Ocean floor manganese nodules have attracted worldwide attention as the possible future resources. However, many problems in the distribution and origin of the nodules remain still unsolved, because of the lack in reliable seabed information. Thus, several leading ocean-oriented countries are now carrying out, or have plans about the systematic research programs on manganese nodules, including both prospectings mainly by industry groups, and scientific studies by the governmental and university groups, in which the results of the latter scientific studies are expected to serve as the guideline for the former prospectings. The representative programs are as follows : In Japan, “Basic researches on the deep sea mineral resources” is being conducted by the Geological Survey of Japan, for the northern Central Pacific Basin, using R/V Hakurei-Maru (1, 821 tonnage), with participation of the NIPR (National Institute for Pollution and Resources) in each cruise on their own program, “Technological study on the development of deep sea mineral resources”. Also, the industries group, DOMA (Deep Ocean Minerals Association), is engaged in a program of “Development of new prospecting technology for manganese nodule deposits”, with the objective areas south of Hawaii Islands of the Pacific. In the United States, there are three categories of research programs, being actively conducted by the groups of universities, Federal organizations, and industries respectively. The first is “MANOP (Manganese Nodule Program) of NSF (National Science Foundation) Seabed Assesment Program, carried out by the interuniversities group. This is now concentrated on the detailed studies of the sea floor to obtain its real physical, geochemical and biological informations by means of the in-situ measurement instruments, deployed in each representative area of different sedimentological condition of the Pacific. The second is “DOMES (Deep Ocean Mining Environmental Studies)” of the Office of the Marine Minerals, NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration), in which the research groups from the Federal organizations such as NOAA and U.S. Geological Survey are in charge of conducting its geological aspects. The third are the programs of the industry groups related to the commercial development of manganese nodules, including prospecting, mining and processing. Four major international consortiums, Deepsea Ventures Group (OMA, Ocean Mining Association), INCO Group (OMI, Ocean Management Inc.), Kennecott Group (Kennecott Exploration), and Lockeed Gr oup (OMC, Ocean Minerals Co.) are now developing their programs, aiming at mining operation tests in the Pacific as immediate objectives. In West Germany, a program, “Researches on manganese nodules”, is actively promoted under the coordination and sponcering of the Ministry of Research and Technology, with participation of the Federal Institute for Geoscience and Natural Resources, universities and industries association (AMR, Arbeitsgemeinschaft meerestechnisch gewinbare Rostoffe), using R/V Valdivia (1, 317 tonnage), for the objective areas between Clarion and Clipperton fracture zones of the Pacific. In France, CNEXO (Centre National pour L'Exploitation des Oceans) and its research group, AFERNOD (Association Francais d'Étude et de Recherche des Nodules océaniques) are carrying out “Rsearches on polymetallic (manganese) nodules”, mostly for the southern Central Pacific Basin. In England, a research group has done recently some research cruises on the manganese nodules and metalliferous sediments for the Indian Ocean.
During the 1970s, new patterns of population change have appeared in the U.S., and previous patterns have acquired new complexities. The main purpose of this paper concentrates on identification and reaffirmation of the train of forces that bring about urban and rural spatial change, and the study starts from perception of several population changes through analyzing statistical data to find out the existence of a bunch of growth-inducing factors. At first, we can trace big migrations from the northeast and north central regions to the south and west. This regional shifts had already started before 1970, and became truly dramatic for the first half of the 1970s. Secondary, population increase of rural sector can be clearly seen. The gains increase partly due to the popular metropolitan overspill into adjacent counties but others are the result of the rural resurrection, a remarkable renascence of growth in the remoter nonadjacent counties due to specialized activities such as increasing accessibility of rural areas to the big metropolitan areas owing to advances in highway transportation, especially in development of “Interstate Highway System”, new industrial location trends emerged in the 1960s such as the decentralization of manufacturing, the revival or expansion of energy extraction, highly localized, large-scale energy related industrial development, recreation, and retirement. Thirdly, the slower growth of SMSAs as a whole can be noticed. However, growth rate depends upon the scale or the location of each SMSA, and slower growth is caused by the decline of central cities or slower growth of suburban areas. As for the slower growth of suburban areas where outstanding growth was seen during the 1950s and 1960s, we can recognize that three major reasons underlie that is to say, changing in the American life-style, rising of housing price, and increasing difficulties in using private cars. Finally, faster growth of black population is evident in the suburban areas of SMSAs. Black suburban population is still small in total number, compared with that of white one : however, faster growth of black population there will lead eventually to white abandonment of suburban community. Without doubt, such new trends as mentioned above, seen during the 1970s, are highly connected with the new patterns of population change of that period. Several sharp breakes with previous trends suggest that the forces underlying contemporary American population trends differ considerably from that operated during the 1960s. Through analyzing those new patterns as well as growth-inducing factors affecting population change of American urban and rural areas, it may be possible to point out that government role in developing new urban patterns is getting bigger. In the U.S., urban and rural community development has long been carried out by private hands. However, after “urban crisis” of the 1960s, federal government started to join in the private sector such as “urban development” or “development of new communities”. Government role in formation of new settlement patterns is still very small compared with that of private sector. However, we can recognize that new government participation in urban development will make it possible that government can lead urban development into favorable direction, not only in physical project but also in introducing social planning into this field.