-
31. Climbing Up the Technological Ladder
- ISEAS–Yusof Ishak Institute
- Chapter
- Additional Information
150 Goh Chor Boon By: ROS Size: 7.5" x 10.25" J/No: 03-14474 Fonts: New Baskerville 31. CLIMBING UP THE TECHNOLOGICAL LADDER GOH CHOR BOON Reprinted in abridged form from Goh Chor Boon, “Climbing up the Technological Ladder: Some Issues and Problems in ASEAN”, in Development and Challenge: Southeast Asia in the New Millennium, edited by Wong Tai-Chee and Mohan Singh (Singapore: Times Academic Press, 1999), pp. 99–126, by permission of the author and the publisher. TECHNOLOGICAL DEPENDENCY AND UPGRADING IN ASEAN Simply stated, the dependency theory maintains that growth and development in the developing countries (the “periphery”) is hampered by structural dependence on the advanced, industrialised countries (the “core”), although the degree of such constraints varies widely. The dependency theory was made popular during the 1970s by the pessimistic views of Gunder Frank (1967) and Samir Amin (1973), both of whom asserted the virtual impossibility of take-off development in the peripheral Third World because of the exploitative ways in which capitalist industrialised core countries developed by “underdeveloping” the Third World. In a later work and in response to the emergence of newly industrialising countries, Frank (1983:323– 46) argues that the popular strategy of export-led growth adopted by these countries did not create genuine development because it was largely dependent on the flow of international capitalism and foreign technology. Some proponents, while claiming that peripheral capitalist development is possible , are “hard” or “rigid” on the concept of technological dependence. As stated by Cardoso and Faletto (1979), “[b]asically the dependence situation is maintained because, in addition to the already stated factors of direct control by the multinationals and dependence on the external markets, the industrial sector develops in an incomplete form”. Cardoso argues that “dependent-associated” development of the Third World countries was not merely constrained by the structure of unequal exchange imposed by the advanced countries; their growth paths were also determined by their domestic circumstances, such as the low levels of indigenous technological capabilities. Writing some 25 years later and when the world economy is becoming more competitive , more global, and increasingly 031 AR Ch 31 22/9/03, 12:44 PM 150 Climbing up the Technological Ladder 151 By: ROS Size: 7.5" x 10.25" J/No: 03-14474 Fonts: New Baskerville controlled by information and communication technology, Cardoso and his colleagues (Carnoy et al., 1993) reaffirm the dependency position of many Third World countries. But they now face “a crueller phenomenon: either the South (or a portion of it) enters the democratictechnological -scientific race, invests heavily in R&D, and endures the ‘information economy’ metamorphosis, or it becomes unimportant, unexploited and unexploitable ”. They further state that even for those former Third World countries, such as the Asian NIEs, India, China and Chile, which have been incorporated in the global economy , there is an urgent task to introduce changes. These changes include an appropriate industrial policy, an educational policy to upgrade human resources and to integrate the masses into contemporary culture, a science and technology policy capable of producing a technological leap forward in information technology, new materials and new modes of organisation, and social reforms to produce an “atmosphere of freedom which is conducive to organisational and technological innovation ” (Carnoy et al., 1993:156). Hence, under certain circumstances, “dependent development” in Third World countries was possible. A similar view on technological dependency was expressed by a historian of technological change, Nathan Rosenberg. He maintained that, because they lack “organised domestic capital goods sector”, developing countries generally do not possess the indigenous capabilities to make capital-saving innovations (Rosenberg, 1976:146–47). Thus, they have to import their capital goods — at the expense of not being able to develop their own technological base of skills, knowledge and infrastructure which are the key elements for further technical progress. In the late 1970s, the dependency perspective came under criticism largely due to a changing relationship between global capitalism and Third World economic development . By the mid-1970s, it was evident that a number of East Asian countries were experiencing a process of “late industrialisation ”. Beginning with Japan in the 1950s, Hong Kong in the 1960s, and South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore in the 1970s and 1980s, and possibly Malaysia, Thailand, and Indonesia today, these countries confirmed that successful capitalist accumulation and growth, albeit slow, of indigenous technological effort in innovation and research and development was possible in “the periphery”. More importantly , the dynamic role of the state, especially in the Asian NIEs...