Information Technology (IT) has become symbolic of modernity and progress almost since its inception. The nature and boundaries of IT have also meant that it has shaped, or become embedded within, a wide range of other scientific, technological, and economic developments. Governments, from the outset, saw the computer as a strategic technology, a keystone of economic development, and an area where technology policy should be targeted. This was true for those economies interested in maintaining their technological and economic leadership, but also figured strongly in the developmental programme ... More

Information Technology (IT) has become symbolic of modernity and progress almost since its inception. The nature and boundaries of IT have also meant that it has shaped, or become embedded within, a wide range of other scientific, technological, and economic developments. Governments, from the outset, saw the computer as a strategic technology, a keystone of economic development, and an area where technology policy should be targeted. This was true for those economies interested in maintaining their technological and economic leadership, but also figured strongly in the developmental programmes of those seeking to modernize or catch up. So strong was this notion that predominant political economic ideologies have frequently been subverted or distorted to allow for special efforts to promote either the production or use of IT. This book brings together country-based studies to examine in depth the nature and extent of IT policies, as they have evolved from a complex historical interaction of politics, technology, institutions, and social and cultural factors. In doing so, many key questions are critically examined. Where can we find successful examples of IT policy? Who has shaped policy? Who did governments turn to for advice in framing policy? Several chapters outline the impact of military influence on IT. What is the precise nature of this influence on IT development? How closely were industry leaders linked to government programmes and to what extent were these programmes, particularly those aimed at the generation of ‘national champions’, misconceived through undue special pleading? How effective were government personnel and politicians in assessing the merits of programmes predicated on technological trajectories extrapolated from increasingly complex and specialised information?