A corrollary to this is that ignoring technologies may choke off access to new industries. Australia has (by choice?) no manufacturing facilities for computer chips. But a lot of the new advances in biotech builds on silicon chip technologies. A lesson for govts who think they can pick "winners" vs "losers"
On 2/15/08, Owen Densmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The economist has a thought provoking article on the limits of > leapfrogging: > http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10650775 > .. and attached for convenience. > > The idea is that, although in a few cases new technologies can be > deployed in developing countries .. and sometimes better than the > developed countries, new technologies often depend on older ones, thus > cannot easily be deployed by leapfrogging the older ones. > > -- Owen > > MOBILE phones are frequently held up as a good example of technology's > ability to transform the fortunes of people in the developing world. > In places with bad roads, few trains and parlous land lines, mobile > phones substitute for travel, allow price data to be distributed more > quickly and easily, enable traders to reach wider markets and > generally make it easier to do business. The mobile phone is also a > wonderful example of a "leapfrog" technology: it has enabled > developing countries to skip the fixed-line technology of the 20th > century and move straight to the mobile technology of the 21st. Surely > other technologies can do the same? > > Alas, the mobile phone turns out to be rather unusual. Its very nature > makes it an especially good leapfrogger: it works using radio, so > there is no need to rely on physical infrastructure such as roads and > phone wires; base-stations can be powered using their own generators > in places where there is no electrical grid; and you do not have to be > literate to use a phone, which is handy if your country's education > system is in a mess. There are some other examples of leapfrog > technologies that can promote development—moving straight to local, > small-scale electricity generation based on solar panels or biomass, > for example, rather than building a centralised power-transmission grid > —but there may not be very many. > > Indeed, as a recent report from the World Bank points out (see > article), it is the presence of a solid foundation of intermediate > technology that determines whether the latest technologies become > widely diffused. It is all too easy to forget that in the developed > world, the 21st century's gizmos are underpinned by infrastructure > that often dates back to the 20th or even the 19th. Computers and > broadband links are not much use without a reliable electrical supply, > for example, and the latest medical gear is not terribly helpful in a > country that lacks basic sanitation and health-care facilities. A > project to provide every hospital in Ethiopia with an internet > connection was abandoned a couple of years ago when it became apparent > that the lack of internet access was the least of the hospitals' > worries. And despite the clever technical design of the $100 laptop, > which is intended to bring computing within the reach of the world's > poorest children, sceptics wonder whether the money might be better > spent on schoolrooms, teacher training and books. > > The World Bank's researchers looked at 28 examples of new technologies > that achieved a market penetration of at least 5% in the developed > world, and found that 23 of them went on to manage a penetration of > over 50%. Once early adopters latch onto something new and useful, in > other words, the rest of the population can quickly follow. The > researchers then considered 67 new technologies that had achieved a 5% > penetration in the developing world, and found that only six of them > went on to reach 50%. That suggests that although new technologies are > often adopted by a small minority of people in poor countries, they > then fail to achieve widespread diffusion, so their benefits do not > become more generally available. > > Lavatories before laptops > The World Bank concludes that a country's capacity to absorb and > benefit from new technology depends on the availability of more basic > forms of infrastructure. This has clear implications for development > policy. Building a fibre-optic backbone or putting plasma screens into > schools may be much more glamorous than building electrical grids, > sewerage systems, water pipelines, roads, railways and schools. It > would be great if you could always jump straight to the high-tech > solution, as you can with mobile phones. But with technology, as with > education, health care and economic development, such short-cuts are > rare. Most of the time, to go high-tech, you need to have gone medium- > tech first. > > > > ============================================================ > FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv > Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College > lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org > -- Saul Caganoff Enterprise IT Architect LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/scaganoff ============================================================ FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
