the agricultural colleges and universities. Young in-
vestigator awards and investigator-initiated grants
should be started to recruit bright new scientists, women
as well as men, into the agricultural research system
(Keyworth, 1983). The ARS, ERS, SRS and Cooperative
State Research Service (CSRS) of the USDA especially
need the infusion of new blood.
 Farms and agribusinesses will need many more skilled
entrepreneurs and workers with capacity to produce,
distribute and use the inputs that will carry the new,
complex and sometimes dangerous technologies. Non-
research public agencies that provide informational,
regulatory and other public services for agriculture will
need to improve the skills of their employees.


 Administration and Coordination

 The problems and issues in food and agriculture have
changed faster than the administrative structures of the
state Agricultural Experiment Stations and the USDA.
Success in meeting the research needs of the next 50 years
will require continued overcoming of mismatches
between problems and subjects, on one hand, and the
multidisciplinary administrative units of the colleges of
agriculture and the USDA, on the other. This must be
done in the agricultural research establishment (ARE)
itself, with its unique concern for and ability to do PS
and SM research and its substantial capacity for DISC
research relevant to farming and agribusinesses.
 The objectives and values sought by the ARE have
been criticized by biological and physical scientists out-
side the ARE; food, resource and agricultural activists;
and social scientists and humanists. Though alternative
agricultural production, marketing and rural social
systems exist, they are inadequately considered in the
ARE. Choices among these alternatives require evalua-
tion. It is important that the ARE's research mission be
expanded administratively to deal with such choices and
with the values involved in them. This is required both
to respond constructively to the ARE's critics and to im-
prove the ARE's PS and SM research. The required
philosophic reorientation of the ARE will be difficult.
Many biological and physical agricultural scientists avoid
research on values as unscientific. More emphasis is
needed on orientations that permit objective research on
values, non-monetary as well as monetary, and intrinsic
as well as market exchange values (prices). Here the
social scientists, humanists and, incidentally, agri-
cultural extension workers, vocational agriculture
teachers and 4-H club leaders, have contributions to


offer to the ARE and to the broader biological, physical
and social science communities.
 For the entire spectrum of research (PS, SM and
DISC), the ARE must more fully exploit its advantages
and resources while also taking advantage of public and
private research capability external to itself. No research
system outside the ARE has the record of agricultural
problem solving and subject matter research accom-
plishments, the endowments of facilities, and the built-
in delivery systems and feedback mechanisms. These
facilities and assets will be important for the PS and SM
research required in the next 50 years. The ARE is
further unique in its coverage of the entire research
spectrum-PS, SM and DISC; its coordination with the
private sector, whose contributions equal or exceed those
of the public sector; and the federal-state agricultural
research partnerships. It is crucial for the future that
administrative and intellectual linkages be strengthened
among the ARE, other federal and state agencies, and
the non-land-grant universities that also do agricultural
research; and that the USDA and state Agricultural
Experiment Stations be administratively updated to
handle current and future agricultural problems and
issues.
 It is particularly important in developing the capac-
ity advocated herein that ARE administrators support
proposals from organizations outside 'itself to finance
basic disciplinary research relevant to agriculture. It is
even more important that agencies outside the ARE not
be successful in dismantling or preventing the full
development of the PS and SM capacity of the ARE.
Objective, realistic cooperation and coordination, not
destructive competition, are needed.
 Though a great deal of planning and programing of
research goes on in the ARE itself, we need to recognize
another layer of powerful decision makers important for
agricultural and food research: the National Academy
of Science (NAS), the National Science Foundation
(NSF), Congress, the executive branch of the U.S.
government, and non-land-grant universities with which
farmers, agribusinessmen and ARE personnel have little
or no communication. ARE scientists, their ad-
ministrators and their clientele groups should reach out
beyond their usual professional linkages to bridge the
gaps that exist at all levels between themselves and these
scientists and administrators outside the ARE. This is
most important for agricultural research to fulfill its
crucial mission of increasing our capacity to produce
and, less importantly, for the ARE's long-term survival
as a productive institution serving society.