested customers
in government, academia, and industry and uses electronic mail to
quickly and inexpensively disseminate information on Japanese
developments in computer science and technology.  According to
university researchers, this information is valuable and may not be
readily available otherwise. 

However, the U.S.  organizations have generally not identified the
demand for and usefulness of the information to potential customers
in government, industry, and academia.  For example, the Embassy
Environment, Science, and Technology Office disseminates foreign
technology information to users in industry and academia via Project
STRIDE cables.\14 A 1988 report prepared for the National Science
Foundation, State, and Commerce concluded that industrial research
and development managers believed this information had limited
value.\15

In addition, military officials told us that the STRIDE cables are
difficult to read due to their format.  In our February 1993
testimony, we stated that there may be reason for caution in efforts
to provide foreign technology information to industry and academic
organizations because the usefulness of this information to them has
not been determined. 


--------------------
\14 Project Science and Technology Reporting for Information
Dissemination Enhancement (STRIDE) is a mechanism used by State,
Commerce, and the National Science Foundation for disseminating
science and technology information developed abroad to users in
federal laboratories, academic institutions, and the private sector
on a fee-for-service basis through Commerce's National Technical
Information Service. 

\15 William D.  Guns, Catherine P.  Ailes, and Damian M.  Saccocio,
Project STRIDE:  S&T Reporting for Information Dissemination
Enhancement, SRI International (STPP-TN-3164-5, Aug.  1988). 


      LACK OF COORDINATION BETWEEN
      CIVILIAN AND MILITARY
      ORGANIZATIONS
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :5.3

Although coordination among these civilian and defense organizations
is not required,\16 U.S.  Embassy officials in Tokyo told us that
cooperation would be beneficial because it would (1) provide an
opportunity to share information and limited resources, (2) offer the
potential to reduce unnecessary duplication, and (3) help to
establish a coherent foreign science and technology policy.  For
example, U.S.  military officials in Japan told us that the
Environment, Science, and Technology Office in the Embassy is an
institution highly respected by Japanese industry with whom they have
developed working relations to promote U.S.-Japan technology
exchange.  This office's assistance could help U.S.  military offices
in Japan establish contact with the Japanese science and technology
community, since the community, reflecting the views of the larger
Japanese society, has not been receptive to U.S.  military
representatives. 

Some U.S.  organizations, such as the three services research
offices, are cooperating by sharing information and coordinating
staffing requirements; however, according to U.S.  Embassy and DOD
officials, efforts initiated by the Embassy Environment, Science, and
Technology Office to share information, such as biweekly meetings,
have encountered several problems.  For example, Embassy and DOD
officials said that because the civilian and defense offices have
differing missions and reporting requirements that, in some cases,
restrict dissemination of the information even among other federal
offices, many of the military participants are non-communicative
during the meetings and some relevant military officials do not
attend.  In addition, a U.S.  military official in Japan told us that
his organization has not been invited to these meetings.  According
to an Embassy official, it is not surprising that no central federal
agency is responsible for coordinating the collection of foreign
technology information because of the organizational distinction
between the civilian agencies and defense and intelligence agencies. 


--------------------
\16 The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Years 1992 and
1993 requires the Secretary of Defense to establish the Office of
Foreign Defense Technology Monitoring and Assessment to help
coordinate defense-related foreign technology monitoring activities. 
The Defense Intelligence Agency is the lead agency in establishing
this office. 


      LACK OF APPROPRIATE
      BACKGROUND AND LANGUAGE
      CAPABILITIES
---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :5.4

U.S.  officials that we interviewed in Japan had differing
perspectives regarding the appropriate background needed for a staff
member to effectively collect foreign science and technology
information.  Several of the U.S.  officials in the civilian and
defense organizations that collect foreign technology information in
Japan do not have a technical background, such as science or
engineering.  U.S.  Embassy officials told us that collectors who do
not have a technical background can adequately collect general
technology information used for policy decisions.  However, officials
from the defense organizations said that, when collecting and
assessing technical information, experts are needed to comprehend the
relevance and implications of technical developments and provide more
detailed information useful to researchers and scientists.  A U.S. 
Embassy official in Japan told us that the information would be of
better quality if those without a technical background and the
technical experts worked together to collect and assess the
information. 

Many of the officials collecting information for the U.S.  government
efforts in Japan also do not have Japanese language capabilities. 
U.S.  officials told us that this lack of language skills poses
problems when collecting technology information in Japan, since much
of the most important technical information in Japan is available
only in Japanese.  In fact, DOD officials told us that it is
difficult to find U.S.  scientists and researchers who have foreign
language capabilities; however, a DOD official told us that his
agency is beginning to address the problem by providing education and
training in Japanese language, culture, and management and business
practices to U.S.  scientists, engineers, managers, and students.\17
According to the DOD official, an effective short-term solution may
be to enable U.S.  organizations in Japan to hire staff with Japanese
language skills to assist technical staff who lack these skills. 


--------------------
\17 The United States-Japan Industry and Technology Management
Training Program is being conducted by the Air Force Office of
Scientific Research on behalf of DOD.  Eight universities have been
funded in merit-based competitions since fiscal year 1991 to increase
DOD's understanding of Japanese technology management methods. 


   RECOMMENDATIONS
------------------------------------------------------------ Letter :6

We recommend that the Secretaries of Defense and State, in
consultation with the Secretary of Commerce, reevaluate the missions
of their offices that monitor and disseminate foreign technology
information in Japan in light of global economic and technical
changes. 

We also recommend that these offices in Japan be required to

  -- determine through sample surveys/evaluations

the information needs of their customers and potential customers;

how well they are addressing these needs; and

how they can improve the usefulness of the information collected as
well as their reporting formats and methods of dissemination;

  -- coordinate and cooperate with other U.S.  government
     organizations in the various federal agencies and laboratories
     that are monitoring and disseminating foreign technology
     information to make the best use of the federal resources that
     are being spent on these activities; and

  -- hire or train staff with the appropriate background and language
     skills needed to effectively collect foreign technology
     information and/or assign teams of technical and nontechnical
     staff as well as staff with and without language skills to
     maximize staff capabilities. 


---------------------------------------------------------- Letter :6.1

Our scope and methodology are discussed in appendix III. 

We performed our review between February 1992 and July 1993 in
accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards.  As
requested, we did not obtain agency comments on this report. 
However, we discussed our findings with program officials from DOD,
State, and Commerce as well as U.S.  private sector officials.  They
generally agreed with our findings.  We have included their specific
views where appropriate. 

We are sending copies of the report to the Chairmen, Senate and House
Committees on Armed Services and the House Committee on Science,
Space, and Technology.  We will also make copies available to others
upon request. 

Please contact me at (202) 512-4587 if you or your staff have any
questions concerning this report.  Major contributors to this report
are listed in appendix IV. 

Sincerely yours,

David E.  Cooper
Director, Acquisition, Policy,
 Technology, and Competitiveness Issues


U.S.  GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS IN
JAPAN THAT COLLECT AND DISSEMINATE
JAPANESE TECHNOLOGY INFORMATION
=========================================================== Appendix I

This appendix discusses the efforts of 10 U.S.  government
organizations in Japan to collect and disseminate Japanese technology
information. 

The 10 U.S.  government organizations that collect technology
information in Japan we reviewed, including 3 civilian and 7 defense
organizations, have diverse missions and differing reporting
requirements, but have similar approaches to collecting and
disseminating foreign technology information.  Although some
organizations provide raw data, some provide analyzed information,
and others provide both.  The organizations have experienced similar
difficulties in obtaining access to Japanese technology information. 
Officials from each U.S.  organization provided the following
information. 


   ENVIRONMENT, SCIENCE, AND
   TECHNOLOGY OFFICE
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:1

The Environment, Science, and Technology Office in the American
Embassy in Tokyo is funded by the State Department's East Asia and
Pacific Bureau.  It has several missions, including (1) managing the
interests of U.S.  technical agencies, (2) covering nuclear
nonproliferation, (3) covering environmental policy and cooperation,
and (4) collecting information on Japanese science and technology
developments and disseminating it to policymakers at the State
Department.  According to an official from this office, environmental
policy and cooperation probably takes up more time than any other
concern. 

Although disseminating information to industry and academia is not a
formal task of the Environment, Science, and Technology Office,
helping U.S.  businesses to compete is one criteria that the State
Department now uses to evaluate all staff for promotion.  The Office
in Tokyo disseminates the foreign technology information that it
collects to government and nongovernment decisionmakers via Project
STRIDE.  The science officers determine on a case-by-case basis what
technology information should be provided through STRIDE.  For
example, a recent STRIDE cable included information on the joint
development by Nippon Electronics Corporation and AT&T of a
64-megabit direct random access memory contact formation technique. 

The total cost for the Environment, Science, and Technology Office
for fiscal year 1993 is estimated to be $875,000.  The Office has
seven science officers and four foreign service nationals who provide
administrative and logistical support as well as contacts to the
Japanese community.  Two of the science officers have technical
backgrounds and three are fluent in Japanese.\1 A science officer
told us that foreign policy generalists can do adequate analyses of
technological developments, even though such analyses would be
enhanced if they worked side by side with technical experts. 

The science officers determine what technology information to collect
based on (1) information reported in the Japanese press, (2) specific
State requests, and (3) trends identified during the course of their
work.\2 Information is primarily collected by monitoring developments
reported in Japanese--mostly English language--newspapers and other
publications, such as the Science and Technology Agency's monthly
bulletin, STA Today.  Some publications and information are received
directly through the Japanese government.  When addressing a specific
request, the science officers will occasionally collect information
on specific technology developments by telephoning or visiting
Japanese companies or government laboratories.  Information is
disseminated via cables. 

According to a science officer, for the most part, the Environment,
Science, and Technology Office does not have a problem getting access
to Japanese technology information.  However, because some of the
science officers cannot read Japanese or are not fluent in the
language, they cannot closely monitor documents that are only written
in Japanese.  According to the head of the Office, the main problems
his staff faces are (1) disseminating STRIDE information to industry
via the National Technical Information Service, which is not as
effective as it should be since it does not have sufficient funds,
and (2) the lack of interest in foreign technology information on the
part of U.S.  industry. 


--------------------
\1 According to a State Department official, two positions in the
Environment, Science, and Technology Office are now designated as
requiring Japanese language fluency. 

\2 According to a science officer, they learn what information is
important. 


   NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION -
   TOKYO
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:2

The National Science Foundation's (NSF) Tokyo office is located in
the American Embassy.  NSF provides funds for science-related
programs and projects.  Some of the Tokyo office's many functions
include (1) collecting information on Japanese science policy and
developments and (2) acting as a liaison/intermediary in the many NSF
programs with the Japanese government, public corporations, and
industry.  For example, the NSF Tokyo Office provides support for the
U.S.  scientists and researchers working and studying in Japan under
NSF fellowship programs.  In addition, the office provides support to
the Japanese Technical Evaluation Center (JTEC) panels during their
visits to Tokyo. 

The fiscal year 1992 budget for the NSF Tokyo office was $404,000. 
The office has one scientist and four Japanese administrative staff
to assist him in reporting information to NSF headquarters in
Washington, D.C.  The scientist normally serves a term of at least 2
years.  The Office's current scientist has Japanese language skills
that enable him to discuss science- and technology-related matters
with Japanese government officials as well as make presentations in
Japanese. 

The NSF Tokyo Office has several science policy issues that it
routinely monitors, including the budget and future projects of the
Ministry of International Trade and Industry (MITI).  In addition,
the Office receives direct requests from NSF offices in Washington,
D.C.  The scientist uses his own discretion to determine what
additional information should be collected. 

The scientist collects science information by monitoring government
documents and Japanese newspapers and other publications that are
available in English as well as attending conferences and meeting
with Japanese government and private sector officials.  Information
is disseminated to NSF through internal reports and memorandums.  NSF
offices then incorporate the information into their own reports and
documents that are available to the public via the National Technical
Information Service.  The NSF Tokyo office also provides information
directly to the Environment, Science, and Technology Office for its
STRIDE cables.  Other than through the National Technical Information
Service, neither NSF nor the Tokyo office has an established
mechanism for providing information to U.S.  industry. 

According to the NSF Tokyo office scientist, obtaining information on
Japanese research is relatively easy, since, in the past 5 years,
Japanese government agencies have been producing more English
language brochures outlining the types of projects they are doing and
the amount of funds devoted to those projects.\3


--------------------
\3 U.S.  and Japanese officials told us that a time lag can occur
between the time a Japanese document is published in Japanese and the
time it is translated and made available in English. 


   DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY - TOKYO
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:3

The Department of Energy (DOE) has an office located in the American
Embassy in Tokyo to represent and service all Energy program offices
with interests in Japan as well as to advise the Ambassador on
energy-related matters.  The office has regional responsibility for
all Energy program interests, such as materials and service sales,
national laboratory programs, and researcher exchanges.  The Tokyo
office reports to the Department's Office of Domestic and
International Energy Policy. 

The DOE Tokyo office's operating budget was $490,000 for fiscal year
1992, and it has three technical staff, one of which is a U.S. 
official who heads the Office, and one administrative staff.  The
head of the office has a technical, business, and economic background
and has Japanese language skills.  The rest of the staff is Japanese. 

The DOE Tokyo office collects technical information for Energy
program offices and laboratories that may also assist U.S.  industry
to export goods and services to Japan.  Staff collect information on
Japanese energy developments by monitoring Japanese literature and
through regular contacts with officials from the government,
scientific, academic, and private sectors.  Staff also meet with
Japanese officials from agencies, such as MITI, the Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, and the Science and Technology Agency to discuss
U.S.  energy projects, agreements, and Memorandums of Understanding
with the Japanese government, academia, and private sector. 

According to the head of the DOE Tokyo office, staff do not
experience problems obtaining technical information in Japan. 


   DEFENSE TECHNOLOGY OFFICE
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:4

The Defense Technology Office (DTO) is part of the Mutual Defense
Assistance Office in the American Embassy in Tokyo.  The Mutual
Defense Assistance Office is responsible for maintaining liaison
among Department of Defense (DOD) components in Japan, the
appropriate elements of the U.S.  diplomatic mission, and Japanese
defense organizations.\4 DTO's mission is to (1) identify Japanese
technology with potential defense applications and disseminate this
information to DOD organizations, laboratories, and defense
contractors; (2) facilitate DOD access to Japanese technology through
government-to-government and government-to-industry liaison; and (3)
pursue cooperative arrangements with the Japan Defense Agency to
develop technologies that benefit both U.S.  and Japanese defense
acquisition programs.  DTO also orally or via memorandums provides
the information that it collects to the Departments of Commerce and
State.  DTO relies upon these agencies to identify potential
commercial technology applications and, where appropriate, to pass
this information on to industry. 

DTO's fiscal year 1992 budget was $301,000.  The Mutual Defense
Assistance Office has 17 total staff, 4 of which are DTO staff.  The
DTO staff includes a director and one staff from each of the three
services.  These staff are primarily program managers that have
little technical expertise yet maintain industry contacts.  Two of
the staff have Japanese language capabilities, and the Mutual Defense
Assistance Office has a full-time interpreter.  For technical
expertise, DTO staff depend on visiting experts from DOD
organizations and scientists from the three services' research
offices in Tokyo.  There is a Memorandum of Understanding, dated
March 6, 1992, between these offices to promote cooperation among
them and provide supplemental technical support to DTO when needed. 

DTO uses the list of technologies identified in the annual Defense
Critical Technologies Plan as well as other DOD technical assessments
to determine what technologies to monitor.  Information is primarily
collected by (1) doing technology assessments\5 to determine Japan's
technical progress and direction and (2) performing database
investigations to monitor technical developments.  DTO also
facilitates technology flowback to the United States through
coproduction Memorandums of Understanding and the Joint Military
Technology Commission.\6

According to DTO officials, DTO has several difficulties in
collecting and disseminating foreign technology information.  DTO's
director told us that it is difficult to find a U.S sponsor that can
incorporate the Japanese technologies into their operations or
products.  In addition, DTO officials said that it is difficult to
convince Japanese companies to transfer their commercial technologies
to the United States for military applications, because they believe
the commercial application of the technology will be classified or
restricted, limiting its use in the commercial sector.  However,
according to the Mutual Defense Assistance Office's chief, typically
only the military application of the technology is classified.  DTO's
director also said that technical skill and expertise are needed to
recognize valuable technologies with the potential to be integrated
into a U.S.  company's products or processes. 


--------------------
\4 DOD 5105.38-M. 

\5 These assessments are developed by visiting experts from DOD
organizations and staff from the Office of Naval Research - Asia, the
Army Research Office - Far East, and the Asian Office of Aerospace
Research and Development. 

\6 The Joint Military Technology Commission serves as the means for
consultations between the U.S.  and Japanese governments in
identifying Japanese technologies with military applications that can
be transferred to the United States.  The Japanese government
component of the Commission has the authority to grant the approval
of exports of military technology to the United States.  Commission
membership includes Japan's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, MITI, and
the Japan Defense Agency as well as the U.S.  Mutual Defense
Assistance Office and the U.S.  Embassy.  No military equipment is
exported. 


   DEFENSE ATTACHE OFFICE
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:5

The Defense Attache Office in the American Embassy in Tokyo is a
diplomatically accredited triservice DOD organization.  The Defense
Attache Office's mission is to monitor and report on the capabilities
of the Japanese military defense forces.  Specifically, this includes
(1) collecting and reporting military and military-political
information, (2) representing DOD and the U.S.  military in Japan,
and (3) advising the Ambassador on military matters.  The Defense
Attache Office also does some liaison and coordination work, hosting
U.S.  DOD and military visitors in Japan. 

The Defense Attache Office's budget, which is provided by DOD rather
than the State Department, was $632,500 for fiscal year 1992.  The
five diplomatically accredited military/defense attaches do not have
technical backgrounds but have some degree of Japanese language
capability.  There are also 12 administrative personnel in the office
in Tokyo, 7 of which are foreign service nationals.  The defense
attaches are overt military information collectors.  The Defense
Attache told us that the small staff is fully occupied in addressing
its primary collection mission. 

The Defense Attache Office is tasked by DOD to collect both general
and specific technology information.  However, the office primarily
monitors Japanese defense policy, strategy, and operations as opposed
to raw technology information.  The defense attaches collect this
information through open sources, such as Japanese newspapers or
government publications, as well as frequent meetings with Japan
Defense Agency and military officials.  The defense attaches do not
analyze the information that they obtain, but report the information
directly to DOD.  All information is classified. 

According to Defense Attache Office staff, they have experienced
difficulties in collecting technology information in Japan due to
language differences and cultural reticence.  They said that although
language is not an insurmountable barrier to obtaining information,
because much of the Japanese information is published in English,
Japanese language capability increases an individual's access to
information.  In addition, because of the Japanese culture, the staff
must be known and accepted by their Japanese contacts and establish
some credibility before the Japanese will provide information. 


   OFFICE OF NAVAL RESEARCH - ASIA
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:6

The Office of Naval Research established an Asian Office (ONRASIA) to
study, evaluate, assess, and report on basic scientific developments
of interest to the Navy in Japan and other Asian countries.  ONRASIA,
co-located in Hardy Barracks in Tokyo with the other two services'
research offices, is responsible for (1) gaining insight into foreign
research and development and projecting future objectives of U.S. 
competitors, (2) understanding foreign technical motivation and
goals, (3) producing timely technology assessments and evaluations,
(4) providing contacts/linkages between U.S.  and foreign science and
technology communities, and (5) fostering technology transfer. 

ONRASIA's budget for fiscal year 1992 was approximately $1 million,
including salaries, travel expenses, and office support services. 
ONRASIA currently has four liaison scientists, who are assigned to
the office for up to 3 years; one visiting scientist; and five
support staff.  The liaison scientists are required to be active
senior researchers from government, industry, or academia with an
excellent publication record and good contacts in Japan and other
Asian countries.  One of the scientists has Japanese language
capabilities. 

The scientists determine what technology information to collect based
on their personal expertise in a technical area.  In addition,
occasionally, specific information is requested by the Office of
Naval Research or another customer.  The scientists primarily collect
foreign technology information by (1) visiting laboratories and
individual scientists, (2) attending technical meetings and
conferences, (3) organizing and/or sponsoring science and technology
workshops, (4) monitoring literature, and (5) providing direct
linkages between the Navy and U.S.  science community and those in
Japan and other Asian countries.  Some of the information is
analyzed/assessed by the scientists and is disseminated to customers
in the Office of Naval Research, DOD laboratories, and other DOD
research organizations.  The scientists develop a list of customers
in their own individual areas of expertise, which may include users
in industry and academia.  Information is disseminated via (1) the
Office of Naval Research's quarterly publication, the Scientific
Information Bulletin;
(2) electronic mail; (3) personal communications, such as letters,
facsimile, or telephone calls; (4) meetings and workshops; and (5)
papers, articles, and special reports. 

The Office of Naval Research evaluates the effectiveness of the
science and technology information collected by its foreign offices
in Europe and Asia as an integral part of its annual review of
one-third of the organization's technical programs.  Information
collected by the foreign offices is evaluated based on feedback from
Office of Naval Research scientific officers as well as customers of
the information in Navy laboratories and the U.S.  technical
community.  The Office of Naval Research also performed a one-time
peer review of its foreign offices in 1992 to evaluate the
effectiveness of these offices' science and technology information
collection efforts.  As a result of this review, the Office of Naval
Research is restructuring its foreign offices to improve the value of
the information to the customer.  For example, both the technical
areas to be assessed as well as how the assessments are done will be
determined by Navy program managers responsible for the relevant
technical areas.  In addition, an Office of Naval Research official
told us that the office plans to use a wide range of scientists and
engineers from Navy laboratories, industry, and academia to perform
these focused assessments. 

According to ONRASIA officials, their military affiliation is
somewhat of a problem in collecting technology information in Japan
because of the Japanese reluctance, especially those in academia, to
share information with military officials.  Efforts to overcome this
problem include staffing the office with well-known scientists who
have published several papers and have established good contacts in
Japan.  Other problems experienced by ONRASIA scientists include
outdated monitoring and dissemination technologies or methods, lack
of Japanese language skills, and lack of understanding of the
Japanese culture. 


   ARMY RESEARCH
   OFFICE - FAR EAST
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:7

The Army Research Office established a Far East office (ARO-FE) to
collect information and report on the latest developments in basic
science relating to the particular needs of the Army.  Located at
Hardy Barracks in Tokyo, ARO-FE is responsible for (1) identifying
major technology developments, trends, and opportunities in Japan and
other Asian countries and disseminating this information to Army
scientists and other DOD personnel; (2) promoting the exchange of
information and collaboration between Army scientists and scientists
in Japan and other Asian countries; (3) supporting Army laboratories
and scientists by arranging for Army scientists to visit foreign
laboratories and sponsoring technical meetings, conferences, and
workshops of interest to the Army's research and development program
objectives; (4) working closely with other U.S.  organizations that
collect and disseminate foreign technology information; and (5)
providing technical support to DTO. 

ARO-FE's operating budget was about $500,000 in fiscal year 1992. 
The office currently has one liaison scientist who has some Japanese
language capability.  ARO-FE also invites scientists to visit the
office and uses ONRASIA's support staff.  According to ARO-FE's
liaison scientist, the Army Research Office plans to increase ARO-FE
staff between 1993 and 1995 to four liaison scientists, three to five
rotational scientists, and one support staff. 

The ARO-FE liaison scientist informally determines what technology
information to collect based on his past experience working in Army
laboratories, biannual visits to these laboratories, and specific
requests from Army scientists.  Information is primarily collected by
(1) visiting Japanese laboratories, (2) participating in or
organizing/sponsoring international symposia/workshops, (3)
sponsoring and facilitating researcher exchanges, (4) sponsoring
collaborative programs and special studies with other U.S. 
organizations such as ONRASIA, and (5) monitoring technical
literature.  The scientist analyzes the information that is collected
and provides a technical assessment to Army laboratories, other DOD
organizations, and industry via electronic mail, facsimile, or
regular mail.  The scientist also collaborates with ONRASIA
scientists on articles published in the Office of Naval Research's
Scientific Information Bulletin. 

The ARO-FE scientist told us he faces problems getting access to
Japanese technology information, because many Japanese academics and
some government officials are unwilling to share information with
military researchers.  He also said that this is a barrier in
transferring dual-use technology to the United States.  In addition,
the scientist said that he has difficulty persuading U.S.  scientists
to visit Japan, because (1) Japanese laboratories are not well
regarded in the United States and (2) DOD scientists are not
encouraged to work in them. 


   ASIAN OFFICE OF AEROSPACE
   RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:8

The Air Force Office of Scientific Research has recently
reestablished an office in Japan, the Asian Office of Aerospace
Research and Development (AOARD), to collect information on basic and
applied science and technology developments related to Air Force
needs and disseminate this information to Air Force laboratories and
other DOD organizations.  Specifically, the office's mission includes
(1) monitoring science and technology activities in Japan and other
Asian countries; (2) assessing defense-critical technologies, within
its capabilities; and (3) facilitating the transfer of appropriate
science and technology to Air Force laboratories.  Secondarily, AOARD
plans to (1) act as a liaison to the Air Force and DOD science
communities, (2) coordinate and facilitate visits with Air Force
personnel, and (3) provide technical support to DTO. 

The upper bounds of AOARD's budget was $1 million in fiscal year
1992, including mission and support funds; however, AOARD's director
told us that he expected to use only a fraction of that figure,
because all planned staff had not been hired.  The office is
currently staffed with three scientists/engineers who have strong
Japanese language skills and extensive technical experience.  The
director is authorized to hire an additional scientist/engineer and
an administrative staff person.  The director told us that he would
also like to obtain authorization to hire two Japanese nationals to
serve in secretarial and technical support positions. 

AOARD's planned approach to the collection of foreign technology
information includes (1) participating in selected conferences and
workshops; (2) visiting academic, government, and industry
laboratories; and (3) helping to initiate cooperative programs
between U.S.  and Japanese research and development organizations in
key technical defense areas.  AOARD staff maintain regular contact
with U.S.  aerospace industry representatives in Japan.  AOARD
reports to the Air Force Office of Scientific Research on a biweekly
basis and provides periodical topical reports, synopses of
conferences, and observations on Japanese government and corporate
research and development policies.  The Air Force Office of
Scientific Research plans to begin evaluating AOARD's effectiveness
late this year based on the technical excellence of the information
that is collected and its relevance to customers' mission needs.  The
effectiveness of the information will be determined by top leaders
from the Office of Scientific Research and Air Force laboratory chief
scientists. 

AOARD's director told us that he has experienced several problems in
recruiting scientists for the new office, largely because of the
different culture and language.  Although the director said that a
lack of Japanese language skills is not a major barrier to collecting
technology information in Japan since many Japanese speak English, he
believes that language skills would clearly enhance the scientists'
ability to carry out their mission.  The director also told us that
the antimilitary sentiment in Japan could be overcome if the
information collector is an expert and has established a name in the
scientific community. 


   ARMY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
   CENTER FAR EAST
--------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:9

The Army Science and Technology Center Far East, located at Yokota
Air Force Base in Tokyo, Japan, is part of the Army Materiel Command. 
The Center is responsible for supporting DOD's research and
development and acquisition programs, with a particular emphasis on
scientific and technical developments of interest to the U.S.  Army
and national research and development and materiel acquisition
management organizations. 

The Science and Technology Center's budget for fiscal year 1992 was
$1.06 million.  The Center currently has 1 commanding officer and 32
civilian and military staff, including 13 technical staff and 19
administrative support staff; about half are Japanese nationals who
serve as liaison coordinators and interpreters.  Technical staff, who
are experts with an advanced degree in their field and generally
serve a 3-year tour of duty, are paired off with Japanese nationals
who have been at the Science and Technology Center for 5 to 10 years. 
According to Center officials, the Japanese nationals are the key to
obtaining access to Japanese companies because they provide
information on the Japanese culture and continuity to the Center's
staff. 

Science and Technology Center staff collect and sometimes translate
information on emerging technologies from countries throughout the
Pacific Rim and disseminate this information to the services as well
as DOD laboratories and other organizations through reports. 
Information is collected by (1) monitoring open sources, such as
newspapers, journals, databases, and government publications; (2)
attending symposia, trade shows, and conferences; and (3) meeting
personally with bench-level scientists in Japanese government and
private sector laboratories.  According to Center staff, they report
raw data to DOD since they do not have the time or training to
analyze the information they collect.  DOD has a formal feedback
process through which about 15 percent of the Center's reports are
evaluated based on the quality and usefulness of the information
provided. 

According to Center staff, although they collect a great deal of
information in Japan, they have experienced problems in obtaining
both basic and applied technical information, since (1) Japanese
university officials will not share basic research information with
military-affiliated personnel and (2) advanced research is mostly
proprietary because it is done primarily in industry laboratories. 


   AIR FORCE
   DETACHMENT 1
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix I:10

Air Force Detachment 1 is located at Yokota Air Force Base in Tokyo,
Japan.  Detachment 1 is responsible for collecting scientific and
technical information in the Pacific theater as well as providing
direct support to unified and Air Force component commanders to
satisfy scientific and technical information requirements of
operational units in their theater of operations.  In addition,
Detachment 1 staff (1) collect, assess, and disseminate information
on performance characteristics, vulnerabilities, and capabilities of
foreign aerospace weapon systems, subsystems, and related support
components; (2) evaluate and provide assessments of trends and
projections for technologies, processes, and products; (3) prepare,
train, and maintain readiness to meet wartime mission
responsibilities; and (4) provide planning assistance, coordination,
and support to operational commands. 


U.S.-SPONSORED ORGANIZATIONS IN
THE UNITED STATES
========================================================== Appendix II

This appendix discusses the efforts of two U.S.  government-sponsored
organizations located in the United States to collect and disseminate
Japanese technology information. 


   THE JAPANESE TECHNICAL
   EVALUATION CENTER
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:1

The Japanese Technical Evaluation Center (JTEC)\1 is funded by the
National Science Foundation (NSF), in cooperation with other
agencies, to assess the status of trends of Japanese research and
development in selected technologies, such as advanced computing,
high temperature superconductivity, and material handling.  Other
agencies, such as the Advanced Research Projects Agency, the Office
of Naval Research, the Department of Energy, and the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, have funded or cofunded JTEC
studies through NSF.  JTEC's mission is to (1) assess whether Japan
is ahead of or behind the United States in certain technologies and
(2) identify Japanese research and development strengths as targets
for technology transfer back to the United States as well as
opportunities for cooperation between the two countries. 

JTEC operates under a standard research grant from NSF, and its grant
funds have averaged about $844,000 per year over the past several
years.  This spending level is expected to remain roughly constant
through fiscal year 1994.  JTEC has four full-time staff, but the NSF
provides additional support staff as well as meeting facilities. 

For the most part, JTEC has competed for funds from individual
program offices throughout the government that need foreign
technology information to run their programs and have a budget to pay
for the information.  This guarantees that the results produced have
ready customers, and, as an additional benefit, many other users get
the same information. 

The process of identifying technologies for JTEC studies is carried
out in a bottom-up fashion.  In many cases, program officers in
various research and development agencies throughout the government
come to JTEC with proposals or suggestions for studies.  These
proposals are considered by JTEC and NSF, in conjunction with an
advisory body of outside experts, to determine which requests meet
JTEC criteria.  About three in four proposed studies are done because
they are appropriate for the JTEC format.  JTEC then puts together a
small group of potential sponsors who try to agree on the scope of
the study and identify a panel chair. 

JTEC's technical assessments are performed by panels of six to nine
U.S.  technical experts in each area.  Panel members, which are
selected from industry, academia, and government, are leading
authorities in the field, technically active, and knowledgeable about
Japanese and U.S.  research programs.  Panelists spend about 1 month
reviewing technical literature on the subject and then spend an
intensive week conducting extensive tours of Japanese laboratories. 
According to JTEC and NSF officials, their organizations' reputation
and good standing with the Japanese allow JTEC panels good access to
Japanese government and private sector laboratories. 

Although it has been suggested that JTEC maintain a permanent office
in Japan to monitor day-to-day developments in Japanese technology
and assist in planning JTEC panel site visits, JTEC staff told us
that (1) this could easily cost millions of dollars and (2) it is
unlikely that JTEC could recruit the high caliber of people that
serve on JTEC panels to serve in such an office, even for short
periods of time.  In addition, JTEC staff said that they maintain a
close relationship with the Office of Naval Research's Asian Office,
which maintains a permanent presence in Tokyo. 

Within 6 to 8 weeks after the site visits, the panels present draft
conclusions at a public workshop in Washington, D.C.  JTEC clients,
policymakers, press, and a targeted list of industry representatives
and academic researchers are invited to attend these workshops.\2 In
the months following the workshop, panelists draft the final report,
which is reviewed by JTEC and NSF as well as by the Japanese hosts. 
JTEC's Senior Advisor told us that this review process to ensure
accuracy makes it difficult to get reports out more quickly.  A JTEC
official said that some JTEC sponsors have found the workshop more
valuable than the final report, primarily because of its timeliness. 
The report is given to workshop attendees, sponsors, panelists, and
the Japanese hosts.  Until recently, JTEC had 800 copies printed of
each report.  JTEC distributed about 200 of these to a preestablished
list of interested clients and sent about 100 for distribution
through the National Technical Information Service.  The remaining
copies of the report are available to interested parties through
JTEC. 

Overall, support for JTEC and NSF as its lead agency has been
positive, but some U.S.  officials have criticized several aspects of
the program.  According to a senior official in the American Embassy
in Tokyo, JTEC provides quality studies on cutting-edge technologies
and has obtained good access to Japanese laboratories; however, its
dissemination is limited.  In addition, some agency officials have
indicated that although JTEC studies appear to be affordable when
they are cofunded by a few agencies, they can be expensive for one
agency to fund.  For example, an Air Force official told us that his
organization chose not to use JTEC because it was too expensive to
fund (on average about $180,000 per study) and not timely enough (on
average about 1.5 years per study).  According to JTEC's Senior
Advisor, JTEC studies cost less than comparable studies performed by
the National Academy of Sciences or various private sector
organizations.  In addition, he told us that about 50 percent of the
cost of a JTEC study includes (1) the cost of sending panel members
to Japan for a week and (2) the honoraria paid to the panel members. 
JTEC feels that both of these are necessary costs, because they
contribute to the high caliber of the panel members and quality of
the resulting information. 

JTEC and NSF held a workshop in May 1991\3 to (1) develop a better
understanding of client needs, (2) establish relationships between
government agencies that need this type of information, (3)
strengthen JTEC and other programs to better serve the science and
technology community, and (4) define better methods for information
dissemination.  As a result, JTEC has efforts underway to speed up
report processing and increase the dissemination of its reports to
government, academia, and industry.  For example, JTEC has developed
a list of audiences and potential audiences for its information and
is experimenting with different promotion ideas for their workshops. 
Through substantial investments in advertising and increasing their
mailing lists, JTEC has recently increased attendance at workshops to
over 200, compared to last year when it rarely exceeded 100.  In
addition, JTEC has increased its print run to 1,000 on its latest
report on knowledge-based systems, compared to 300 2 years ago, and
has distributed over 3,000 executive summaries for each of its 3 most
recent reports.\4 JTEC is examining the possibility of increasing the
distribution of its executive summaries by using a professional
society or commercial publisher. 


--------------------
\1 JTEC is part of Loyola College's (Maryland) global initiative, the
International Technology Research Institute.  The Institute oversees
(1) JTEC; (2) the World Technology Evaluation Center, which assesses
the technical capabilities of countries in Europe, the former Soviet
Union, and Canada; and (3) the Transportation Technology Evaluation
Center funded by the U.S.  Department of Transportation. 

\2 Two of the workshops have been videotaped and are available for
purchase through JTEC.  These include the JTEC workshops on (1)
Japanese Space Robotics and (2) Advanced Manufacturing Technology for
Polymer Composite Structures in Japan. 

\3 According to the Senior Advisor, JTEC is currently undertaking a
critical review of various aspects of the JTEC program as a follow on
to this workshop and the 1992 NSF-supported review, "Study on the
Distribution and Use of JTEC-Related Information."

\4 Display Technologies in Japan (June 1992); Material Handling in
Japan (March 1993); and Satellite Communications in Japan (July
1993). 


   SEMATECH
-------------------------------------------------------- Appendix II:2

SEMATECH is a research and development consortium of U.S. 
semiconductor manufacturing firms that receives one-half of its funds
from the U.S.  government.\5 SEMATECH has established the Competitive
Analysis Group within the consortium for collecting, analyzing,
translating, and disseminating foreign, primarily Pacific Rim,
technology information to its internal organization as well as its
member companies.\6 SEMATECH's Competitive Analysis Group has 10
staff members; 1 member fluently speaks and reads Japanese.  The
other staff members have engineering backgrounds.  According to a
staff member, since this office collects detailed technical
information, an engineering background is essential to understand and
analyze the data.  In addition, the staff member told us that foreign
language skills are also essential since much of the best Japanese
technical information is not available in English. 

Although the department monitors all available foreign data, its
staff discusses specific needs with its internal groups and works on
joint research projects with its member companies.  Information is
primarily collected by monitoring databases, newspapers, magazines,
and government reports as well as periodically visiting Japan and
other Asian countries to meet with foreign officials and attend
international technical symposia and conferences.  According to a
staff member, if SEMATECH had an office in the Far East, the Group
could maintain an ongoing relationship with information sources and,
therefore, more effectively collect technology information.  However,
establishing an office overseas is cost prohibitive, and SEMATECH
believes that many of its member companies already have a sufficient
presence in Asia. 

Based on the needs identified, the office provides timely information
regarding (1) what the competition is doing; (2) where the
competitors are going with a technology, process, or product; and (3)
what steps should be taken to remain competitive in that technology,
process, or product.  This information is disseminated to projects
within SEMATECH and member companies through a variety of reporting
methods, including reports, analyses, meetings, and translations. 
According to a SEMATECH official, this information can change the way
SEMATECH project leaders and member companies think about their
competition and plan their research and development strategies. 


--------------------
\5 See our most recent report on SEMATECH, Federal Research: 
SEMATECH's Technological Progress and Proposed R&D Program
(GAO/RCED-92-223BR, July 16, 1992). 

\6 Each of SEMATECH's member companies has a Competitive Analysis
Group that meets quarterly with SEMATECH's group.  According to a
SEMATECH staff member, this network is effective in coordinating and
disseminating foreign technology information. 


SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY
========================================================= Appendix III

In reviewing U.S.  and Japanese organizations that collect and
disseminate foreign technology information, we interviewed and
obtained documents from knowledgeable officials at the Departments of
Defense, State, and Commerce.  In Tokyo, Japan, we interviewed over
90 representatives of 27 U.S.  and Japanese civilian government,
defense, and private sector organizations that collect and
disseminate foreign technology information.  We selected these
organizations based on information obtained from knowledgeable U.S. 
officials and industry representatives.  We interviewed 10 of the 11
U.S.  government organizations in Japan that monitor and disseminate
foreign technology information.\1 We also reviewed a document
produced by the Central Intelligence Agency, but did not include the
Agency's activities in our review. 

We assessed the efforts of the U.S.  and Japanese organizations that
we met with based on five factors:  amount of funds, number of staff,
official mission, relationship with home government, and efforts to
coordinate with other organizations.  The U.S.  and Japanese
companies that we interviewed did not provide specific funding
information. 

We also interviewed representatives of several U.S.  consulting
companies that monitor Japanese technology information as well as a
university professor that has written extensively on Japanese
technological and industrial developments.  We attended a conference
entitled "Targeting Research and Development for Competitive
Advantage" that was sponsored by the American Foreign Service
Association.  In addition, we interviewed (1) a scientist at the Los
Alamos National Laboratory that worked at Japan's International
Superconductivity Technology Center under an agreement between these
two organizations and (2) officials from the National Science
Foundation, the Japanese Technical Evaluation Center (JTEC), and the
Semiconductor Manufacturing Technology consortium that are
responsible for foreign technology information collection and
dissemination.  We also attended a JTEC workshop. 

We interviewed officials from the following U.S.  and Japanese
organizations in Japan: 


--------------------
\1 We did not interview officials of the Naval Science and Technical
Group Far East due to time constraints. 


      U.S.  ORGANIZATIONS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix III:0.1

  -- American Electronics Association

  -- Air Force Detachment 1

  -- Army Research Office, Far East

  -- Army Science and Technology Center, Far East

  -- Army Science and Technology Translation Unit

  -- Asian Office of Aerospace Research and Development

  -- Defense Attache Office

  -- Department of Energy

  -- Environment, Science, and Technology Office

  -- Mutual Defense Assistance Office, Defense Technology Office

  -- National Science Foundation, Tokyo Regional Office

  -- Office of Naval Research Asia

  -- U.S.  corporation\2

  -- U.S.  and Foreign Commercial Service


--------------------
\2 Officials from the U.S.  corporation we interviewed agreed to
provide information on the condition that their company not be named
in our report. 


      JAPANESE ORGANIZATIONS
----------------------------------------------------- Appendix III:0.2

  -- The Institute of Physical and Chemical Research

  -- International Superconductivity Technology Center

  -- Japan Electronics Industry Development Association

  -- Japan External Trade Organization

  -- Japan Information Center for Science and Technology

  -- Japan Key Technology Center

  -- Japan Research and Development Corporation

  -- Ministry of International Trade and Industry

  -- Mitsubishi Research Institute

  -- National Center for Science and Information Systems

  -- New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization

  -- Nippon Electronics Company

  -- Science and Technology Agency


MAJOR CONTRIBUTORS TO THIS REPORT
========================================================== Appendix IV

NATIONAL SECURITY AND
INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS DIVISION,
WASHINGTON, D.C. 

Kevin Tansey, Assistant Director
Rosa M.  Johnson, Evaluator-in-Charge
Erin Slonaker Noel, Evaluator

FAR EAST OFFICE

Conor B.  O'Brien, Evaluator


*** End of document. ***