Tech must pay for itself

Most of the important technological innovations of the last century have been made in the United States.

These include the motorcar, the atom bomb, the jet airplane, the personal computer and the Internet. These technological advances are the base of American economic strength.

In 1997, for example, the American economy was facing a downturn. The Asian crisis was, in part, a result of this development. American companies were unable to import the produce of countries like Thailand; nor were they able to make investments in those countries.

The result was that the east Asian 'Tigers' were deprived of both their export markets as well as capital inflows. This led to a decline in their currencies and resulted in the crisis.

This downturn was arrested by the dot-com boom.

Suddenly, euphoria was created in the US stock markets. It came to be believed that a 'new economy' was being created.

The share prices of Cisco Systems and Microsoft rose dramatically. The consequent buoyancy attracted the capital of the world.

Investors in Europe and Japan put their money into the American stock markets. This inflow of world capital enabled the American consumer to increase his consumption.

America once again started importing goods from east Asia and other countries. American multinationals were able make more foreign investments as well.

Once again the world economy was on a growth path. This change from a downturn to growth mode was caused by the development of the dot-com technologies.

The secret of the United States being the growth engine of the world lies in its ability to continuously develop new technologies. The question is whether such development of new technologies can continue to take place unabated.

History tells us that technological developments have taken place in spurts with long periods of hiatus in between.

The development of bronze metallurgy in 3000 BC was followed by about 2,500 years of technological stagnation till the Greeks developed iron technologies.

Once again, there was technological stagnation for about 2,000 years till the Mongols developed gunpowder.

If the present pace of technological developments in the US can be sustained then the US economy will continue to be the engine of the world. But there are some indications that every frontier technology developed in the recent times has not delivered.

British Airways and Air France have decided to phase out their supersonic Concorde service later this year because of falling demand. At one time the Concorde was heralded as the model of future technology.

The marvellous technology notwithstanding, the Concorde will be phased out after having resulted in heavy losses for the European airlines.

Notably, the American airlines  refused to buy this airplane. They had made the correct economic assessment and were saved of losses.

British Telecom had heavily invested in third generation '3G' telephony. This new generation of mobile phones can receive faxes, send or receive large email messages, download maps and help in navigation, browse the web, undertake videoconferencing and even show TV programmes.

But it was not able to start these services. It had borrowed heavily for this investment. It had to sell off its investments across the world from Japan to Spain simply to stay afloat.

Other European telecom players have incurred similar losses. Services based on 3G technology have yet to make a profit anywhere in the world.

The increasing speed of personal computers is no longer attracting new buyers. PC users are finding that the high speed does not make an appreciable change in their work.

A report in the New York Times says: "Computers have reached a point where they are already more than fast enough to suit a typical home user's needs -- web surfing, email and word processing."

As a result PC-makers are having a hard time selling their faster machines.

Similar experiences can be witnessed in the fields of bioinformatics (genome sequencing has hardly produced any economic returns yet), biotechnology (the Bt Cotton is proving to be a failure at places) and space exploration (a second moon walk has not been undertaken).

There appears to arise a point where  'over'-development of technology occurs. The technology is unquestioningly superior but it is not commercially viable. The money invested in its development then becomes a waste.

At the same time new technologies are being developed in the areas of satellite imagery, space exploration, genome sequencing, cloning, superconductors, solar photovoltaic systems and human organ transplants.

The future course of the world economy will depend upon whether these technologies become commercially viable in the sense of the dot-com boom.

The task before India is to acquire those technologies that are commercially viable while not fretting about getting all the new technologies. We have to walk on the knife's edge. We may face a situation like that of Iraq if we fail to adapt the new technologies.

We have paid heavily in the past for not having adopted the frontier technologies speedily. At the same time, however, we cannot afford to meet the fate of the Concorde. It is necessary, therefore, for us to develop a commercial assessment of new technologies.

Powered by