Technology, Society, and National Development

Jerrold J. Garcia

Webster’s dictionary defines technology as “the science of the application of knowledge to

practical purposes; applied science; the application of scientific knowledge to practical purposes in a
particular field; a technical method of achieving a practical purpose; the totality of the means employed
by a people to provide itself with the objects of material culture.”
Some people would say that science occupies itself with knowing why, while technology concern
itself with knowing how. Traditionally, physics and chemistry were considered “science” because they
dealt with foundational knowledge, while electrical, chemical, and mechanical engineering were
“technology” in as much as they were more on application of what chemists and physicists had discovered.
But that was then.
Today, the line that separates the so-called pure science from the applied technologies has
become a little blurred and is becoming more so as time goes on. In nanotechnology, for example, the
scale of devices is so small that we have to reckon directly with quantum mechanical effects.
There is the misconception that technology comes only after science. This could be farther from
the truth. The Romans were already adept at using rudimentary machines long before the advent of
Newtonian mechanics. In fact, the branch of physics known as thermodynamics was born as a response
to the need of the engineers to analyze in depth the steam engine, and to improve its performance.

Toffler’s Waves of Technology

Alvin Toffler (1991), historian and chronicler of the march of technology, presents a picture of
technological development, which is not so much a continuous stream of incremental progress, as three
well-defined surges that occurred in the history of humankind, and which transformed not only a people’s
way of life but also their thinking and worldview.
The First Wave of technology, according to Toffler, was the invention of agriculture. This enabled
the previously nomadic tribes of prehistoric humans to settle down in a fixed place, laying down the
foundation for the future concept of state and country. For the first time in their existence, they had
generally reliable and dependable mode of food production. Since agriculture was much more productive
than mere hunting and foraging, it guaranteed a regular accumulation of production surplus, which would
have very profound implications on the future, as this surplus made possible our subsequent cultural
advances.
The Second Wave came with the Industrial Revolution in Europe, more or less contemporaneously
with Newtonian physics. This was characterized by extensive use of machines and energy like the steam
and internal combustion engines. In manufacturing, the concept of mass production was born and
perfected into assembly line. This wave continued on to the nineteenth century with the discoveries and
inventions in electromagnetism by Maxwell and Hertz, and is still going on today, though it is clearly past
its peak. In education, this technological wave established engineering as a separate discipline co-equal
with the arts, sciences and mathematics.
Most of the industrial technologies we use now are still basically Second Wave technology: cars,
airplanes, televisions, steel mills, oil powered electric generators, and the like.
Finally, in the seventies the Third Wave of technology emerged. This was characterized by more
direct and immediate applications of discoveries in the basic science, such as physics, chemistry, and
molecular biology. In short, this was knowledge-driven technology. For once, humans had the capability
to manipulate materials down to the level of individual atoms and molecules – and even subatomic
particles, such as photons.
 In biology, we have started to intervene in the natural processes down to the level of the
individual bases in the DNA strand. The importance of information in itself – independent of the ambient
process – is being recognized and exploited. This is an era of widespread use of robotics in the
manufacturing sector. In a reversal of mass production trend of the second wave, we are bound to witness
more of the so – called “flex-techs,” the information – driven and flexible manufacturing processes that
can tailor themselves to the requirements of the individual customer. This latest wave is still in an
upsurge. We still have to see how it will unfold.
It would be wrong, of course, to think that these technology waves are non-overlapping and have
sharp delineations between them. Take agriculture as an example. Agriculture itself is a remnant of First
Wave technology. But, if you use a tractor to plow the fields, there is a Second Wave element, and if you
plant genetically engineered varieties of crops, you have also introduced a Third Wave element.

The impact of technology on our society

What is clear now is that as technology developed, resources were transformed by human beings
into different forms with different functions. Technology has helped improve the quality of life. Where
simple machines were designed to ease work, modern technology enable new and more difficult tasks to
be completed with greater accuracy. Agriculture has become highly mechanized. Computer chips are
built with precision. Learning is facilitated, from the impaired to the gifted. Technology is responsible for
discoveries of diseases and cures. Technology, partnered with resourceful marketing, gave birth to new
needs – gadgets for entertainment and information, new products for a youthful and well – endowed
physique.
But technology has come a long way since human beings first learned to use simple tools for their
subsistence. It has changed lifestyle, attitudes, and values. It affects the power, wealth, and development
of nations.
History is replete with lesson on technology and the wealth of nations. In the 1500s, Spain and
Portugal were among the most powerful countries in the world; their colonies stretched from the New
World to Africa and to the Pacific, and they were major powers in Europe. But, by the nineteenth century,
these two countries were well on the decline. By the 1900s, completely overshadowed by the industrial
giants like Germany and England, they had become minor players on the European stage.
There were several reasons for the decline of these two nations, among which was the fact that
their colonies, in the end, turned out to be more of financial burdens, than source of wealth. But there is
one reason for their decline that stands out significantly: they failed to ride the Second Wave of
technology.
The industrial revolution recast the economies of nations; henceforth, wealth would be
predominantly generated in manufacturing and related activities. Portions of this wealth would be
plowed back into scientific and technological research and development, resulting in inventions and
innovation that would further enhance industrial productivity, resulting in even greater wealth, etc. This
positive feedback mechanism led to an upward spiral of productivity, innovation, and wealth never seen
before. Progressive countries such as Germany, England, and France rode the Second Wave and
successfully managed to shift to the manufacturing industry and emerged the dominant players in the
continent. The United States did so, too, and emerged the lone power in North America. Spain and
Portugal did not.
Japan is an interesting case study. Japan was a closed feudal country ruled by warlords who were
interminably waging wars for supremacy against each other. Nominally ruled by an emperor, real power
lay in the hands of the shogun. For centuries, Japan was closed for foreigners, except for minor
concessions to the Portuguese who were allowed to access to certain ports in Japan, and Dutch traders
who were allowed a small settlement on the coast. But, in 1953, the United States sent a naval expedition
under Commodore Matthew Perry to Uraga, Japan to deliver an ultimatum, which essentially demanded
the opening of the country to foreigners and foreign traders. Bowing to the technological and naval
superiority of the United States, the shogun capitulated and signed the requisite treaty the next year, this
time under threat of naval bombardment by an American fleet right in Edo (Tokyo) harbor. The Japanese
soon found themselves forced to sign similar treaties with other Western powers. Its perceived
impotence in the presence of superior foreign force precipitated the collapse of shogunate, leading to the
Meiji restoration in 1868, when state power was returned to the Meiji emperor.
The humiliating experience spurred the Japanese embark on a rapid industrialization drive.
Sending droves of students to Europe and the United States for training, and hiring European and
American firms and advisers, the Japanese absorbed all the sciences and technologies that the West could
offer. It patterned its educational system after the German system, set up research facilities, steel mills,
railway systems, electrical works, subway systems, shipyards, automotive manufacturing, aircraft
manufacturing, etc. By 1905, Japan had become the first industrial military power in Asia.
Another interesting case is China, now the second largest economy in the world, wielding a strong
hold on the production of technology parts and products (see Activity 2).

Uneven development

Today, the nations of the world are in uneven states of development. At one and are the
developed and industrialized countries, such as the US, the countries of European Union (EU), and Japan.
Somewhere along the line are the less developed countries – the Third World – such as the Philippines,
Indonesia, Peru, and Bangladesh. At the other end are the least developed countries, some of which are
found in Africa and in South Asia. The position of a country in this spectrum of development may be
indicated by such measure as per capita income, standard of living, life expectancy, etc. One significant
indicator is the level of technology together with the presence of technological autonomy.
No country today is technologically self-contained or totally self-sufficient. All countries import
technology. The Us imports technology from, and exports technology to, Japan and EU countries. The
same holds true for the latter two. The reason for this is economics. There are times when it is cheaper
for a country A to import a technology from B simply because B may happen to have some intrinsic
competitive advantage. Nevertheless, the US, EU, and Japan are said to be technologically autonomous
because they can decide which technology to import, and to which technology to develop. If they fail to
acquire a particular technology due to some trade or legal barriers, they have the will and the means to
develop that technology on their own. These countries have sufficient trained manpower, and strong,
well-established technological infrastructure made up of its universities and public and private R & D
laboratories. Technological autonomy is intimately related to technology strategy, a term introduced by
Michael Porter in his book Competitive Advantage (1985), which denoted the choice by a firm of a
particular technology or technologies to develop in order to give that firm a competitive advantage.
Obviously, a country must have the means to develop a whole range of technologies for it to have the
capability and the power to pick and choose which particular ones to develop among this range of
technologies.
The technologically advanced countries, in general, are also the affluent ones. Their wealth is
mostly a result of their technological superiority and this technological superiority in turn, is maintained
by their wealth, e.g., they have funding for excellent research and development (R&D) facilities. It is
technological superiority which enables them to pick and choose the technologies to develop and the
technologies to simply purchase or import.
In contrast, less developed countries (LDC) like the Philippines are primarily technology importers
and consumers and very seldom producers. We distinguished exports of finish products and/or raw
materials from export of technology as embodied in techniques, machinery and capital goods. But, more
significant, and fraught with dire implications, is the fact that the LDCs do not have technological
autonomy. These countries cannot will which technology to import and which technology to develop.
They are almost totally dependent on the will and wish of developed countries. The primary reason for
the absence of autonomy is a dearth of skilled manpower and severe lack of technological infrastructure.

Two examples of local industrial technology

Two of the technologies developed locally and with widespread use are jeepney and tricycle
assembly and fabrication. These two public transportation modes fit neatly into the system, given the
poverty level in the country and the primitive state of roads and other infrastructure.

Case Study: the jeepney

The history of the jeepney goes back to the World War II when the US Armed Forces left a surplus
of hundreds of the so-called Jeep, a vehicle developed as a “staff car” for use in the war. The Jeep was
designed to carry two persons in front (including the driver), and another four at the back – or less if there
was a mounted machine gun. When the Americans turned over the surplus equipment to the Filipinos,
the latter worked on the Jeep and, to the amazement of the Americans, made it into a public conveyance
vehicle carrying ten or more passengers. It remains a mainstay of public transportation in the country to
this day.
The jeepney fills an essential transportation need, given the level of development in the
Philippines. These vehicles are assembled all over the country in innumerable car repair shops, and a few
private companies that are dedicated to this business. Whereas, the original jeepney was converted US
Army Jeep, today’s jeepneys are made from imported (usually used and refurbished) diesel engines,
transmission systems and drive shafts, imported or locally fabricated vehicle frames (commonly referred
to as the “chassis”), and steel sheets. A small shop in the province equipped with rudimentary welding
equipment and metal-cutting tools can assemble a jeepney in less than two weeks. A jeepney’s cost
depends on size, the amount of colorful decorations that go into it, and where it was made.
By its very nature, the fabrication of jeepneys is never a standardized process, and thus, each
jeepney is, in the truest sense of the word, unique. Considering that it uses a refurbished engine, and
considering that the assembly process (and subsequent repair work) is never based on any precise
engineering plan or calculations, but on rough “rules of thumb” or lore of the trade, a typical jeepney
turns out to be
• Highly polluting to the atmosphere – due to poor engine maintenance and even poor
understanding of the principles of internal combustion;
• Highly unsafe – due to lack of any stability or impact resistance tests. Almost all, it not all,
jeepneys have a single circuit hydraulic brake system and no cable handbrake. A brake
failure leaves the driver with very little control over the vehicle. Moreover, jeepneys –
especially those in the rural areas – are almost always overloaded. It is not common to
see a 14 – passenger jeepney actually carrying thirty or even forty passengers: four extra
passengers hanging on the rear end, two hanging onto each side, another six perhaps on
the roof and another four crammed insides, between the seats. And somewhere in there
are a couple of sacks of rice.
One notable feature of this “jeepney technology” is that is a technological dead-end. Some
companies have been assembling jeepneys since the fifties or sixties and are still doing exactly the same
thing: importing used engines and other parts and fabricating jeepney bodies from steel sheets with no
technological breakthrough whatsoever.
Surprisingly enough, for all its prevalence, the jeepney business, both assembly and
operation, belong to the underground economy. They are not included in the National Income Accounts
 from which the Gross domestic Product (GDP) and Gross National Product (GNP) are calculated. It seems
there is even no reliable estimate of the volume of business because “boundary” arrangements between
the jeepney driver and the operator/owner can vary a lot.

Case study: the tricycle

The tricycle has a more nebulous origin. There does not seem to have been a modal point in
our history at which we can definitely say that the tricycle came into being. It seems to have simply
snuck up while we were not looking.
Almost all of what has been said about jeepney technology can be said about the tricycle. The
tricycle starts with ordinary motorcycle, designed and manufactured in Japan, and meant by its designer
to carry only one passenger or at most two. With some additional steel pipes, steel sheets, and an extra
wheel, and the motorcycle ends up a tricycle known to carry six or even twelve passengers, not to
mention pigs and other domestic animals, or even queen-sized beds. Almost any welding shop
anywhere in the country can boast that it, too, has fabricated at least one tricycle.
Just like the jeepney, every tricycle is unique. And every tricycle also turns out to be:
• Highly polluting – due to its exhaust gases and because of its nerve-wracking noise.
• Highly unsafe – due to lack of stability tests and likelihood that a collision may be fatal
to its passengers.
As in the case of jeepney, tricycle technology is even more of a technological dead – end. What
technological breakthrough might there be in welding together steel pipes onto a motorcycle body?
Nevertheless, the tricycle fills a real transportation need, especially in the rural areas. The typical
arrangement is similar to that jeepney’s: the tricycle owner rents out the vehicle on a daily basis, for
which the driver pays seventy pesos or more. The driver shoulders the fuel cost, while the owner takes
care of repairs. But, again, arrangement can vary. The tricycle business, too, never makes it into the
National Income Accounts.

Advanced technologies in the Third World

The two examples cited above were chosen because they are archetypal backward technologies.
But one may argue that even in an LDC there are advanced technologies that are definitely of the Third
Wave kind. After all, aren’t Intel and Microsoft also found the in Third World countries? That Intel and
Microsoft are all over the world is true. But, to conclude that these countries, are therefore, well into the
Third Wave technology is only rarely true, and then only in one or a few technology areas. A notable
example here is Cuba, a poor country, but quite strong in biotechnology, arguably the strongest in the
Caribbean and one of the strongest in all of South America.
The mere presence of high technology firms in a country is never an indication that the country
itself is advanced technologically – even if that country is involved in the production process of high
technology items. Far too often, these high technology companies are simply farming out the labor –
intensive part of their production process, such as assembly and packaging. They employ workers with
manual dexterity and no other skills, and at comparatively low wages.

Getting out of the rut

Can an LDC like the Philippines overcome backwardness and attain technological progress and
material affluency? We pose no ready answer here. Issues relating to progress – even technological
progress – are essentially social issues. Let at look at the examples of Taiwan and Korea. These two
countries started off in worse shape than the Philippines but managed to attain their industrialization
goals within a comparatively short period – about thirty years for Taiwan, and less than twenty years for
Korea.
Studying the industrial policies of Taiwan and Korea is a major undertaking in itself and will not
be attempted in this course. But the following comes closest to summarizing their respective policies:
active government intervention in a) mobilizing domestic capital and controlling foreign investment, b)
establishing R&D facilities and building up skilled manpower, and c) providing the necessary business and
R&D incentives. While the Chinese and Koreans knew that in the long run market forces must hold sway,
they also realized that government intervention could be vital and even essential and necessary in the
short and medium term, especially to an economy that was just taking off.
Numerous studies by various experts and by UNESCO show not just a correlation, but also a causal
relationship between technological competence and development. Technological competence is brought
about by a sufficient number of experts and with functional R&D facilities. Of course, simply having
thousands of scientists and engineers will not necessarily result in industrial development. A country must
have the industrial infrastructure, and there must be a close linkage between R&D activities and industrial
production. Thus, a strong R&D component is not in itself a sufficient condition for development, but it
is a necessary condition.

Excerpt from the book: STELLAR ORIGINS HUMAN WAYS – Readings in Science, Technology and Society