The Politics of International Technology Transfer

Technology transfer is well recognized as a major determinant in the economic development of newly industrializing countries. Increasingly, technology transfer is also recognized as an important component in the economic fortunes of developed countries. The globalization of markets and the premium placed on technological sophistication in industry and services emphasizes the need for governments to consider and engage in technology transfer policy strategies. Our understanding of the dynamics of technology transfer can be enhanced through the study of the experiences of specific states. It is against this backdrop that this paper presents an analysis of technology transfer patterns from the United States and Japan to South Korea from 1962 through 1992. The Korean experience reveals that patterns of technology transfer cannot be explained simply by concentrating on what has been transferred from donor countries, such as the United Slates and Japan. Rather, we need to turn our focus to the host country and to the policy strategies that have been adopted to shape patterns of technology transfer. In short, the question turns from the economics of what, to the policies of how, technology transfer is accomplished.     

Review Article: Industrial Espionage and Technology Transfer

J. R. HARRIS. Industrial Espionage and Technology Transfer: Britain and France in the Eighteenth Century. Aldershot and Brookfield: Ashgate, 1998. Pp. xvii, 655. $110.95 (US). Reviewed by John Money     

Evaluating Government Technology Transfer

The national laboratories are a reservoir of scientific and technological talent that can help America to compete in international markets.… Spurred in the past decade by new legislation and enlightened policies, the national laboratories have greatly expanded efforts to transfer federally-funded inventions and technology to private industry.
Alan Schriesheim (Director, Argonne National Laboratory), "Toward a Golden Age for Technology Transfer," Issues in Science and Technology, Winter, 1990–91, p. 52.
Although Congress adopted several laws in the 1980s to encourage the commercialization of federal laboratory technology and to promote technology transfer from the federal laboratories to the private sector, collaboration between laboratories and industrial firms has been modest at best.
Erich Bloch, Toward A U.S. Technology Strategy, Washington, DC: National Academy Press, February, 1991, p. 22.     

Technology Transfer and Public Policy

This article uses events occurring between 1989 and 1994 at the University of California (UC) as a case study to illustrate the consequences to the university of the collision between two powerful public policy agendas for the university: (a) that it maintain its traditional independence, carrying out its roles of teaching and research untainted by the lures and demands of the marketplace, and (b) that it become more active in economic development activities, including the development and sale of its intellectual property and the establishment of companies to exploit university research. The unsuccessful attempts over these five years by the UC to establish a separate nonprofit foundation to manage its considerable portfolio of intellectual property and to form a for-profit company to fund development and start-up efforts have been plagued with controversy. UC's story offers parallels with the experiences of other universities and illustrates an emerging pattern in the responses of higher education to the new pressures on them to be more economically relevant. The lessons from the UC case are valuable for other universities and for policymakers involved in technology transfer activities.     

Technology Transfer between Technology Centres and SMEs: Evidence from the Basque Country

Public policies (often at the regional level) favouring pre-competitive research and cooperative research and development have played a decisive role in the development of technology centres in Europe and all over the world. The technology offer model gave priority to the creation of technology transfer organizations and structures, but there is increasing evidence that this model did not attach enough attention to the needs of small- and medium-sized companies (SMEs) and in particular, to their capacity to take in knowledge. In this paper, based on qualitative research, we show in detail some of the main issues involved in the relationships between technology centres and SMEs in the Basque Country, a region that has developed intensive policies favouring technology transfer organizations over the years.     

Academic Perceptions of University-Firm Technology Transfer

Why do some academics engage in technology transfer activities while others do not? What facilitates technology transfer? What inhibits it? This paper attempts to answer these questions from the vantage point of academic researchers. After briefly reviewing some pertinent literature, findings from a survey of academic researchers in the nation's top 100 research universities are presented. An assessment is made of academic researchers' technology transfer activities and of attributes that differentiate researchers who engage in technology transfer from their non-participating colleagues. Conclusions are drawn regarding the barriers and facilitators of university technology transfer to industry.     

Technology Transfer and the Federal Laboratories

Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADAs) are at the heart of recent federal efforts to increase United States technological competitiveness through the commercialization of public technologies. CRADAs are comprehensive legal agreements for the sharing of research personnel, equipment, and intellectual property rights in joint government-industry research. Since 1986, over 2200 CRADAs have been entered into. This study provides a midterm evaluation of the CRADA process. It finds that important legal obstacles remain in the use of CRADAs. Progress is also impeded by a lack of industry familiarity with research in the federal laboratories, as well as inadequate federal funding for research collaboration.     

Technology Transfer from University to Industry

The present national technology transfer policy suffers from the limited focus on structural barriers, as well as the reluctance of American business to invest in precommercial research and development. A growing consensus from the national debate suggests that policy attention be reoriented, thereby giving a greater emphasis to precommercial technology development (TD) research. This paper examines whether the nation's research-intensive universities, a reservoir of virtually unlimited scientific and technological resources, can possibly go beyond basic research and produce economically viable technology efficiently. To this end, the paper introduces key principles that help organize TD research within the research-intensive university. It also presents the results of a large-scale TD experiment being carried out by a research-intensive university under federal sponsorship. The midterm result strongly indicates that with modest financial support and some internal cultural adjustment, research-intensive universities can break through their ideological barriers and efficiently translate new scientific advances into commercially viable, cutting-edge technology. This is possible because, among other factors, the research-intensive university can build on its awn comparative advantage of strong fundamental research.     

University-Industry Collaboration on Technology Transfer: Views from the Ivory Tower

This article reports the results of a national survey that examines the concerns of American faculty about close university industry collaboration and explores how these concerns may impinge upon their participation in industrial innovation. The data show that while academics are generally, but cautiously, in favor of close collaboration, they live with deep tension that is caused by two powerfully competing realities: the instrumental need for industry funding, and the intrinsic need to preserve intellectual freedom. A challenge to public policy is to fashion a positive-sum strategy (e.g., tax incentives) in which firms would be encouraged to increase funding for their academic collaborators, who then may fulfill their research mission better while contributing to industrial innovation.     

Asian Transnational Enterprises and Technology Transfer in Thailand

Like many of its neighbours, Thailand is increasingly interested in upgrading the technological capability of its indigenous firms through the inward investment (foreign direct investment, FDI) of transnational enterprises (TNEs). Its science and technology policies, however, remain fragmented, and they compete with regional distribution priorities. This paper examines the nature of technology transfer between Asian TNEs (Japan and the newly industrializing economies (NIEs), that is, the NIEs of Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and Taiwan) and Thai firms based on the responses of some 145 firms from a 2005 survey. It finds only modest levels of technological transfer in production and process technologies. Asian TNEs evaluate factor cost advantages and government incentives favourably. Logistic regressions, however, indicate that government incentives are negatively related to technology process modification between NIE subsidiaries and Thai customers. But, the technical training of Thai workers significantly increases the likelihood of Asian subsidiaries undertaking process technology transfers. Among NIE firms, the ability to import foreign skilled labour further increases the likelihood of such technological activities. Finally, forward linkages among the NIEs are positively associated with firm location in the urban agglomerations of Bangkok and Chon Buri, and, among smaller firms. Our study suggests that prevailing FDI policies have little influence on technology transfer, while technology policies that favour large TNEs work against smaller NIEs that are engaged in modest technology transfer.     

中国计划经济的重新审视与评价

中国经济体制在20世纪的后50年里,就经济运行来说,经历了一个由计划与市场并存向计划经济转变、再由计划经济向市场经济转变的螺旋式发展过程。中国在50年代之所以选择计划经济体制,除主观认识因素外,当时的工业化压力、资源短缺和政府动员能力强也是重要因素。计划经济体制形成后的20年里,尽管它在集中资源加快独立工业体系的建立方面发挥了重要作用,并基本保持了高积累下的社会稳定,但是它最大的缺陷是不能长久实现社会主义所追求的高效率,而这正是计划经济被社会主义市场经济所取代的真正原因。