This study analyzes the science policies offive countries with free-market economies (the United
Kingdom, the Federal Republic of Germany, France, the Republic of Korea, and the United
States of America) that have successfully applied science and technology to increase their
industrial competitiveness in world markets. The article describes the historical and cultural
differences affecting how resources for pure and applied research have been organized and
allocated, and it details the different ways in which government intervention is used to increase
the contribution of research to technological competitiveness. It poses lessons for decision
makers wanting to modify their own country's approach to science policy, especially those of
the new market economies of Eastern Europe. Detailed descriptions of each country studied are
given in appendixes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allen, J. (Ed.). (1974). Guide to world science (Vol. 3). Guernsey, United Kingdom: F. Hodgson.
2.
Amsden, A.H. (1989, May-June). Asia's next giant: How Korea competes in the world economyTechnology Review , 92, 46-53.
3.
Bond, J. (1986). The science and technology resources of West Germany-A comparison with the United States (NSF 86-310Washington, DC: National Science Foundation.
4.
Botkin, J. (1982). Global stakes: The future of high tech in AmericaCambridge, MA: Ballinger.
5.
Brooks, H. (1987). What is the national agenda for science?American Scientist, 75, 511-517.
6.
Brooks, H., & Cooper, C. (Eds.). (1987). Science for public policy.Oxford, United Kingdom: Pergamon.
Dalyell, T. (1983). A science policy for BritainHarlow, Essex, United Kingdom: Longmans.
9.
Darvas, G. (Ed.). (1988). Science and technology in Eastern Europe.Harlow, Essex, United Kingdom: Longman Group.
10.
Department of Education and Science. Advisory Board for the Research Councils. (1986). Exploitable areas of scienceLondon: HMSO .
11.
Department of Education and Science. Advisory Board for the Research Councils. (1987). A strategy for the science baseLondon: HMSO .
12.
Department of Trade and Industry. (1986). Science and technology report.London: HMSO.
13.
Dickson, D. (1988). The new politics of science.New York: Pantheon.
14.
Dimancescu, D., & Botkin, J. (1986). The new alliance: America's R&D consortia.Cambridge, MA: Ballinger .
15.
Federal Ministry for Research and Technology. ( 1988). Report of the Federal Government (FRG) on research.Bonn: Federal Republic of Germany.
16.
Geimer, H., & Geimer, R. (1981). Research organization and science promotion in the FRG.Munich, Germany: T. G. Saur.
17.
Goldsmith, M. (1984). U.K. science policy: A critical review of policies for publicly funded research.Harlow, Essex, United Kingdom: Longmans.
18.
Ince, M. (1986). The politics of British science.Brighton, Sussex, United Kingdom: Wheatsheaf Books .
19.
Korea: Transition to maturity [Special issue] (1988). World Development, 16(1).
20.
Lederman, L.L. (1985). Science and technology in Europe: A surveyScience and Public Policy, 12, 131-143.
21.
Lederman, L.L. (1986). Research policies and strategies in six countriesScience and Public Policy, 13, 67-76.
22.
Lederman, L.L. (1987). Science and technology policies and priorities: Acomparative analysisScience, 237, 1125-1133.
23.
Long, T. D., & Wright, C. (Eds.). (1975). Science policies of industrial nations.New York: Praeger.
24.
Maddox, J. (1982, May 27). Science in West GermanyNature, pp. 261-280.
25.
Magiziner, T.C., & Patinkin, M. (1989). Fast heat: How Korea won the microwave warHarvard Business Review, 67 , 83-93.
26.
Ministere de la Recherche et de l'Enseignement superieur. (1989). La recherche en France: principaux organismes.Paris: French Government.
27.
Ministry of Science and Technology. (1987). Introduction to science and technology.Seoul: Republic of Korea.
28.
Mody, A. (1989, June). Institutions and dynamic comparative advantage: Electronics industry in South Korea and Taiwan. World Bank Industry Series (No. 9Washington, DC: World Bank.
29.
National Research Council. (1981). Outlook for science and technology.Washington, DC : National Academy of Sciences.
30.
National Science Board. (1982). University-industrial relations: Myths, realities and potentialsWashington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
31.
National Science Board. (1987). Science and indicators indicators—1987Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
32.
National Science Board. (1989). Science and engineering indicators—1989Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
33.
Norman, C. (1981). The god that limps: S&T in the '80s.New York: Norton.
34.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (1967). Reviews of national science policy: U.K. and FRG.Paris: OECD.
35.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (1972). The research system: Comparative study of the organization and financing of fundamental research: Vol. 1: France, Germany, and the United Kingdom.Paris: OECD.
36.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (1984). Industry and university: New forms of cooperation and communication.Paris: OECD .
37.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (1986a). Innovation policy: France.Paris: OECD.
38.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (1986b). Science and technology indicatorsParis: OECD.
39.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (1988). Science and policy outlook.Paris: OECD.
40.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (1989a). The changing role of government research laboratories.Paris: OECD.
41.
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (1989b). Main science and technology indicators, (1989/1)Paris: OECD.
42.
Petit, M.J. (1987). Industrial research and development consortia.Austin: University of Texas .
43.
Philips, Sir David. (1988). A strategy for science in the U.KScience and Public Policy, 15(1), 3-13.
44.
Report of the President's committee on industrial competitiveness. (1985). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
45.
Republic of Korea. (1985). Korea Technology Development Corporation (KTDC) Annual Report, 1985Seoul: Republic of Korea.
46.
Republic of Korea. (1986, February). Korea Institute for Economics and Technology (KIET) BrochureSeoul: Republic of Korea.
47.
Republic of Korea. (1987). Korea Advanced Institute ofScience and Technology (KAIST) Report for 1987Seoul: Republic of Korea.
48.
Ronayne, J. (1984). Science in government: A review of the principles and practice of science policy.Baltimore, MD: Arnold.
49.
Rothschild, Lord Nathienal M. V. (1971). The organization and management of government R. and D.: A framework for government R. and D.London: HMSO.
50.
Roy, R., & Shapley, D. (1988). Lost at the frontier: U.S. science and technology policy adrift.Philadelphia, PA: ISI.
51.
Science in Europe (1987, September 4). Science , pp. 1101-1114.
52.
SRI International. (1985). Performer organizations and support strategies for fundamental research: Vol. 1: Comparative overview; Volume 2: Country studies ( Contract report to the National Science Foundation, Washington, DC).
53.
Teich, A. H., & Pace, J. H. (Eds.). (1986). Science and technology in the U.S.A.Harlow, Essex, United Kingdom : Longman Group.
54.
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (1983). Castasia II Report. Submission of the Republic of Korea (Science Policy Series, No. 55, pp. 267ff.). Paris: UNESCO.
55.
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (1985). Science policy and organization of research in the Republic of Korea (Science Policy Series, No. 56, Kim, Hyung-ki, principal authorParis: UNESCO.
56.
United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. (1988). Statistical yearbook.Paris: UNESCO.
57.
U.S. Congress. House Committee on Science and Technology, Task Force on Science Policy. (1986). History of science policy in the United States, 1940-1985Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
58.
U.S. Congress. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, Task Force on Technology Policy. (1988a). Technology policy and its effect on the national economy.Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
59.
U.S. Congress. House Committee on Science, Space and Technology. (1988b). University/industry alliancesWashington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
60.
U.K. Government. (1987). White paper on civil R&D.London: HMSO.
61.
Walgate, R. (1982, March 25). Science in France: The grand experimentNature, pp. 285-304.
