1780 



the international economic position of the Linited States it would 

 be necessary to "rethink our policies, reorder priorities, set specific 

 goals." In amplification of this point, the report quoted Prof. ^lurray 

 Wiedenbaum's statement that it was necessary to "emphasize key 

 civilian areas to a greater extent." 



The inherent interest of the Department of State in the international 

 implications of the high-versus-low-technology question would appear 

 to be highlighted by this interim report. But the Department seems 

 to have played no role in the extended exploration of the matter. 

 It is possible that the diplomatic role of domestic technology, espe- 

 cially in the low-technology industries, may have been neglected as 

 attention has been concentrated on reacting after the fact to the 

 emergency and spread of more dramatic items of high technology. 



Some Concluding Observations 



A major issue of national polic}^ may be emerging: the question of 

 whether Government investment in high technolog}^ should be con- 

 tinued at past rates — or even expanded; or whether more public 

 benefit would accrue from a shift of Government funding support 

 to low technolog3\ 



Technology influences many aspects of diplomacy. The effects of 

 high technology tend to be specific and programmatic; those of low 

 technology more general and economic. High technology produces 

 the spectaculars, and the applications of low technology pay for 

 them; they also provide mass-produced manufactures that supply 

 domestic markets and earn the bulk of foreign exchange. 



While high technology demonstrates the sophisticated skill of 

 American technologists and impresses the developing countries, their 

 need is for the fundamental knowledge and skills of low technology. 



Government investment in applied science and technology in the 

 United States has been concentrated in the high- technology area. 

 Except in the longstanding program of agricultural research and 

 development, Government investment in low technology has been 

 quite minor. 



On the other hand, developed nations in international trade 

 competition with the United States maintain extensive research 

 programs in low technology, and — also of importance — encourage 

 close cooperation within industries and between industry and gov- 

 ernment on technological programs. The diplomatic consequences 

 that flow from this difference between United States and foreign 

 government policy toward low technology warrant examination. 

 They are reflected in patterns of world trade, usage of miported 

 materials, balances of payments, economic health, currency stability, 

 and the prospect of progressive deterioration of the position of the 

 United States in the world economy. 



In view of the important relationship of both high and low tech- 

 nology for U.S. diplomacy, it seems important for the Department of 

 State to participate in the formulation of U.S. policy toward both 

 categories. One kind of activity singularly appropriate for the De- 

 partment would be the formulation of a policy for achieving a rational 

 balance between exports and imports of technological information. 

 The Department is unlikely to be able to mobilize the skills necessary 

 for managing the substantive aspects of such a two-way transfer of 

 technology. But the design of institutional arrangements for this 



