Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T20:26:24.540Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Technology, International Competition, and Economic Growth: Some Lessons and Perspectives

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 July 2011

Keith Pavitt
Keith Pavitt
Affiliation:
Research Fellow in the Science Policy Research Unit at the University of Sussex, England.
Get access

Extract

With World War II and the explosion of the atomic bomb, the critical importance of organized research and development (R & D) to weapons development and to international relations became obvious to everyone. It created new problems in national policy, deriving essentially from the mobilization and the close involvement of university science and industrial technology with strategic and quasistrategic aims. And it changed the rules of the game in international relations by increasing, by many orders of magnitude, the costs of waging all-out war.

Type
Research Article
Information
World Politics , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , January 1973 , pp. 183 - 205
Copyright
Copyright © Trustees of Princeton University 1973

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See, for example, Gilpin, Robert, American Scientists and Nuclear Weapons Policy (Princeton 1962)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Aron, Raymond, The Great Debate (New York 1964).Google Scholar

2 Worley, James, “Changing Direction of Research and Development Employment Among Firms,” Table I, in Nelson, Richard, ed., The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity (Princeton 1962)Google Scholar; National Science Foundation, National Patterns of R & D Resources, NSF 70–46 (Washington, D.C. 1971), 2.Google Scholar

3 Fabian, Yvan, Young, Alison and others, R & D in OECD Member Countries: Trends and Objectives (OECD, Paris 1971).Google Scholar This is the first comprehensive comparison of trends in R & D expenditures in the 1960's in the industrialized non-Communist countries.

4 Pavitt, Keidi and Wald, Solomon, The Conditions for Success in Technological Innovation, Part II, E (OECD, Paris 1971).Google Scholar

5 See, for example, National Science Foundation, A Review of the Relationship Between Research and Development and Economic Growth/Productivity (Washington, D.C. 1971).Google Scholar

6 OECD, Gaps in Technology: Analytical Report, Book IV (Paris 1970).Google Scholar

7 See, for example, Dennison, Edward and Poullier, Jean-Pierre, Why Growth Rates Differ (Washington, D.C. 1967)Google Scholar; also fn. 5.

8 The best general sources on Eastern European (mainly Russian) science and technology are: OECD, Science Policy in the USSR (Paris 1969)Google Scholar; Richta, Radovan, Civilization at the Crossroads (Prague 1968)Google Scholar; Boretsky, Michael, Comparative Progress in Technology, Productivity, and Economic Efficiency: USSR versus USA, and The Technological Base of Soviet Military Power, U.S. Congress, Joint Economic Committee (Washington, D.C. 1966 and 1970 respectively)Google Scholar; Freeman, Christopher and Young, Alison, The Research and Development Effort in Europe, North America and the Soviet Union (OECD, Paris 1965)Google Scholar; UNESCO, Statistics on Research and Experimental Development Activities, 1967 (Paris 1970).Google Scholar

9 Berenyi, Ivan, “Computers in Eastern Europe,” Scientific American, CCXXIII (October 1970).Google Scholar

10 For an admission of the weaknesses of the previous U.S. system, and intentions for the future, see David Packard's speech to representatives of defense firms on August 11, 1971 (Department of Defense News Release No. 689–71).

11 For a description of the characteristics of “research-intensive” industries in the West, see Gruber, William and Vernon, Raymond, “The Technology Factor in a World Trade Matrix,” in Vernon, Raymond, ed., The Technology Factor in International Trade (New York 1970)Google Scholar; for a description of the USSR's “uniform-technology” policy, see Williams, Bruce, Technology Investment and Growth (London 1967), 147.Google Scholar

12 For a list of Russian purchases of Western plant and equipment, see Goldman, Marshall I., “More Heat in the Soviet Hothouse,” Harvard Business Review, XLIX (July-August 1971), 15Google Scholar, exhibit IV.

13 New York Times, February 15, 1971, p. 2.

14 Westin, Alan, “Information Technology and Public Decision-Making,” in Program on Technology and Society, Harvard University, Sixth Annual Report, 1969–1970, 65.Google Scholar

15 Burns, Tom, “The Innovative Process and the Organization of Industrial Science,” in Main Speeches, European Industrial Research Management Association, Conference Papers, V (Paris 1967)Google Scholar; cited in Pavitt and Wald (fn. 4), 61.

18 Vernon, Raymond, “The Multinational Enterprise: Power versus Sovereignty,” Foreign Affairs, XLIX (July 1971).Google Scholar

17 For a fuller discussion, see Pavitt, , “Technology in Europe's Future,” Research Policy, 1 (August 1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18 See Michael Boretsky's paper, presented before the National Academy of Engineering, Symposium on Technology and International Trade, October 1970; also, Boffey, Philip, “Technology and World Trade: Is There Cause for Alarm?” Science, CLXXII (April 2, 1971), 37–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

19 See “The U.S. Searches for a Realistic Trade Policy,” Business WeeK, July 3, 1971.

20 Nelson, Richard, “World Leadership, the Technological Gap and National Policy,” Minerva, IX (July 1971).Google ScholarEads, George and Nelson, Richard, “Governmental Support of Advanced Civilian Technology: Power Reactors and the Supersonic Transport,” Public Policy, XIX (Summer 1971).Google Scholar

21 OECD, Reviews of National Science Policy: Switzerland (Paris 1971).Google Scholar

22 See Aviation Week and Space Technology, May 31, 1971.

23 Ibid., June 21, 1971, p. 15.

24 Valentine, Burl, “Obstacles to Space Co-operation: Europe and The Post-Apollo Experience,” Research Policy, 1Google Scholar, No. 2.

25 Meyboom, Peter, Technological Innovation in Canada, Economic Development Division, Department of Finance (Ottawa 1970).Google Scholar

28 OECD, Review of National Science Policy: Canada (Paris 1970)Google Scholar

27 “Science Policy for What: The Uniqueness of the Canadian Situation,” mimeo, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs (Princeton 1971).

28 See Pavitt and Wald (fn. 4), 52–56.

29 See Gilpin, Robert, “Technological Strategies and National Purpose,” Science, CLXIX (July 31, 1971), 441–48.Google ScholarStoleru, L., “Quand l'Etat se mele du marche,” Le Monde, June 25, 1971.Google Scholar

30 See Jéquier, Nicolas, Le Défi Industriel Japonais (Lausanne 1970).Google Scholar

31 For a detailed discussion of the links between national capabilities in academic science and in industrial technology, see Pavitt and Wald (fn. 4), Part III.

32 See Fabian and others (fn. 3).

33 For a fuller discussion, see Pavitt, , “A European's View of the Environmental Crisis,” mimeo, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs (Princeton 1971).Google Scholar

34 See Fabian and others (fn. 3).

35 With economically motivated R&D there are no similar variations in efficiency across countries. See Pavitt and Wald (fn. 4), Annex A.

36 Hamilton, David, “Advanced Passenger Train Revealed,” New Scientist and Science Journal, L (June 10, 1971), 624–25.Google Scholar

37 For indications of current thinking on these problems in the U.S. Government see statements by Pollack, , Frutkin, , and Kratzer, in A General Review of International Cooperation in Science and Space, Hearings before the Subcommittee on International Cooperation in Science and Space of the Committee on Science and Astronautics, U.S. House of Representatives, 92nd Cong., First Sess., May 18, 19, and 20, 1971. (Washington, D.C. 1971).Google Scholar

38 For a convincing presentation of this argument, see Cooper, Charles, “Science and the Underdeveloped Countries,” Problems of Science Policy (OECD, Paris 1968).Google Scholar

39 Christopher Marlowe, The Jew of Malta, Act IV, scene 1.