The evolution of technology assessment

The Evolution of Technology Assessment Michael J. Cleary and Horace W. Lanford

Early researchers contributed substantially to the philosophy and methods of modern technology assessment. W. F. Ogbum [ 171 and S. C. Gilfillan [7], for example, demonstrated how interdependent technology and society are, and Henry Adams [I] demonstrated the utility of trend extrapolation--particularly exponential trends. These contributions have provided significant insight into technology assessment. Technology assessment is an organized, in-depth study of the effects that may occur when a technology is functionally improved or a new technology is introduced. Present-day interest in the subject may have been initiated by Jules Verne’s provocative stories about journeys to the center of the earth, from the earth to the moon and 20,000 leagues under the sea. Mysterious I.sZand, published in 1875, foretold such devices and experiences as the submarine, the aqualung, television and space travel.

and fruitful career in the prediction of technological progress, the history of invention and-of great importance to present technology forecasters-the interactions of technology and society. Gilfillan worked closely with Ogbum, another sociologist, and these two researchers greatly enriched the literature of what is now called technology assessment. Ogbum is known particularly for his application of statistical methods to the problems of the social sciences, for his concept that invention is the fundamental cause of cultural evolution and for his concept of cultural lag; i.e., that an invention affecting one aspect of culture may require adjustments in other cultural areas, and that delays in adjustment may be encoutered. Ogburn wrote Social Effects of Aviation [17] in 1946, and an earlier work was published as On Culture and Social Change [15] in 1964. EARLY TECHNOLOGY

Verne’s writings may well have influenced H. G. Wells in his ventures into science fiction: The Invisible Man, 1897 [22] and The War of the Worlds, 1898 [23] and in his attempts at foretelling the future: Anticipations, etc., 1902 ]241. Shortly after the turn of the century, other individuals with scientific training became interested in forecasting progress and events of the future. Gilfillan began his long 26 0019-8501/78/0007~0026/$01.25

0

ASSESSMENT

EFFORTS

Ogburn was research director of President Herbert Hoover’s Committee on U.S. Social Trends (1930-1933) and, as such, a chief architect of Technological Trends and National Policy [ 161, published by the U.S. Government Printing Office in 1937. Gilfillan was a major contributor to this Government report, serving on the U.S. National Resources Committee, which authored the

Elsevier North-Holland,

Inc., 1078

Industrial Marketing

Muntigement

7, 26-3 1 (1978)

report, and contributing a chapter: “The Prediction of Inventions” [8]. Gilfillan wrote The Sociology of Znvention [7] in 1935, and later, works on the prediction of technical change. He established the concept that important inventions are the accretion of little details, that an invention is a new combination from prior art [7]. Ogbum and Gilfillan have shown to modem forecasters the interrelationships and interdependencies of technical progress with other areas, specifically the social area, and by inference, implication and association, the economic and political areas. THE CONTRIBUTIONS

OF HENRY ADAMS

Adams stands out as a significant contributor to the formalization of technological forecasting. In many ways, Adams can be seen as an enigma. He viewed himself as being chronologically at the birth of modem man. He seems to have been the first one to articulate the ever-increasing pace of man’s progress. In his autobiography, The Education of Henry Adams [I], Adams proposed a dynamic theory of history. This dynamic theory defined progress as the development and economy of forces and defined force as anything that does or helps to do work. Man is thus a force, as is the sun. Adams observed that man’s function (as a force of nature) was to assimilate other forces as he assimilated food. Adams saw little progress of man from his beginnings on earth until 300 A.D. What progress was made, according to Adams, consisted in economics of energy rather than in its development. Some progress was apparent during this time, such as the use of roads, the use of

H. W. LANFORD is Professor of Management, Wright State University. He has specialized in problems of technology assessment/technological forecasting, systems management and research and development management. His articles have appeared in 10 professional journals and he is a consultant in problems of his specializatron. His books are: Technological Forecasting Methodologies: A Synthesis (1972), Prevision Tecnologica y Planificacion A Largo Plaza (with B. C. Twiss) 1976 and System Management: Planning and Control, in press.

MICHAEL J. CLEARY, is Associate Professor of Quantitative Business Analysis, Wright State University. His consulting experience includes the presentation of seminars for industry and Government in management science and statistical applications. Before coming to Wright State in 1971, he served as Assistant Vice-President, production, for the Title Guarantee Co., New York. He holds a B.A. from Norwich University and M.A. and Ph.D. in economics from the University of Nebraska.

harbors, the size of ships, the use of metals, the use of instruments and the development of writing. However, the roads were still traveled by the horse and other beasts of burden and slaves; the ships were propelled by sails or oars; the instruments were limited to the lever, the spring, the screw; even the metals in use had been discovered long before. Adams traced slight developments or evidence of progress such as the compass, gunpowder, the printing press up to 1500. “After 1500, the speed of progress so rapidly surpassed man’s gait as to alarm everyone, as though it were the acceleration of a falling body which the dynamic theory takes it to be.” The telescope, the microscope, gunpowder, the compass, the printing press and electric conductors enabled a small number of men to contribute to progress. Very slowly, the accretion of new forces, chemical and mechanical, grew in volume and provided a base for the rapid acceleration of progress and knowledge in the 17th Century and for the startling acceleration of the 18th Century. In 1909 Adams wrote “The Rule of Phase Applied to History,” which appeared in the Degradation of the Democratic Dogma [2], first published in 1919, in which he projected his curve of progress that demonstrated his use of “the old, familiar law of squares.” This is shown as Figure I. To support his theory, Adams used an analogy of the coal output of the world and its conversion to steam horsepower. This he saw as a measurable parameter to chart the progress of society. Adams stated that the coal output of the world, roughly speaking, doubled every 10 years between 1840 and 1900. In the form of utilized power for a ton of coal, three or four times as much power was yielded in 1900 as in 1840. Concerning the utilized power of coal, Adams stated that the rate of acceleration may be tested in “a thousand ways,” and cited the ocean steamer as an example. Adams worked back from 1.905 when 30,000 steam horsepower vessels crossed the ocean and halved the power every 10 years, or: 1905-30,000 steam horsepower 1895-15,000 “ ‘& “ 1885- 7,500 “ “ “ 1875- 3,750 “ “ “ 1865- 1,875 “ “ “ 1855937 “ “ “ 1845468 “ “ “ 1835234 “ “ “ Adams stated that the 234 steam horsepower for 1835 vessels is sufficiently accurate to make the point. He 27

1800

/

TIME

FIGURE I.

Adams’ law of acceleration

or law of prog-

ress.

HAN'S PROGRESS

1800 /

/1700 10,000

1000 TIME

FIGURE 2.

28

Adams’

law of acceleration.

PRESENT

cited the scores of new forces opened up since 1800; the old force raised to higher powers (the navy gun); great regions of physics, and the discovery of radiation which revealed a new universe of force. Complexity occurred across a wide spectrum of activities, and arithmetical ratios were useless for any attempt at accurate estimates. The force evolved seemed more explosive than gravitational and followed closely the curve of steam (steam horsepower generated by coal). Adams was satisfied that the rate of increases in progress parameters (forces) doubled each IO-year period from 1820 to 1900. He suggested that the same ratio of acceleration, or retardation, could be carried back to 1400 (Fig. 2). Adams stated that historians are interested in the law of reaction between force and force-between mind and nature-or what he called the law ofprogress. The formula of squares serves as a law of mind. Adams asserted that the law of acceleration had measured man’s progress throughout time, but that man had no method of measuring (or comparing) this progress until the development of coal power in the 19th Century, which furnished the first means of assigning closer values to the elements. It is thus clear that Adams should be given much credit in the formalization and demonstration of technological forecasting.

PIEL’S DEVELOPMENT OF ADAMS’ LAW OF ACCELERATION A modern contributor to the development of technological forecasting is Gerald Piel. His base is the works of Adams and he has projected Adams’ curve backward 2,000 years and forward 50 years as shown in Figure 3. Pie1 stated that a wealth of statistical data supports the ascent of the curve of man’s progress to twice the height at which Adams charted it at the turn of the century. According to Piel:

MAN'S PROGRESS

TIME FIGURE 3.

Adams’ curve extended.

isolation of elements, as shown in Figure 5, and to sources of inanimate energy, as shown in Figure 6. RECENT EFFORTS TO ENCOURAGE APPLICATION OF TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT Adams’ law of acceleration or law of social progress is thus firmly established. Ralph Lenz undertook the application of Adams’ law of acceleration to technological progress in 1958. Figure 7 shows an exponential projec-

weak

Nuclear

Every index, from the consumption of energy per capita in the United States to the volume of scientific publication, has more than doubled in this period. Since few

statistical series reach beyond 150 or 200 years into the past, the projection of the curve back behind 1600 must be regarded as largely symbolic. The projection of the curve may reverse the rule of phase and count changes in quality as accumulations in quantity [ 191.

Q~Q

Pie1 uses the law of acceleration or progress to highlight the shrinking time intervals in the discovery of one primary force of nature to the next as shown in Figure 4. Pie1 further applied Adams law of acceleration to the

QQQ’

\QQ’

I

I

1

1

Q~Q

go’ XQp’

I

~0' \’

I’

I

.a< -\p” +* 9%

TIME FIGURE 4.

Discovery

of natural forces.

29

100,000

c

70,000

-

50,000

-

40,000

-

30,000

-

,a ,’ / ,/’ #’ /’ ,/’ 0

g

/’

,,’

,’

0

2 K

0

0

G 0 i

10,000

-

i;’

7,000

-

2 :

5,000

-

00

4,000

-

3,000

-

O 0

0

O 0

2,000 T

FIGURE5.

IYE

Isolation

6

20,000

/+

of elements. 1920

tion of the weight growth of fighter aircraft that has proved remarkably accurate. This trend analysis and many others have demonstrated the consistency with which Adams’ law applies itself to the sciences. The Lenz work appears to be the starting point of modem efforts to forecast technology [ 121. Since Lenz’s pioneering efforts, other efforts have come to light, some of which have built on Lenz’s work. Zwicky practised the morphological approach from 1938 and published

Nuclear

A

TIME

FIGURE 6.

30

Sources

of inanimate

energy.

1930

1950

1940

1960

1970

YEAR

FIGURE 7.

Gross

weight

of U.S. single-place

fighter

Aircraft.

results in 1962. Battelle Columbus Laboratories has been involved in technology forecasting activities for some 25 years and Swager, Lipinsky, Sheppard, Buttner and others have applied network construction to practical problems. These researchers were, of course, assisted by the writing of Churchman, Ackoff, Amoff, Magee, Quinn and others. Joining Quinn in the investigation and application of systems analysis were Quade, Linstone and others. Morris has contributed to technology forecasters in his research and application of modeling, as have others, such as Forrester. Erich Jantsch contributed significantly with his Technological Forecasting in Perspective [9], published in 1967. In 1967, Bright began his series of conferences on technological forecasting, aided by such outstanding researchers as Lenz, Ayres, Helmer, Gordon, Cetron, Buttner, Rea, Linstone, Rubin, Martino, Pardee and Jantsch, and published the results of these conferences in 1968 [5]. Ayres published Technological Forecasting und Long-Range Planning in 1969, particularly strong in the history of technological forecasting, morphological analysis and envelope curves [4]. Cetron’s book on technological forecasting also appeared in 1969, documenting many years of experience in technological forecasting with the U.S. Navy [6]. Lanford circulated pri-

vately a government report on technological forecasting prepared for the Foreign Technology Division of the U.S. Air Force Systems Command in 1970 [lo]. This Government report served as the background for a book on the subject by Lanford in 1972 [ll]. Martino, a significant contributor to the literature of technological forecasting, also published a book in 1972 [ 141. In 1972, Lanford began a series of conferences on technological forecasting, sponsored by the American Management Associations, assisted by such outstanding individuals as Lenz, Jr., Sheppard and Buttner.

An objective of this article has been to show the origin and development of the exponential curve so useful to technological forecasters. Another objective is to encourage wider use of technology assessment procedures by long-range planners. With each passing day, periodicals emphasize problems of technology and of energy sources. A key area for investigation is the long-term weather changes, the implications on world food supplies and the consequent political, social and economic challenges and threats. The long-range planner--Government, academic and business/industrial-will need all possible tools to meet the challenges of the future. The methods of technology assessment offer the long-range planner additional tools to meet this challenge successfully. REFERENCES

Adams, H., The Rule of Phase Applied to History, Degradation Democratic Dogma, Peter Smith, New York, 1949. Ibid.,

Aqres, R. U., Tec~hnologicul Forecasting und Lmg-Runge McGraw-Hill Book Cornpan!,. New York, 1969.

5.

Bright, J. R., cd., Tec~htwlogicoI Forecosting Jiw Industry und Govmmwt, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, N.J., 1968.

6

Cetron, hl. J., Technologicul Forecasting, A PrrrcticuI Approach. don and Breach, Science Publishers. Inc., New York, 1969.

7. Gilfillan, Chicago. 8

S. C., The Sociology 1035.

of Inwrtion.

Follett

PImning.

Gor-

Publishing

Co..

Gilfillan, S. C.. The Prediction of Inventions, in U.S. National Resources Committee. Tec,hmk~gical Trrnd.c md Nationul Policy, Part I. Section II. pp. 15-25, U.S. Government Printing Office, June 1937.

9. Jantsch, E., Techmlogical Forecasting in Perspective. Organization Economic Cooperation and Development, Paris, 1967.

for

IO. Lanford, H. W., Technological Forecasting Methodologies. Foreign Technology Division, Air Force Systems Command, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, 1970.

WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS

Adams, H., The Education of Henry Adams, The Modern Library, York, 1931. (Reprinted by Heritage Press, New York, 1958.)

4.

New of the

II.

Lanford, H. W., Technological Forecasting Methodologies: American Management Association, New York, 1972.

A S~nthrsi~.

12. Lenr, R. C., Technological Forecasting, ASD-TDR-62-414, WrightPatterson AFB, Ohio, Air Force Systems Command, June 1962. 13. Ibid..

p. 3 1.

14. Martino, J. P., Technological York, 1972. 15. Opburn, Chicago

Forecasting.

Gordon

W. F., On Culture and Social Change, Press, Chicago, 1964.

&

Breach,

New

The University

16. Ogburn, W. F., et al, Technological Trends and National Polk:\. National Research Council, Natural Resources Committee, 1937.

of U.S.

17. Ogburn, W. F. (Assisted by Adams, J. L., and Gilfiilan. S. C.), Social Effects of Aviation, Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, 1946. 18. Piel, G., The Acceleration phlet, Scientific American, 19. Ibid.,

p. 8.

20. Ibid.,

p. 9.

21. Ibid.,

p. IO.

of History, April 1963 speech pub. as pamNew York, p. 3.

22.

Wells, H. G., The Invisible Man, Alfred A. Knopf, New York,

23.

Wells, H. G., The War ofthe Worlds, Platt and Munk, New York, 1963.

24.

Wells, H. G., Anticipations of the Reaction of Mechanical and Scientific Progress upon Human Life and Thought, Harper & Bras., New York, 1902.

1934.

p. 292.

31