Rationales for high technology development programs are suggested, and results to a survey of how state and federal agencies concerned with high technology development define such industry are presented. The general similarity found between federal and state definitions contradicts theoretical expectations of variation, and suggests the natural federal logic may be suppressed in this case. Speculation is made that state assistance is in general not following the directions set by Japan.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ArmingtonCHarrisCOdleM, 1984, “Formation and growth in high-technology firms: A regional assessment” in Technology, Innovation, and Regional Economic Development report number OTA-STI-238, Office of Technology Assessment (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC) appendix B
2.
Battelle Institute, 1970, “The regional potential model”Battelle Memorial Institute, 505 King Avenue, Columbus, OH 43201.
3.
BaumanPChrislipDParrJ, 1984, “Summary of high technology development programs in five selected states: Implications for Colorado”Center for Public/Private Sector Cooperation, University of Colorado at Denver, Denver, CO 80208
4.
BearsePKonopkoD, 1979, “A comparative analysis of state programs to promote new technology based enterprise”The New England Journal of Business and Economics5(2) 49–74
5.
BennettR, 1980The Geography of Public Finance: Welfare Under Fiscal Federalism and Local Government Finance (Methuen, Andover, Hants)
6.
BluestoneBHarrisonB, 1982The Deindustrialisation of America: Plant Closings, Community Abandonment, and the Dismantling of Basic Industry (Basic Books, New York)
7.
BullockM, 1983, “Academic enterprise, industrial innovation, and the development of high technology financing in the United States”Brand Brothers and Co., London
8.
CCII, 1982, “State activities to encourage technological innovation: An update” report by the California Commission on Industrial Innovation for the National Governors' Association Task Force on Technological Innovation, February; 1120 N Street, Suite 1201, Sacramento, CA 95814.
9.
ClarkG, 1983Interregional Migration, National Policy and Social Justice (Rowman and Allanheld, Totowa, NJ)
10.
DavisL, 1982, “New definition of ‘high-tech’ reveals that US competitiveness in this area has been declining”Business America18 October pp 18–23
11.
DoC, 1985County Business Patterns, 1983: United States CBP-83-1, US Department of Commerce and Bureau of the Census, (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC).
12.
ErdevigE, 1986, “Federal funds flow no bargain for Midwest”Economic Perspectives 10, Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago, pp 3–10
13.
GalbraithJ, 1967The New Industrial State (Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA)
14.
GHTCC, 1985aHigh Tech in Colorado: Maintaining our Competitive Edge first year report and executive summary of high technology strategic plan FY 1985–1990; Governor's High Technology Cabinet Council, 136 State Capitol, Denver, CO 80203–1792.
15.
GHTCC, 1985bHigh Tech in Colorado: Maintaining our Competitive Edge. Volume 2: A Technical Reference Governor's High Technology Cabinet Council, 136 State Capitol, Denver, CO 80203–1792.
16.
GlasmeierAHallPMarkusenA, 1984, “Recent evidence on high-technology industries' spatial tendencies: A preliminary investigation” in Technology, Innovation, and Regional Economic Development report number OTA-STI-238, Office of Technology Assessment (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC) appendix C
17.
GlasmeierAMarkusenAHallP, 1983, “Defining high technology industries” WP-407, Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
18.
GrunwaldJFlammK, 1985The Global Factory: Foreign Assembly in International Trade (Brookings Institution, Washington, DC)
19.
HosleyJKennedyJ, 1985, “A revision of the index of industrial production”Federal Reserve Bulletin number 71, July issue, pp 487–501
20.
LangridgeR, 1984, “Defining ‘high-tech’ for locational analysis” DP-22, Urban and Regional Economics Series C, Department of Economics, University of Reading, Reading, Berks RG6 2AH
21.
MarkusenA, 1985Profit Cycles, Oligopoly and Regional Development (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
22.
MarkusenABlochR, 1985, “Defensive cities: Military spending, high technology, and human settlements”Sage Urban Affairs Annual Review, Volume 28. High Technology, Space and Society Ed. CastellsM (Sage, Beverly Hills, CA) pp 106–120
23.
ML, 1984, “An act to provide tax incentives and financial assistance to advanced technology business” House Bill number 145, by Representative Hall, Ways and Means, Regular Session, Mississippi Legislature, New Capitol Bldg., 400 High St, Jackson, Mississippi 39201.
24.
MusgraveRMusgraveP, 1976Public Finance in Theory and Practice (McGraw-Hill, New York)
25.
OMB, 1972Standard Industrial Classification Manual, 1972 (with 1977 supplement) Office of Management and Budget (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC).
26.
OTA, 1983Census of State Government Initiatives for High-Technology Industrial Development Technology, Innovation, and Regional Economic Development Background Paper OTA-BP-STI-21, Office of Technology Assessment (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC).
27.
OTA, 1984Technology, Innovation, and Regional Economic Development Report number OTA-STI-238, Office of Technology Assessment (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC).
28.
PetersonG, 1982, “The state and local sector” in The Reagan Experiment Eds PalmerJSawhillI (The Urban Institute, Washington, DC) pp 157–243
29.
PremusR, 1982Location of High Technology Firms and Regional Economic Development a staff study prepared for the use of the Sub-Committee on Monetary and Fiscal Policy of the Joint Economic Committee (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC)
30.
ReesJStaffordH, 1984, “High technology location and regional development: The theoretical base” in Technology, Innovation, and Regional Economic Development report number OTA-STI-238, Office of Technology Assessment (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC) appendix A
31.
RicheRHeckerDBurganJ, 1983, “High technology today and tomorrow: A small slice of the employment pie”BLS Monthly Labor Review November issue, pp 50–58
SweetD, 1970, “An industrial development screening matrix”Professional Geographer22124–127
34.
ThompsonC, 1978Crumbs from the Ivory Tower: A Survey of Spin-Off Firms from the University of California Berkeley Masters Thesis, Department of City and Regional Planning, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720
35.
Tomaskovic-DeveyDMillerS, 1983, “Can high-tech provide the jobs?”Challenge26(2) 57–63
36.
US Congress, 1982High Technology and Regional Development hearings before the Sub-Committee on Trade, Productivity, and Economic Growth of the Joint Economic Committee (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC).
37.
US News and World Report, 1985, “US versus Japan: Can American workers win the battle?” cover story, 2 September.
38.
ZuckerSDeutschCHoerrJJonasNPearsonJCooperJ, 1982The Reindustrialization of America The Business Week Team (McGraw-Hill, New York)
