researcher before public release. Experience suggests that disagreements about publication can almost always be resolved by discussion between the principal investigator and the technical contract manager. The Panel emphasizes that its support for a review period is not intended to support any government effort to veto publication, or to limit the government’s power to classify, in accordance with law, any research it has supported.
To help government policy officials to supervise the application of the gray-area research criteria and to gain perspective on the longer-term effects of the restrictions imposed on such research, there is a need to ensure that an accurate accounting of such restrictions is kept.
The Panel recommends that in cases where the government places such restrictions on scientific communication through contracts or other written agreements, it should be obligated to record and tabulate the instances of those restrictions on a regular basis.
The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
4 General Conclusions: Balancing the Costs and Benefits of Controls ."
Scientific Communication and National Security . Washington, DC: The National Academies Press,
Please select a format: