1773 



one analyst, "In fields such as power generation, primary metals, 

 road and rail transportation, consumer durables, and communications, 

 European companies are among the world leaders." '*^'' The same 

 could also have been said of Japan. 



Another author pointed out that American preoccupation with 

 such science-based high technologies as "strategic" hardware had 

 actually worked to the broader economic disadvantage of this country 

 by diverting attention of U.S. scientists and technologists" . . . from 

 prosaic problems such as those of improving old processes or dealing 

 with air pollution and waste disposal." He explained that European 

 interest concentrated on increasing the efficiency and productivity of 

 commonplace processes, rather than risking development of "frontier" 

 technology.^^^ The study offered at this point a table of 18 classes of 

 items in international trade, showing a considerable correlation 

 between the ability of U.S. exports to compete in world markets 

 and "scientists and engineers in R. & D. as percent of employment" in 

 these 18 classes. 



U.S. low-technology industries appear to have a number of dis- 

 advantages in world trade. Frequently, companies in this category 

 got an earher start in technological development, but then tended to 

 rest on their laurels. In some cases foreign companies invested in 

 U.S. patents and other "intellectual property," and then improved 

 upon them to outdo the older U.S. competition. Destruction of 

 industry in Europe and Japan meant that rebuilding was necessary, 

 so that more modern production facilities were available. Another 

 advantage enjoyed by industries outside the United States is that 

 they all adhere to agreed voluntary standards and to the metric 

 system, with which U.S. products are often incompatible.*^^ Other 

 disadvantages frequently cited are U.S. antitrust policies, patent 

 policies, onerous administration of pollution controls, and industrial 

 and mining health and safety legislation. One comparative advantage 

 of foreign competition is asserted to be the close and cordial working 

 relationship between industry and government, whereas this relation- 

 ship in the United States tends to have an adversarial character. 

 Clearly, these alleged disadvantages would be generally more charac- 

 teristic of low-technology industries than those in — for example — 

 aerospace, military, and nuclear fields associated with high technology 

 and large Government investment. A useful comparison might be 

 drawn, in fact, between the policies of foreign governments toward 

 low technology and the policies of the U.S. Government since 1962 

 with respect to agricultural technology development and dissemina- 

 tion. To some degree, perhaps, foreign governments have observed 

 the extraordinary success of U.S. agricultural development, coupling 

 the farm to the county agent and experiment stations, and have 

 applied these lessons to manufacturing industry of their own. As 

 U.S. workers in the foreign assistance program endeavor to transplant 

 this uniquely American system to agriculture of developing countries, 

 it is possible that it might also be transplanted to lagging industries 

 in the United States. 



«° Ibid., p. 663. 



«' Ibid. 



«2 Ibid., pp. 666-667. 



