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