- Record: found
- Abstract: found
- Article: found
DEFINING HIGH TECHNOLOGY INDUSTRY: A CONSENSUS APPROACH
Abstract
Reasons are suggested for care over the definition of high technology industry. Some general approaches to definition are outlined, and a chronology of definitions is presented. Conceptual and practical problems with conventional choices are discussed, and a new consensus definition — drawn from a survey of current practice in the USA — is suggested as a complement to objective definitions. This is used to speculate upon high tech's potential role in the overall US employment problem.
Content
Author and article information
NOTES AND REFERENCES
Real specialists’, San Francisco Chronicle Business Extra, 8 July 1985, p. 19.
Breheny M., Cheshire P. and Langridge R.. 1985. . “The anatomy of job creation? Industrial change in Britain's M4 corridor. ”. In Silicon Landscapes . , Edited by: Hall P. and Markusen A.. p. 120 London : : Allen and Unwin. .
Eads G. and Nelson R.. 1971. . Government support of advanced civilian technology. . Public Policy . , Vol. 119((3)): 405––27. .
H. Giersch, Proceedings of a Conference on Emerging Technology at Kiel Institute of World Economics, JCB Mohr, Tubingen, 1981; and S. Miller, Emerging Technologies and Their Implications for Mid-America, Stanford Research International, Menlo Park, California, June 1984.
Freeman C.. 1982. . The Economics of Industrial Innovation . , Cambridge , Mass : : MIT Press. .
E. Deuterman, ‘Seeding science-based industry’, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Business Review, 1966, pp. 7–15.
R. Kelly, Alternative Measurements of Technology-Intensive Trade, Staff Economic Report, OER-ER-17, Office of Economic Research, International Economic Policy and Research, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy, US Department of Commerce, September 1976.
R. Riche, D. Hecker and J. Burgan, ‘High technology today and tomorrow: a small slice of the employment pie’, BLS Monthly Labor Review, November 1983, pp. 50–8.
Tomaskovic-Devey D. and Miller S.. 1983. . Can high-tech provide the jobs? . Challenge . , Vol. 26((2)): 57––63. .
R. Langridge, Defining ‘High-Tech’ for Locational Analysis, Discussion Paper in Urban and Regional Economics, series C, no. 22, Department of Economics, University of Reading, January 1984.
Markusen A., Hall P. and Glasmeier A.. 1986. . High Tech America: the What, How, Where and Why of the Sunrise Industries . , Boston : : Allen and Unwin. .
America rushes to high technology for growth’, Business Week, 28 March 1983, p. 87.
Taylor T.. 1985. . “High technology industry and the development of science parks. ”. In Silicon Landscapes . , Edited by: Hall P. and Markusen A.. London : : Allen and Unwin. .
J. Rees and H. Stafford, ‘High technology location and regional development: the theoretical base’ in Technology, Innovation, and Regional Economic Development, US Office of Technology Assessment Report no. OTA-STI-238, USGPO, Washington DC, July 1984a, appendix A; A. Scott, ‘Empirical observations on industrialization and urbanization in Southern California’, Annual Trewartha Lecture to the University of Wisconsin-Madison Geography Department, 26 March 1985; B. Moore and R. Spires, ‘The role of high technology complexes and science parks in regional development’, paper presented at an OECD Seminar on Science Parks and Technology Complexes in Relation to Regional Development, Venice, 3 June 1986.
P. Hall, ‘The geography of the fifth Kondratieff cycle’, New Society, 26 March 1981, pp. 535–7.
R. Premus, Location of High Technology Firms and Regional Economic Development, Staff Study Prepared for the Use of the Sub-Committee on Monetary and Fiscal Policy of the Joint Economic Committee, Congress of the United States (97th Congress, 2d Session), USGPO, Washington DC, 1 June 1982.
J. Cremeans et al., ‘Structural change in the US economy: 1979–87. High technology versus smokestack industries’, in US Department of Commerce, 1984 US Industrial Outlook, USGPO, Washington DC, 1984, pp. 39–45.
L. Browne, ‘Can high tech save the Great Lakes States?’, New England Economic Review, November/December 1983, pp. 19–33.
A. Saxenian, ‘Let them eat chips’, review of E. Rogers and J. Lar sen, Silicon Valley Fever: Growth of High Technology Culture, Basic Books, New York, 1984, in Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 3, I, 1985, pp. 121–7.
J. Hekman, ‘The future of high technology industry in New England: a case study of computers’, New England Economic Review, January/February 1980, pp. 5–17; and ‘Can New England hold on to its high technology industry?’, New England Economic Review, March/April 1980, pp. 35–44.
J. Cordrey, ‘Developing a community's high technology resource base: the Dayton case’, paper to the 91st Annual Meeting of the Ohio Academy of Science, Ohio State University, 23–25 April, 1982.
P. Flynn, ‘Lowell: a high technology success story’, New England Economic Review, September/October 1984, pp. 39–49.
L. Browne, ‘Conflicting views of technological progress and the labor market’, New England Economic Review, July/August 1984, pp. 5–16.
J. Burgan, ‘Cyclical behavior of high tech industries’, BLS Monthly Labor Review, May 1985, pp. 9–15.
R. Kelly, The Impact of Technological Innovation on International Trade Patterns, Staff Economic Report ER-24, Bureau of International Economic Policy and Research, US Department of Commerce, USGPO, Washington DC, December 1977.
L. Davis, ‘New definition of ‘high-tech’ reveals that US competitiveness in this area has been declining’, Business America, 18 October 1982, pp. 18–23.
An Assessment of US Competitiveness in High Technology Industries, International Trade Administration, US Department of Commerce, USGPO, Washington DC, July 1983.
State Activities to Encourage Technological Innovation: an Update, report by the California Commission on Industrial Innovation for the National Governors’ Association Task Force on Technological Innovation, 1120 N Street, Suite 1201, Sacramento, California 95814, February 1982; US Office of Technology Assessment, Census of State Government Initiatives for High-Technology Industrial Development, Technology, Innovation, and Regional Economic Development Project Background Paper OTA-BP-STI-21, Congress of the United States, USGPO, Washington DC, 1983a; US Office of Technology Assessment, Technology, Innovation, and Regional Economic Development Background Paper No. 2: Encouraging High Technology Development, Report No. BP-STI-25, Congress of the United States, USGPO, Washington DC, February 1984b.
S. Moser, ‘The great high tech treasure hunt’, Management Focus, Peat, Marwick and Mitchell, September/October 1984, p. 17.
M. Weiss, ‘High technology industries and the future of employment’, in P. Hall and A. Markusen (eds), Silicon Landscapes, op. cit., pp. 80–93.
T. Taylor, ‘High technology industry and the development of science parks’, in Hall and Markusen, op. cit., pp. 134–143.
J. Schumpeter, Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, George Allen and Unwin, London, 1976.
US Office of Technology Assessment, op. cit., 1983a.
F. Layfield, Local Government Finance: Report of the Committee of Enquiry, Command 6453, HMSO, London, 1976; R. Jackman, ‘Does central government need to control the total of local spending?’, Local Government Studies, 8, May/June 1982, pp. 75–90.
US Office of Technology Assessment, op. cit., 1983a.
B. Harrison and S. Kanter, ‘The political economy of states job creation business incentives’, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 44, 4, 1978, pp. 424–35.
US Office of Technology Assessment, Technology and East-West Trade, An Update, Report No. OTA-ISC-209, Congress of the US, USGPO, Washington DC, May 1983b.
Transfer of United States High Technology to the Soviet Union and Soviet Bloc Nations, US Senate Committee on Governmental Affairs Hearings before the Permanent Sub-Committee on Investigations, US Senate, 97th Congress, 2nd Session, USGPO, Washington DC, 4–12 May 1982.
These were: Stanford, Cal Tech, MIT, Cornell, and California. See ‘State secrets’, Scientific American, 246, 4, 1982, p. 70.
US Office of Technology Assessment, op. cit., 1983b.
R. Oakey, High Technology Small Firms: Regional Development in Britain and the United States, St. Martin's Press, New York, 1984.
A. Scott, op. cit.
Hall and Markusen, op. cit.
R. Oakey, op. cit.
R. Oakey, High Technology Industry and Industrial Location: The Instruments Industry Example, Gower, Hants, England, 1981.
R. Eckelmann, High Technology Industries: Profiles and Outlooks — The Computer Industry, International Trade Administration, US Department of Commerce, USGPO, Washington DC, April 1983.
P. Hall, A. Markusen, R. Osborn, and B. Wachsman, ‘The American computer software industry: economic development prospects’, Built Environment, 9, 1, 1983, pp. 29–39.
J. Clifford, High Technology Industries: Profiles and Outlooks — the Semiconductor Industry, International Trade Administration, US Dept. of Commerce, Washington DC, April 1983.
Exploratory Workshop on the Social Impacts of Robotics: Summary and Issues — a Background Paper, US Office of Technology Assessment Report No. OTA-BP-CIT-11, Congress of the US, USGPO, Washington DC, 1982; R. Eckelmann, High Technology Industries: Profiles and Outlooks — The Robotics Industry, International Trade Administration, US Department of Commerce, USGPO, Washington DC, April 1983; S. Sanderson and B. Berry, ‘Robotics and regional development’, in J. Rees (ed.), Technology, Regions, and Policy, Rowman & Littlefield, New Jersey, 1986, chapter 8.
International Trade Administration. High Technology Industries, Profiles, and Outlooks: Biotechnology, US Department of Commerce, USGPO, Washington DC, July 1984; M. Feldman, ‘Biotechnology and local economic growth: the American pattern’, in Hall and Markusen (eds), op. cit., pp. 65–79: M. Feldman, ‘Patterns of biotechnology development’, in P. Brotchie et al., (eds), The Future of Urban Form: The Impact of New Technology, Croom Helm, Beckenham, Kent, England, 1985, pp. 93–107.
J. Paul, High Technology, International Trade and Competition: Robotics, Telecommunications, Computers, Semiconductors, Noyes Publications, Park Ridge, New Jersey, 1984.
Flynn, op. cit., pp. 41–2.
M. Boretsky, ‘Concerns about the present American position in international trade’, Symposium on Technology and International Trade, National Academy of Sciences, Washington DC, 1971.
R. Kelly, op. cit.
C. Aho and H. Rosen, Trends in Technology-Intensive Trade, Economic Discussion Paper No. 9, Bureau of International Affairs, Office of Foreign Economic Research, US Department of Labor, National Technical Information Service, Springfield VA, October 1980.
R. Vinson and P. Harrington, Defining High Technology Industries in Massachusetts, Policy and Evaluation Division, Department of Manpower Development, Slate of Massachusetts, September 1979, p. 5 and Table 4.
Special issue: America's restructured economy’, Business Week, 1 June 1981, pp. 55 100; Scientific American's List of High Technology Industries, quoted in Wisconsin Department of Development, Special Report: Wisconsin, The High Tech Decision, 1982 (P.O. Box 7970, Madison WI 53707).
K. Premus, op. cit.
Riche, Hecker and Burgan, op. cit.
US Office of Technology Assessment, Technology, Innovation, and Regional Economic Development, Report No. OTA-STI-238, Congress of the United States, USGPO, Washington DC, July 1984a.
A. Glasmeier, A. Markusen, and P. Hall, Defining High Technology Industries, Working Paper 407, Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley CA 94720, March 1983.
A. Markusen, P. Hall, and A. Glasmeier, High Tech America: the What, How, Where and Why of the Sunrise Industries, Allen and Unwin, Boston, 1986.
C. Armington, C. Harris, and M. Odle, ‘Formation and growth in high-technology firms: a regional assessment’, US Office of Technology Assessment op. cit., 1984a, appendix B.
L. Davis, Technology Intensity of US Output and Trade, Office of Trade and Investment Analysis, International Trade Administration, US Department of Commerce, Washington DC, 1982; ‘New definition of high-tech reveals that US competitiveness in this area has been declining’, Business America, 18 October 1982, pp. 18–23.
A. Lawson, ‘Technological growth and high technology in US industries’, US Bureau of Industrial Economics, Industrial Economics Review, 1, 3, 1982, pp. 11–18.
D. Gandia, ‘Defining high tech’, unpublished draft paper to the Maryland Department of Economic and Community Development, May 1983.
Tomaskovic-Devey and Miller, op. cit.
J. Hosley and J. Kennedy, ‘A revision of the Index of Industrial Production’, Federal Reserve Bulletin, 71, July 1985, pp. 487–501; J. Hosley, personal communication, 31 July 1985.
Interstate Comparisons of High Technology Industry Employment, State of Florida Department of Commerce, Division of Economic Development, Bureau of Business Assistance, Tallahassee, Florida, 1983.
G. Allen, Emerging High Technology Companies Based on Colorado's High Technology Industry Survey, Business Research Division, Graduate School of Business Administration, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309, 1984.
G. Bootes, personal communication with the Economic Research Specialist, Office of Economic Planning and Development, 1700 West Washington, Phoenix, Arizona 85007, 17 July 1985.
H. Dorsey, personal communications with the Texas Economic Development Commission, July 1985; Gandia op. cit.; Special report: Wisconsin, the High Tech Decision, 1982, and Special Report: Wisconsin, the Technology for the 80s, 1983, both by Wisconsin Department of Development, Business Development Services (P.O. Box 7970, Madison WI 53707).
An Act to Provide Tax Incentives and Financial Assistance to Advanced Technology Business, Mississippi Legislature, House Bill No. 145, by Rep. Hall, Ways & Means, Regular Session, New Capitol Building, 400 High St., Jackson MS 39201, 1984.
T. Kelly, The Location, Organisation, and Regional Impact of High Technology Industry in the UK, unpublished paper, Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, 1983.
T. Kelly, The Location and Spatial Organisation of High Technology Industry in Great Britain: Computer Electronics (PhD Thesis, Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, 1983).
A. Gould and D. Keeble, ‘New firms and rural industrialization in East Anglia’, Regional Studies, 18, 3, 1984, pp. 189–201; D. Keeble and T. Kelly, ‘New firms and high technology industry in the United Kingdom: the case of computer electronics’, in D. Keeble and E. Wever, New Firms and Regional Development in Europe, Croom Helm, London, 1986, pp. 75–104; D. Keeble, ‘Entrepreneurship, high technology industry and regional development in the United Kingdom: the case of the Cambridge phenomenon’, paper presented to a seminar on Technology and Territory: Innovation Diffusion in the Regional Experience of Europe and the USA, Instituto Universitario Orientiale, University of Naples, 20–21 February 1987.
R. Woods, personal communication with the UK Department of Trade and Industry, London, 6 July 1985.
R. Butchart, ‘A new UK definition of the high technology industries’, Economic Trends, 400, February 1987, pp. 82–8.
County Business Patterns, 1982, United States, US Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, CBP-82-1, USGPO, Washington DC, 1985 and earlier years.
A. Rubenstein, ‘Economic evaluation of R & D: a brief survey of theory and practice’, Journal of Industrial Engineering, 17, 11, 1966, pp. 615–20; UNESCO, The Measurement of Scientific and Technological Activities, Paris, 1969; H. Kleinman, Indicators of the Output of New Technological Products from Industry, report to the US National Science Foundation, National Technical Information Service, US Department of Commerce, Washington DC, 1975; OECD, The Measurement of Scientific and Technical Activities: Proposed Standard Practice for Surveys of Research and Experimental Development, Paris, 1981.
Lawson, op. cit.
R. Kelly, op. cit.
Davis, op. cit.
Flynn, op. cit.
Standard Industrial Classification Manual, 1972 (with 1977 update), US Office of Management and Budget, Washington DC.
The four-digit codes which are not included in the majority of four-digit definitions, but which are buried inside a three-digit code in the majority of three-digit definitions (presumably because the relative coarseness does not allow separation) are: turbines and turbine generator sets (SIC 3511), internal combustion engines nee (SIC 3519), typewriters (SIC 3572), phonograph records (SIC 3652), cathode ray television picture tubes (SIC 3672), and electronic connectors (SIC 3678). The implication is they are falsely included at a three-digit level. Conversely, the four-digit codes appearing in the majority of four-digit definitions, but which are not covered by the three-digit codes in the majority of three-digit definitions, are: industrial controls (SIC 3622), industrial organic chemicals nec (SIC 2869), X-ray apparatus and tubes (SIC 3693), and R & D labs (SIC 7391). The implication here is they are falsely omitted by a three-digit level of definition.
J. Beaumont, The Location, Mobility and Finance of New High Technology Companies in the UK Electronics Industry, unpublished study, UK Department of Industry, South East Regional Office, November 1982.
US Office of Technology Assessment, op. cit., 1983a.
Flynn, op. cit.
For example, Vinson and Harrington's Table 4 has electrical industrial apparatus (SIC 362) incorrectly labelled as 372. The OTA in 1984a printed on p. 120 Armington et al.'s SIC code for small arms as 3486 when its actual number is 3484. A. Markusen, Defense Spending and the Geography of High Tech Industries, Working Paper No. 423, Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley CA 94720, 1984, on p. 35 allocates organic chemicals (misc) the code 2866 instead of the correct 2869, and radio, TV communications the code 3622 instead of 3662. These are easy transcription errors to make in the course of several drafts of typing.
For example, US High Technology Trade and Competitiveness, International Trade Administration, Office of Trade and Investment Analysis, US Department of Commerce, Staff Report DIE-01-85, USGPO, Washington DC, February 1985, includes SIC codes 287 and 351 in DOC1 (Boretsky's 1971 definition), whereas its earlier report, An Assessment of US Competitiveness in High Technology Industries, July 1983, does not. The ITA also includes SIC 361 (electric distributing equipment) in its version of DOC2, but this was in the non-technology intensive category in Table 4 of R. Kelly's original work. Tomaskovic-Devey and Miller and Flynn disagree over what is included in the Massachusetts definition: the former include SIC codes 281, 282, 351 and 372, which the latter omits, while the converse holds for codes 348, 363, 364, 365, 369, 379, 384, 385 and 387.
Langridge, op. cit.
Markusen, Hall and Glasmeier, op. cit.
C. Thompson, ‘Definitions of high technology used by state programs in the USA: a study of variation in industrial policy under a federal system’, Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy (forthcoming, 1987).
J. Grunwald and K. Flamm, The Global Factory: Foreign Assembly in International Trade, Brookings Institution, Washington DC, 1985.
Saxenian, op. cit.
S. Zucker, C. Deutsch, J. Hoerr, N. Jonas, J. Pearson, and J. Cooper, The Reindustrialization of America, The Business Week Team, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1982.
S. Cohen, Modern Capitalist Planning: The French Model, University of California Press, Berkeley, CA 94720, 1977.
E. Mansfield, J. Rapoport, A. Romeo, E. Villani, S. Wagner, and F. Husik, The Production and Application of New Industrial Technology, W. W. Norton, New York, 1977; Freeman, op. cit.; L. Telser, ‘A theory of innovation and its effects’, Bell Journal of Economics, 13, 1, 1982, pp. 69–92.
A. Markusen, Profit Cycles, Oligopoly and Regional Development, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, 1985; Markusen, Hall and Glasmeier, op. cit.
R. Walker, ‘Technological determination and determinism: industrial growth and location’ in M. Castells, High Technology, Space and Society, SAGE Urban I Affairs Annual Reviews, 28, Beverly Hills CA, 1985, pp. 226–64.
M. Storper, ‘Technology and spatial production relations: disequilibrium, interindustry relationships, and industrial development’ in Castells, op. cit., pp. 265–83.