Achieving "appropriate" levels of investment in technological change: what have we learned?
ResearchPublished 1977
In 1971 the National Science Foundation (NSF) sponsored a colloquium to explore the relationships between R&D spending and productivity, and to examine the case for government intervention to increase the level of such R&D spending. The present paper examines the progress made in finding answers. The primary conclusion is that answers have not been found. One of the principal indicators of progress cited is our growing realization that it was naive to expect that they would be. It is suggested that the focus of NSF research support should shift from the narrow concern reflected in the topics mentioned above to the broader issue of corporate decisionmaking and factors influencing it. The final section outlines a program of research aimed at examining the longer-term consequences--including the consequences for innovative performance--that may result from the recent transformation of the bulk of U.S. industry from "unregulated" to "regulated."
Document Details
- Copyright: RAND Corporation
- Availability: Available
- Year: 1977
- Print Format: Paperback
- Paperback Pages: 18
- Paperback Price: $20.00
- Document Number: P-5998
Citation
RAND Style Manual
Chicago Manual of Style
Eads, George C., Achieving "appropriate" levels of investment in technological change: what have we learned? RAND Corporation, P-5998, 1977. As of October 11, 2024: https://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P5998.html
Eads, George C., Achieving "appropriate" levels of investment in technological change: what have we learned? Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation, 1977. https://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P5998.html. Also available in print form.
This publication is part of the RAND paper series. The paper series was a product of RAND from 1948 to 2003 that captured speeches, memorials, and derivative research, usually prepared on authors' own time and meant to be the scholarly or scientific contribution of individual authors to their professional fields. Papers were less formal than reports and did not require rigorous peer review.
This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.
RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.