The activity that we now call “technology transfer” is not a new phenomenon. For many years, it has been commonplace within the business sector of the economy to engage in transfers of information or manufactured devices, prototypes or materials, by means of a legal instrument, or through the provision of services and direct sales. Much of the discussions on transfer of technology to developing nations have met with myriad criticisms. These criticisms have a reason largely due to the emphasis on ecological and environmental catastrophes attributable to such technology transfer. Hence, we are going to restrict the term technology transfer to the export of technology excluding nuclear technology to developing nations. (This is necessary to block the proliferation of mass destructive technologies or other means of delivery such as ballistic missiles). It will be used as the process by which the ability to do something is joined with the capacity to do it. It will also be construed as the dissemination of all the information necessary so that one party may duplicate the work of another party.
More still technology transferee will be seen as the facilitation of the technological know how and the legal rights from the more developed countries to developing ones. Finally, we will conceive the term to depict specific technical assistance to developing countries.
The reasons for these restricted definitions of the term are to fend off various attacks on this type of venture over the years. There is no doubt, that most of the efforts made by third world nations for sustained economic growth have been met with strong criticism from the environmentalists. Their common slogan is ecological damage or environmental catastrophe. We shall in this paper demonstrate that the argument of the ecological damage misses the point. We shall also call for the strategic scheme of transfer of technology to be championed by the UN.
The arguments of the environmentalists who are mostly resident in the developed countries have steered up a serious concern for the leaders and the elite of developing nations. The leaders have perceived the world’s preoccupation with ecological damage as it regards to third world’s efforts to technological advancement as yet another stratagem by which the third world’s aspirations to economic growth and development were to be stymied.
The third world elites have further come to the realization that their national independence and survival depend on obtaining current and emerging technologies, including electronics, bio-technology, telecommunications and information storage. Generally, the much-acquired technology has been achieved by commercial purchase for foreign investment or joint venture, although at significant cost in foreign exchange or national resources revenue. There is no doubt that technology innovation in third world countries is going to be difficult. To benefit from technology transfer it is important to seek appropriate technology that can be applied using local material and human resources. Such technology transfer must be economically, socially and technically competitive in order to make a strong impact. It requires patience, persuasive skill and continuous support of those with financial and administrative power.
Even then most developed nations have come to recognize that the goal of sustainable developments the ideal for any just world economic order. This world economic order can only be achieved if there is considerable technology transfer and assistance to the less developed nations. The reason is that the principal weakness of the developing countries is the lack of access to technology. However, strong international competition, expanding multinational corporations and the worldwide market has spread technological capabilities globally as the world has begun functioning as a single technologic evolution system. Hence, the developed nations should perceive technological assistance as a moral imperative.
The developed nations have to be concerned about the development of the global nation. Development in this sense can be examined from two distinct angles: as a process of economic growth, a shift and sustained increase of production, productivity and income per head, or as a process that enhances the effective freedom of the people involved to pursue whatever they have reason to value (Sen 1995). The material and industrial success of the modern developed nations has its basis in certain geographical, historical and cultural conjectures; national geographical advantage (adequate water, temperate climate) gives some areas of the world some economic advantage (Landes 1998).
Furthermore, the protestant ethic, a capitalist’s spirit of entrepreneurship,
Puritan frugality and self-reliance, individualism and the subsequent industrial revolution fostered the rise of capitalism. The historic development of industrial capitalism has its roots in exploitation and domination of the “new worlds” and particularly those lands destined to become developing countries. Colonization provided economic riches, natural resources and cheap labor more importantly, the influx of wealth and possibilities in new territories through large-scale social transformation to Europe itself.
The proposed development of the third world cannot be a repeat of the developed nations, under development of the third world is the inverse of the developed countries own development process, and has primarily been impelled from outside, rather than been a transformation from the inside (a very different process from what happened in the pioneering 19th century Europe). Moreover, developing countries do not have the same possibilities of exploiting the ‘peripheral territories’ to fuel their economies.
Asymmetries along cultural, historical, and geographical lines abound.
The label underdevelopment signifies that backward societies are being evaluated by the standards of the dominant culture. As deculturation proceeds, such societies increasingly voice their predicaments and aspirations in terms of the developmentalist’s categories, which entails cultural asphyxiation, and loss of the vitality and coherence of indigenous cultural forms, these crisis have generated numerous reformulations of “good” or appropriate development along with new recipes for successful implementation; autocentric development, meeting basic needs, and eco-development, sustainable development etc.
Development should not be conceived as a race to catch up to nations that are more fortunate but as a continuing effort by developing societies to achieve a more equitable distribution of opportunities to realize their potential at both the national and international levels. Technological developments-the type being proposed has to be built from indigenous values so as to exact lower social costs and impose less human suffering and cultural destruction. Hence, a sound development strategy requires critical examination of values (with their strengths and weakness) in light of modern human needs, leading to the formulation of goals for a development appropriate to the people in question. Development built from indigenous value exacts lower social costs and imposes less human suffering and cultural destruction, than when it copies outside models-because it is from indigenously rooted values that people derive meaning in their lives sense of identity and cultural integrity, and the reassurance of continuity with their environment and their past even amid change (Marris1974). This view is also shared by other social scientists like Walter Van Beck when he opined that …culture might well become the Trojan horse of development. Hailed as new altars on which to sacrifice to the god of development, it eventually destroys the walls of bureaucracy to deliver the civilized Troy of development agencies to the vagaries of cultural anarchy. Perhaps this is the ploy of action groups, NGOS, Anthropologists, linguists and theologians as well.
Having hammered as long on the impenetrable walls of development organizations they have at least left the field, leaving that simple notion of culture behind in the planning process. But in the belly of that notion, they smuggle on the forces that may threaten the ordered existence of that huge walled city.
There is no doubt that the nexus between culture and technology is profound. Development however defined is a continuing process from which no culture, society or individual is exempt. It is a process for all, so reciprocacity is involved. Developments pressing imperatives will doubtless oblige cultures to change and conversely the resilience critically tested value systems will invite the people of the world to enrich their own views and presuppositions for action. Both categories of these joined forces may realize that they need each other, if they are to gain wisdom and make the world a better place. “Local cultures” will certainly be transformed and will benefit from the gift of the world’s cultures but they will do it under very different conditions that we are barely beginning to comprehend, if we manage to move beyond “age of development” and shift gears before today’s style of globalization freezes up cultural and social relations into even worse forms of domination. Globalization requires novel form of inculturality.
A world wide chorus of voices proclaim that full human development is impossible if essential cultural values are excluded – that economic, political, technical, and artistic achievements do not exhaust the creative triumphs of which human beings are capable, however the accepted vie was that cultural differences would vanish under the onslaught of modernization. But globalization has been accompanied by a resurgence of local cultural tradition, and the growing realization that there is more to society’s and human behavior than economic and technology, that local cultures play an important part in guiding human actions and holding the fabric of society together.
Never the less, previous efforts at lending assistance to the developing nations have either been poorly planned or were destined to fail as an evidence to show that such technology transfer is a futile activity. The is no surprise that the IMF had repeatedly stated that it is not and was never intended to be a development institution neither was the World Bank “The fundamental goal of creating markets for industrialized country exports was written into their charter” (139) that means that debt traps and mercantilists dependency were the goals all along.
Therefore when the IMF/World Bank/GAAT/NAFTA/WETOM/Military Colossus forces other countries to devalue their currency and reduce consumption to increase sales of their valuable resources to the developed countries, this lowers the value of their labor and commodities and raises the relative value of manufactured products from the developed countries. The claim is made that this is due to the inefficiencies of developing countries industry and labor, but this is hardly so. The low level of wages is intimately linked not to low productivity of labor, time as classical economic theory would suggest but to the undervalued exchange rates and the workings of the international monetary system. The world monetary system does not set value of the currencies on the basis of relative productivity of workers. The present system is based on balance of payments consideration and on capital flow. This explains why the purchasing power of the US dollar, French Franc or Japanese Yen is much bigger in Mexico, Bangladesh, Brazil or Nigeria, than it is in their countries of origin. This is a system to keep billions of people worldwide poor, underdeveloped, uneducated, sick and in debt.. This is international finance and its paternalistic player is the International Monetary Fund (IMF). Many of us believe the myth that wealthy nations are doing what they can to help the third world. Yet the situation in Latin America, Sub Sahara Africa and much of Asia is just as bad as it was fifty years ago, when the IMF and World Bank was created by the Allied powers. When we look at how the IMF “helps” the Third World, we see a big part of the problem. Most third world nations have a large debt (that is nothing new-so does the United States) paying the interest on this debt is such a problem that the nations must continue to borrow through the IMF. Every few years sit down with indebted nations and say “sure we will lend you some more money so you can make interest payments, but there are some stipulations.” These stipulations are called “structural adjustment programs” the borrowing nation must go through “structural adjustment” or be shunned by the international community as a troublemaker who will not pay up. Structural adjustment as demanded by the IMF is best summed in four words, earn more, and spend less. While such advice might be valid if it were given to only a few countries at once, dozen of debtors are now attempting to earn more by exporting whatever they have at hand, particularly natural resources including minerals, tropical crops, timber, meat and fish. Structural adjustment commonly includes privatization of industries, reductions in funding for schools, hospitals and housing, increase in taxes, opening of markets, and dozens of other technical economic changes including devaluation of currency (local).
According to neo-classical economic theory, these changes will create the most efficient world systems. Never mind that peasants wont have a school to go to. Never mind that so many changes in such a short period often leads to violence and political chaos in African nations. Never mind that third world farmer will go hungry because with free trade they are now expected to compete with grain grown by machine in Kansas. Never mind that an IMF controlled by the first world nations looking for a profit is imposing these changes from ouside. Never mind that democracy in third world becomes useless when all decision making is done in Washington DC by the IMF. Third world dictators tend to implement structural adjustment better. What the IMF doesn’t understand that a healthy, educated democratic third world is best not only for the poor but also for the first world banks. Unless the IMF stops messing up third world societies, these nations will never be able to pay back the banks loans. All the criticism of the IMF and World Bank appear to be justified but it does not equal the total abdication of the idea of technology transfer as been advocated by certain environmentalist. There is overwhelming evidence to show that IMF and World Bank’s type of technology transfer have been responsible for innumerable economic and human calamities, far more devastating that environmental and ecological destruction that are alleged. Poverty has increased due to the lending programs by institutions like IMF. Suzan George had observed that “Debt is an efficient tool, it insures access to other people’s raw materials and infrastructure on the cheapest possible terms. Dozens of countries must compete for shrinking export markets and can export only a limited range of products because of Northern protectionism and the lack of cash to invest in diversification. Market saturation ensures reducing exporters income to a bare minimum while the North enjoys huge savings. The IMF cannot seem to understand that investing in. …(a) Healthy well-fed, literate population…is the most intelligent economic choice a country can make.”
Every rich nation today has become developed because in the past their government took measures of responsibility to promote economic growth. There was also a lot of protectionism and intervention in technology transfer. There was an attempt to provide some sort of equality, education, health and other services to help enhance the nation. The developing nations have understood that some form of protection allows capital to remain within the economy and hence via multiplier effect help enhance the economy. We now come to the crux of the matter, which is what type of technology transfer are we promoting. We are suggesting that the developed nations structure a technical benefit package for the third world countries which will include information technology, energy supply technology, and agricultural technology. Under information technology it is understood that monumental advances in information technology have been made which have been likened to the invention of movable print in the 15th Century (Toffler 1990) and to the transition from agricultural to industrial society (McPhail 1981) and yet the merits of this revolution are hotly disputed, particularly for the developing world. Many of the alleged shortcomings derive from pronounced inequalities in information flows. Developed nations would ensure that third world countries would come to a bare minimum of the technology life.
Sheldon Annis, in The Information Revolution Need Not Exclude the Poor, claims that equality can be achieved in the information technology provided that developing countries return first to the basics-eliminating illiteracy, for example since the core of communication is the ability to read and write.
Development institutions focus on new programs that directly enhance the poor’s ability to enhance the information age by lending and investment for telecommunication s infrastructure and technology and through openness with information.
Bernard Woods is even more effusive in Communications Technology and the Development of People; he argues that information and communication systems should be given a central role in development. He considers such systems to be prerequisites to the information transfer, learning and behavior change needed for the whole of society if development is to prove self-sustaining. In this regard, developed nations can provide technical support and hardware for this type of technology transfer. This ultimately be beneficial for both developed nations and third world for business purposes. It will be very convenient for businessmen in Washington DC to call up a village in Ghana and order certain needed raw materials in the split of a second.
The Macbride Report concluded in 1980 that the right to receive information had been overemphasized while the right to seek and impart information had been underemphasized. The whole problem of the free flow of information, the report concluded had been reduced to the issue of defending medias from official restrictions. The resulting imbalance in news circulation was mirrored imbalances in the diffusion of data necessary for scientific purposes, technological innovations, commercial transactions, trade development and other activities (Macbride Report). Many have asserted that knowledge is the foundation of sustainable development. Jerry Kenney for instance has noted that knowledge has … the unique characteristic of not been consumed when it is used. Knowledge however is inaccessible when in the information upon which it is based is not in the place or form that it is needed. It is information technology that allows information to be configured to meet these requirements.
Information technology encompasses all technology systems that transfer, gather, process or store information. This includes informatics, broadcast channels, geomantics (environmental information systems), and voice and data carrying channels. For developing countries to be able to attract and maintain the investment necessary to develop in a sustainable fashion modern infrastructure is prerequisite, telecommunication is an integral part of this equation. In 1984 the Independent Commission for Worldwide Telecommunication development revealed that two thirds of the world population have no access to telephones. Developing countries have been slow to accept the positive link between the provision of telecommunications and economic growth. The telephone, it seems has been deemed a luxury good rather than a tool for work (Hills 1990) never the less the voice telephone is still the dominant element in all telecommunication worldwide. In spite of this, the value of telephone service for health, community development, education and government administration is almost completely unexplored (as noted in a recent development communication report). In 1969 developing countries accounted for 7% of all installed telephone lines. By 1988, the figure had risen only to 12%. Without wider access to telephone services people in the developing world will not benefit from extension to phone technology, email, fax, access to databases, teleconferencing (Woods 1995).
It is difficulty to assess the extent to which the concept of development journalism has succeeded in Africa. According to Stanford Mukasa and Lee Becker, however, content analyses of African media reveal an absence of development –oriented stories such as those on agricultural production, literacy programs and self-reliant development. In Tanzania, which officially purports to practice development journalism, a survey of 150 journalists from the government and private media concluded that they lacked the background and education requisite to meeting the goals of development journalism. It was not surprising, therefore, the survey stated, that the journalists surveyed tended to report events rather process and personalities rather than issues.
The next area of assistance is energy supply technology. It is inconceivable that most third world countries have no access to electricity supply, and the importance of this form of energy supply cannot be overemphasized. This form of technology transfer can be championed by the United Nations with the cooperation of indigenous people to achieve worldwide energy supply efficiency and availability. It is indisputable that much of the basis of technological take off depends on steady energy supply. The mode of industrial production and preservation cannot be achieved as in the developed nations without steady energy supply. In fact, this has been identified as one of the major factors of industrial low productivity and preservation of finished products in the third world.
More importantly, steady and efficient energy supply will trigger the growth of small-scale industries in the rural areas of third world countries, thereby reducing the influx of rural populations to the urban centers.
The third element is agricultural technology. Most third world countries have rich soil and need to be provided with machines and equipment that will boost agricultural productivity. Third world countries do not need quick fix measures like food aid, rather provision of agricultural machines that would initiate the era of mechanized agriculture. There have been concerns from the developed nations as to the consequences of self-sufficient agricultural third world. There is no merit to this concern because self-sufficiency would not eliminate the importation of certain food items that are not produced in the indigenous country. Moreover this development process through the use of technology transfer requires new, proactive partnerships with “indigenous people” to demonstrate how change can take place within the context of a market economy. Never the less there are concerns about the environment of the third world due to the fact that there may be a number of technologies superior to an existing technology, but determining which are “environmentally sound” maybe difficult. For instance, in many regions there are still dirty, inefficient coal fire power stations. These could be replace with (1) a standard modern coal- fired power station, without flue gas desulphurization (FGD); (2) the same but with FGD (3) an ultra-new coal power station based on coal gasification (4) a gas fired combined cycle power station.
The conventional wisdom that it will cost substantial sums to address many environmental problems (in an absolute economic sense) is increasingly being brought into question. A number of studies, notably by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), have shown that much can be achieved through cleaner production. For instance one study has suggested that up to 70% of industrial pollution can be prevented at source by economically profitable procedures. In addition the Business Council for sustainable Development has been advocating and demonstrating the similar idea of “eco-efficient”, which is where companies improve competitiveness and profitability while reducing their environmental impact. For instance, by reducing waste and raw material use.
To reduce its environmental impact, industry needs to use a variety of environmentally sound techniques. These include the use of EST, but may also cover other issues such as management methods, business strategy and design.
In fiscal 1994 the World Bank funded 26 projects, which required category A assessments, totally $4.8 billion. Nine projects were in the energy and power sector, seven were agricultural, five were transport –related and five were Urban or other. In addition the IFC had eight projects involving category A assessments (5 Energy, 2 Industrial (mining), 1 Natural resources) A review of the assessment indicates that most of the resulting recommendations concerned design and management issues, and only a few clearly recommended the use of ESTs. The exception was the energy sector, where a number of environmental assessments recommended the use ESTs, or clearly encouraged its adoption at an early stage, and thus leads to the financing of ESTs within the context of the project as a whole. There is also evidence that some of the category B assessments have encouraged or mandated the use of environment sound technology in less directly environment sensitive projects.
