I* 
K 
foe ' 
On the face of it it seems perhaps contradictory or at least 
puzzling that I stress on the one hand the necessity of 
a movement from the grass roots, of working from the grass roots, 
and at the same time the need for coordination, for 
involvement of the government in it and the building up 
of central organisations for study of the industrial-technological 
questions. Yet there is no conftadiction. The role of the 
government is confined to coordination, the planning 
especially as far as specialisation(Schwerpunkte) is concerned 
has to be based on a close study of the possibilities and 
inclinations at the grass root level. _ n / 
40 'Vi,' 
Officials and politicians shy away fromf this conclusion's 
(although to a different extent in different countries 
and at different times ). They have two illusions : They 
hope that you can operate industrial policy by means of 
general rules such as depreciation allowances; and they think 
that if you interfere directly it must be in form of big 
projects. 
They cANNOT Face the complications of a technology pe r S"sirfeie 
and often declare it as impossible. Yet we have seen 
that organisational problems of a very high degree of 
complexity have been solved in the case of space travel 
( where coordination and involvementof industry was also 
an important part ). So why should technology Policy not 
be possible? 
* The chief point of the coordination is that innovative 
developments are complementary ( e.g. use of a new material 
and its production ) and can therefore not prodeed 
independently o<t each other. 
y £*J 
’■> / » - 
1 1 At ev»-—A^’e, J