1 / 13

Federal R&D and the Development of U.S. IT

Federal R&D and the Development of U.S. IT. David C. Mowery Haas School of Business U.C. Berkeley & NBER. Overview. Three “new industries” emerged during 1945-1980 in information technology: Semiconductors. Computer hardware. Computer software.

kbuchanon
Download Presentation

Federal R&D and the Development of U.S. IT

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Federal R&D and the Development of U.S. IT David C. Mowery Haas School of Business U.C. Berkeley & NBER

  2. Overview • Three “new industries” emerged during 1945-1980 in information technology: • Semiconductors. • Computer hardware. • Computer software. • Federal R&D spending was essential to the creation of these industries, but…. • The effects of Federal R&D investment were influenced by other policies, notably procurement, antitrust, and IP policy.

  3. Semiconductors (1) • Wartime military R&D in electronics & radar technologies supported work on semiconductor materials. • Transistor was developed within Bell Labs R&D program on long-distance transmission. • Bell Labs team “raced” Purdue University researchers in discovering the transistor, but industry subsequently assumed leadership in technology development. • 1956-57: Stanford Prof. James Gibbons was seconded to Shockley Semiconductor to learn semiconductor fabrication technologies. • Federal antitrust suit against AT&T influenced corporate decision to disseminate technology and knowhow about transistor. • AT&T sponsored seminars in 1951 & 1952 on transistor product and process technologies. • 1956 settlement of U.S. v. AT&T mandated low-cost licensing of its large patent portfolio by AT&T. • With AT&T at center, patent cross-licensing was common.

  4. Semiconductors (2) • Early military R&D focused mainly on production engineering. • By late 1950s, objectives had broadened, and federal funding accounted for almost 25% of industry R&D investment • DoD R&D in “molecular electronics” supported established firms, produced limited results. • In 1959, “new firms” received 22% of federal R&D contracts, yet accounted for 63% of industry sales. • “Prize” of DoD procurement contracts led Texas Instruments, 1st producer of silicon junction transistor, to develop the integrated circuit in 1958. • Procurement policy influenced industry development. • DoD awarded procurement contracts to new, vertically specialized “merchant” producers, influencing evolution of industry structure. • DoD orders enabled entrants to exploit learning, reduce costs, and penetrate civilian markets. • “Second-sourcing” procurement requirements accelerated interfirm technology flows.

  5. Semiconductors (3) • Summary: • Defense-related R&D funding important, but procurement also influenced innovation and growth of commercial applications. • Antitrust policy and procurement policy reduced entry barriers & supported substantial interfirm flows of technological knowledge, knowhow. • Exclusionary effects of IPRs were limited by US v. AT&T consent decree, cross-licensing of patents. • Potential dominance by AT&T in commercial development of the technology was forestalled at an early point in the industry’s development. • DoD influence declined as nonmilitary sales expanded • VHSIC program of 1980s & 1990s had limited influence on trajectory of industry’s technology development.

  6. Computer hardware (1) • Computers originated in WWII military demand for ballistics computations, cryptography. • Universities were important sources of early technological developments in computers (e.g., magnetic memory). • MIT’s Lincoln Labs managed SAGE strategic air defense project in early 1950s for which IBM supplied computer hardware. • Federal spending (largely defense-related) supported 59% of computer-related R&D of major U.S. computer firms during 1949-59. • By early 1980s, federal funds accounted for roughly 15% of industry-wide R&D performance. • DoD & NSF funded purchase of hardware for US universities that aided development of computer science departments in late 1950s, 1960s. • Federal agencies funded 75% of math/computer science research performed in universities during 1970s and 1980s. • PhD-granting CS depts grew from 6 in 1965 to 148 by 1995.

  7. Computer hardware (2) • Early DoD-funded R&D programs were relatively open to civilian researchers. • Summer 1946 seminar for industry at UPenn’s Moore School on “Theory and Techniques for Design of Electronic Digital Computers,” sponsored by military research agencies. • Military procurement and R&D programs enlisted participation of new as well as established firms. • Federal procurement policy for much of the 1960s discouraged purchases of nonmilitary equipment from IBM, contrasting with European “national champion” policies. • 1956 settlement of federal antitrust suit against IBM mandated licensing of computer-related patents, further reducing entry barriers. • Federal share of overall industry sales declined after 1950s, but federal sales remained significant in high-end computers (40% in 1972, 13% in 1980).

  8. Computer hardware (3) • Summary of federal policy: • As in semiconductors, federal antitrust policy encouraged interfirm competition, entry of new firms, interfirm flows of knowledge. • Federal R&D spending was motivated largely by national security needs, but military programs were relatively accessible to civilian researchers and firms • R&D funding supported creation of a large, university-based research infrastructure that combined research and training. • Procurement supported entry and discriminated against dominant domestic supplier (IBM) in nondefense applications through the 1960s, the antithesis of European “national champion” policy.

  9. Computer software (1) • Although federal R&D investment and procurement were less significant, the US computer software industry emerged from foundations laid by federal policy in computer hardware: • SW production for SAGE during 1950s was managed by RAND (later, the Systems Development Corp.), and served as a “trade school” for SW developers. • DoD HW procurement influenced development of some “standard” SW languages, e.g., COBOL in late 1950s. • Federal antitrust and procurement policies influenced growth of independent SW industry in late 1960s. • DC-based federal computer services firms began to develop SW. • IBM “unbundling” of SW & HW pricing under antitrust pressure in 1968 facilitated entry by independent SW developers.

  10. Computer software (2) • IBM 650 and 360 mainframe computers formed platforms for SW user-developers and independent developers. • In the PC era, rapid adoption created a large domestic installed base and market for “shrinkwrap” SW that spurred user-driven innovation and “co-invention.” • Federal funding of academic computer science provided people & ideas for SW industry. • IPRs remained relatively weak/uncertain until the 1980s, prior to Diamond v. Diehr. • Failure of “Ada” SW development program of the 1980s illustrates declining DoD influence on SW industry, contrasting with COBOL in 1950s.

  11. Conclusions (1) • Structure of US public R&D programs in IT was nearly as important as their scale: • Competition among research performers and would-be commercializers. • Pluralism and competition among sources of R&D support. • Reliance by federal agencies on extramural R&D performers rather than public laboratories. • Federal policy extended beyond support for R&D. • Policies encouraging adoption, entry, interfirm technology flows enhanced impact of R&D funding on competition, innovation. • Federal R&D investments supported growth of infrastructure for training scientists & engineers in IT-related fields.

  12. Conclusions (2) • Defense-related procurement in semiconductors, computers complemented R&D spending and affected the development of industry structure. • Contracts with new firms aided entry. • Large gov’t “buys” of new products acted like “prizes.” • During the early period of IT industry’s development (circa 1950-80), relatively weak IPRs were associated with considerable new-firm entry. • Roles of industry & universities in innovation contrast among these 3 sectors and change over time. • DoD influence was critical in the early development of IT, but declined in all 3 sectors with growth of nonmilitary sources of demand and R&D funding.

  13. Is energy different? • IT history highlights importance of demand-side policy for adoption & industry development. • In some energy technologies, larger installed base may accelerate technical progress through user innovation. • Energy demand-side policy has been erratic. • Absence of consistent demand-side policy exacerbated by wide swings in fossil-fuel prices. • Public R&D funding has tended to track price swings, exacerbating instability. • In IT, early-stage gov’t (military) demand focused on performance more than price. • Energy technologies often have to meet a more complex set of performance criteria, and compete with mature technologies in many applications.

More Related