RECENT TRENDS IN AUSTRALIAN GOVERNMENT POLICIES FOR TECHNOLOGICAL INNOVATION

NOTES AND REFERENCES

• Australian Labor Party (ALP), National Recovery and Reconstruction Plan, mimeo, 1983 and ALP, ALP Platform, Constitution and Rules as Approved by the 35th National Conference, Canberra 1982, ALP, Barton, ACT, 1982.
   Google Scholar
• It would be possible to develop a framework in terms of a perfect market versus a command economy. While the choice of the terms ‘non-interventionist’ and ‘economic nationalist’ reflects some reliance on economics, it needs to be stressed that the approaches developed here are general in nature and are not meant to represent ideal types. See, for example, the broad range of issues discussed in Barry Jones, Sleepers, Wake!, Oxford University Press, Melbourne, 1982.
   Google Scholar
• The theoretical grounds for government intervention are based on neo-classical economic studies which argue that a market economy would tend to underinvest in inventive activities such as basic and applied research and technological innovation. If it can be established that the rate of return from innovation to society exceeds the private rate of return (to firms and individuals), there exists a case for government intervention in the market for the support of innovation. Further, if it can be established that the social return from indigenous research exceeds the social return from imported know-how, there is a case for giving some sort of preference to the former. See, for example, R. Nelson, ‘The simple economics of basic scientific research’ in N. Rosenberg (ed.), The Economics of Technological Change, Penguin, 1971; K. J. Arrow, “Economic welfare and the allocation of resources for invention’ in D.M. Lamberton (ed.), Economics of Information and Knowledge, Penguin, 1971; C. Tisdell, ‘The international realpolitik of science and technology policy’, Prometheus, 1,1, 1983, pp. 127–43; and Industries Assistance Commission (IAC), Certain Budgetary Assistance to Industry, Australian Government Publishing Service (AGPS), Canberra, 1982, p. 63.
   Google Scholar
• OECD, Policies for the Stimulation of Industrial Innovation, OECD, Paris, DSTI/SPR/75.58, October 1975
   Google Scholar
• OECD, Technical Change and Economic Policy, Paris, 1980, p. 17.
   Google Scholar
• IAC, New Technology and Industry Assistance, Discussion Paper, AGPS, Canberra, July 1983, p. 2.
   Google Scholar
• J. Gilmour, ‘The industrial policy debate in a resource hinterland’, Search, 13, 7–8, 1982, pp. 194–204; OECD, 1980, op. cit., p. 18.
   Google Scholar
• J.N.H. Britton and J.M. Gilmour, The Weakest Link: A Technological Perspective on Canadian Industrial Underdevelopment, Background Study No. 43, Science Council of Canada, Ottawa, 1978, p. 158.
   Google Scholar
• D.J. Daly and S. Globerman, Tariff and Science Policies: Application of a Model of Nationalism, University of Toronto Press, Toronto, 1976, p. 68.
   Google Scholar
• S. Globerman, ‘Canadian science policy and technological sovereignty’, Canadian Public Policy, 4, 1, 1978, p. 38.
   Google Scholar
• Department of Science and Technology, Submission to the IAC Inquiries into Computers etc., Metal Working Machine Tools and Robots, Occasional Paper 1/83, Department of Science and Technology, Canberra, May 1983.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Government, White Paper on Manufacturing Industry, AGPS, Canberra, 1977.
   Google Scholar
• R. Johnston, ‘The control of technological change in Australia’, in S. Hill and R. Johnston (eds), Future Tense, University of Queensland Press, St. Lucia, 1983, p. 108.
   Google Scholar
• Australian Government, op. cit., p. 17.
   Google Scholar
• ibid., pp. 17–18.
   Google Scholar
• ibid., p. 26.
   Google Scholar
• Study Group on Structural Adjustment, Report, AGPS, Canberra, 1979, Vol. 1.
   Google Scholar
• A positive government response may not necessarily imply a determined government action to overcome a problem.
   Google Scholar
• Study Group on Structural Adjustment, op. cit.; House of Representatives, Parliamentary Debates, 23 August 1979, pp. 562–73.
   Google Scholar
• Committee of Inquiry into Technological Change in Australia (Myers Report) Technological Change in Australia, AGPS, Canberra, 1980, Vol. 1; House of Representatives, Parliamentary Debates, 18 September 1980, pp. 1517–26.
   Google Scholar
• House of Representatives, Parliamentary Debates, 30 April, 1981, pp. 1830–53.
   Google Scholar
• Senate Standing Committee on Science and the Environment (Jessop Report), Industrial Research and Development in Australia, AGPS, Canberra, 1979; House of Representatives, Parliamentary Debates, 11 June 1981, pp. 3035–43.
   Google Scholar
• Committee to Review Productivity and Innovation Programs, Report of the Committee to Review Productivity and Innovation Programs, AGPS, Canberra 1982; House of Representatives, Parliamentary Debates, 29 April 1982, pp. 2062–3.
   Google Scholar
• IAC, 1982, op. cit.; Prime Minister, Statement on Taxation and Industry Assistance Measures, Press Release, 19 July 1982.
   Google Scholar
• House of Representatives, Parliamentary Debates, 30 April 1981, pp. 1833, 1839.
   Google Scholar
• House of Representatives, Parliamentary Debates, 29 April 1982, p. 2062.
   Google Scholar
• Committee to Review Productivity and Innovation Programs, op. cit., p. 1
   Google Scholar
• ibid., pp. 2–4.
   Google Scholar
• R. Johnston, ‘Australian science policy: now we can steer, where do we want to go?’, Current Affairs Bulletin, 59, 3, 1982, pp. 20–30.
   Google Scholar
• Committee of Inquiry into the Australian Financial System (Campbell) Report, AGPS, Canberra, 1981.
   Google Scholar
• ALP, 1982, op. cit., pp. 147–54; 1983, op. cit.
   Google Scholar
• ALP, 1983, op. cit., p. 24.
   Google Scholar
• ALP, Science and Technology Policy, mimeo, February 1983.
   Google Scholar
• House of Representatives, Parliamentary Debates, 1 December 1983, pp. 3139–62.
   Google Scholar
• ibid., p. 3141.
   Google Scholar
• ibid., p. 3140.
   Google Scholar
• House of Representatives, Parliamentary Debates, 16 November 1983, pp. 2760–1.
   Google Scholar
• House of Representatives, Parliamentary Debates, 9 November 1983, p. 2469.
   Google Scholar
• ‘A Budget Debate’, Search, 14, 9–10, 1983, pp. 282–3.
   Google Scholar
• ibid., p. 282.
   Google Scholar
• House of Representatives, Parliamentary Debates, 1 December 1983, p. 3144.
   Google Scholar
• ibid., p. 3139.
   Google Scholar
• See, for example, Department of Science and Technology, op. cit.
   Google Scholar
• House of Representatives, Parliamentary Debates, 1 December 1983, p. 3156.
   Google Scholar
• House of Representatives, Parliamentary Debates, 3 November 1983, p. 2348.
   Google Scholar
• The Age, 29 August 1983, pp. 1–2.
   Google Scholar
• Financial Review, 27 January 1983, p. 1.
   Google Scholar
• See L. Gelzer, Tariff Politics, Melbourne University Press, Melbourne, 1982, pp. 27, 34.
   Google Scholar
• See, for example, Department of Science and Technology, Submission to the Uhrig Review of the Industries Assistance Commission, Occasional Paper 6/83, Canberra, October 1983.
   Google Scholar