What are General Purpose Technologies According to Bresnahan and Trajtenberg (1995), "most GPTs play the role of 'enabling technologies,' opening up new opportunities rather than offering complete, final solutions." There are several characteristics that all GPTs share.
. wide scope for improvement and elaboration . applicable across a broad range of uses - both products and processes . strong complementarities with existing or potential new technologies Situating ICTs (information and communication technologies) as a GPT allows policy makers to offer better advice, more grounded advice. Seeing ICTs as a GPT allows governments to deal in a more realistic way with both the expectations and surprises that surround the introduction of a transformative general purpose technology into a changing and competitive economy. What is not known or well understood, however, is the path of this transformation and the economic, social, institutional and policy changes that accompany it. The use of ICTs, much like electricity in decades past, affects much more than the productivity of an individual firm. Through network effects, changes in cost structures, emerging industries, changes in communications patterns and economic policies, ICTs will profoundly change the dynamics of our economy and the global marketplace. We also need to be able to see the ICT picture in its entirety. Currently, analysts and policy-makers are like the fable of the blind men and the elephant. Each describes in great detail only a part of the whole. What is now needed is a better picture of the entire ICT-enabled economic and social transformation. A recent example of a profoundly transforming GPT is electricity. Although significant, it was not the reduction in energy costs that led to greater productivity gains. It was the myriad of applications of electricity, changes in factory designs and new demand-driven technical changes that led to increased productivity gains. As the technology became embedded throughout the economy, overall output changed and aggregate productivity grew. Change led to change and innovations in one area were adopted in others. These complementarities and synergies magnified the effects of the GPT and helped speed the transformation of the economy. As a GPT matures, it usually becomes transparent to the user. The user need know little of the mechanics behind the technology, only that the desired outcome will be achieved. With electricity, it is simply a matter of flicking a switch to light a room, run an elevator or power up a factory. When did electricity move from a "finicky" novelty with a few application to a general purpose technology with countless applications? In other words, when did the technology of electricity become plug and play - electricity becoming the background and the appliances and applications in the foreground? Is it possible, for example, to measure how electricity changed the economy? First, there were a series of micro changes (lighting up the night), followed by broader changes (electrification of buildings leading to high rises) and to finally, with the electrical grid, being part of the infrastructure that allows for the interaction of countless electrified processes, marking the transformative aspect of a General Purpose Technology. Specifically, needed is a project that would map the stages in the development of electricity in becoming a GPT and describe the many innovations and regulations along the way. This would also detail some of the wrong turns made by business or government in the development of electricity and point out the lessons learned. Then, using electricity as a template, the research would help situate ICTs as a GPT, evaluate how far along ICTs are on the path to maturity and discuss how the lessons learned from the electricity example may be applied to ICTs. Needed are new methods of measuring productivity in a time of transformative technological change. A GPT can lead to some small and measurable changes. The real impact of a GPT, however, comes about when the entire economy is transformed such that it can deliver entirely new bundles of goods and services. As new technologies become embedded into them, both inputs and outputs change dramatically. This allows for a dynamic interaction between technology-rich inputs and outputs that is the signal characteristic of a GPT. As the GPT matures, it becomes a case of change leading to more change - an ever-upward spiral of progress. The change is so great, the bundle of new goods and services so different, that conventional measurement is unable to capture the true magnitude of the transformation. Current productivity measures exist and are used to either guide or attack policy. These measures, however, are not capable of accounting for changes to the underlying technological makeup of the economy. As Albert Einstein once stated, "not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts." When the basket of goods and services that society produces changes because of changing technology, what benefits lie in comparing time period A (with one basket of goods and services) with one from time period B, which has a different basket of goods and services. It is the classic case of comparing "apples with oranges." Needed is a new measurement framework that is compatible with the transformations taking place. Research should tell us what should now be counted and what we should now consider stop counting. This research could have wide-reaching implications on the work of national statistical agencies. Previous GPTs have had significant impact on economic systems, changing the organization of firms, transforming established institutions and creating new industries and institutions. Steam power and electricity, for example led to the factory system, mass production, the assembly line, flexible manufacturing and continuous process production. What organizational and institutional changes are possible through networked ICTs. How will existing firms and sectors likely to change and adapt as ICTs move through the economy as a GPT. What new new organizational techniques and institutional arrangements are likely to emerge as ICTs become a more fully-realised GPT. Google, Yahoo, Amazon and eBay come to mind. And the intelligent use of ICTs contributed to Wal-Mart's dominance in retail, turning it into the largest company in the world with a sophisticated, global supply chain. We live in a moment of technological change and development where change is so speeded up that it is difficult to view the present adequately. This makes it difficult to make wise policy choices. What is the role of government during this period of rapid transformation. . What is the appropriate policy response to this transformation? Should government limit its role to creating an appropriate legal, financial or regulatory environment which encourages the rollout of the infrastructure and the use of ICTs, or should it go further to include interventions at the sectoral level? . What are the policy implications of an emerging GPT? Should policy-makers strive to develop a soft policy stance where policies adopted today are dynamic and changeable to try and match changing circumstances. What does this mean in the context of a swiftly developing GPT? . What is an appropriate policy balance between encouraging the rapid rollout of the technology and protecting citizens against some of the perceived negative socio-economic implications of this transformation? Can citizens be cushioned, in some way, from some of the potential shocks that arise as the our economy is inexorably integrated into the larger global and competitive economy? What, for example, is the impact of this transition on labour market policy? . ICT as a GPT may have significant implications on many government institutions, including health care, education and broader governance issues, such as online voting and citizen representation. It is important to note that citizens nation-wide can view government debates in real time and that this advance was made possible through the combination of electricity, television, satellite technologies and other advances. With the widespread diffusion of ICTs, focus must be placed on what new governance issues/challenges will arise. -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ray Harrell Sent: Friday, April 05, 2013 10:23 AM To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION' Subject: Re: [Futurework] The Next Big THing The I phone? REH -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Keith Hudson Sent: Thursday, April 04, 2013 7:35 AM To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION; michael gurstein Subject: Re: [Futurework] The Next Big THing It's more than passing interest that an article written about the Next Big Thing -- required to get GDPs rolling again -- can't find one. The writer even proposes that a master chef should outline the unknown's specifications. He reckons that, at the very least, the Next Big Thing will have to be smart. That doesn't appear in my specs. The three important qualities of any proposal of mine would have to be (a) it would be very expensive to start with, able to be bought only by, let us say, to top 1% income earners in the country; (b) its production cost could be successively reduced by automation and scale so that every adult or homeowner in every class would be able to afford one in due course; (c) it would have intrinsic universal appeal in addition to its status effect when displayed to the outside world. Keith At 04:58 04/04/2013, you wrote: >This is on the order of Keith's refrain concerning the need for a "big >new thingee"... (a bit long and technical but you'll get the idea... > >M > Snip, snip, snip _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
