CIAO DATE: 04/06

The Role of the Private Sector in the Evolution of US Technology Policy

Abstract

Technology policy in the United States has undergone a dramatic transformation in the past ten to twelve years, as the government has increasingly played an active role in the high-tech sector and as the sector itself has faced growing competition from foreign competitors. Truths (or apparent truths) which once were unquestioned—that the U.S. government should only intervene in technology for national security reasons, that entrepreneurial high-tech firms operate best as "lone rangers" in the marketplace—have been closely scrutinized. The result of such scrutiny is that government and industry have changed their perceptions about their roles in a world in which the economic and competitive environment shifts rapidly. Another outcome is that technology policy has taken on increasing importance in U.S. policy circles. We see in the Clinton Administration plans to promote the information superhighway, proposals to overhaul the way in which the telecommunications industry is regulated, support for government-industry research consortia, closer linkage of trade and technology policy, and in general a much closer industry government relationship with the high-tech sector.

The purpose of this paper is to trace the path of technology policy over the last dozen or so years with a focus on the computer and semiconductor industries. In particular, we will look at how these industries organized themselves for increased activity in the policy arena. As we trace how the high-tech industry did this, we will see that the industry succeeded in establishing a stable technology "policy community" that has served as a steady source of policy input as technology policy has gained prominence in the Clinton Administration. There are a variety of viewpoints on the role of groups or coalitions in the policy process. In the hands of some, namely Lowi and Olson, interest groups take on strongly pejorative connotations; the undercut either democracy or economic growth. In the hands of others, such groups or coalitions serve a useful analytical purpose in that they permit the identification of causal forces in the policy process. For Kingdon, whose "policy community" notion we employ, the existence of a policy community is important in the process of getting a policy on the agenda and acted upon; it is part of understanding the "policy streams" which ultimately lead to the adoption of a policy. For Sabatier, groups are labeled "advocacy coalitions," characterized as public or private organizations which share a set of common beliefs, but compete within the policy environment to manipulate policy outcomes in their favor. Sabatier explicitly recognizes how external factors (e.g. the political party in power) and "stable system parameters" (e.g. constitutional rules) affect the process.

Full Text (PDF, 30 pages, 1.82 MB)