The technological revolutions of the last two decades have placed a severe burden on the concept of technology transfer. It is quite clear that the concept has serious limitations; with time, it is not at all clear that its methods have improved or its result progressed.

　　(1)The underlying assumption in “technology transfer” is that the application of new discoveries to the development of new technology by the developed countries produces results which are applicable to underdeveloped countries. Although this assumption has never really been put to a true global test, it is by now clear that this cannot be the main means of technological progress in developing areas such as Africa, Southeast Asian and Latin America, irrespective of its possible utility elsewhere. (2) The question is whether such an outcome is inevitable and inherent in the process or whether it merely reflects the shortage of resources and improper management. It is my contention that “technology transfer” as a vehicle of progress for the developing countries is irreparably flawed and cannot succeed.

　　The fundamental flaw is that “technology transfer” is cast in the die of a colonial process whereby developed countries do things in ways that they find acceptable for their former colonies, the developing countries. (3) Whether the development process is carried out by citizens of the recipient nation or not is irrelevant; the philosophy upon which” technology transfer” is based, beginning with training and ending with application, is composed of a set of socio-culturally and economically determined values within the institutionalized fabric of science, which select the questions found to be meaningful, dictate the preferred research plans and evaluate the significance only of the results obtained.

　　Clearly, technology based on the set of determinants is not likely to be very relevant to the vastly different economic and socio-cultural conditions of developing countries. It will hardly get to the needs of the developing countries, perhaps even serving to slow progress.

　　(4) This situation must be replaced by a new process which might be called “basic knowledge transfer” as part of growth of a forefront science in the developing countries. This approach contains the following features:

　　· Given full access to new scientific discovery at the cutting edge of science, that is, at the region of high intensity transfer from basic to applied knowledge, the scientists of developing countries can create their own technology transfer from basic to applied.

　　· Scientists in the developing countries, in active dialog with other elements such as government, community and industry, can identify and prioritize problems and develop a practical situation.

　　(5) The problem of internal “technology transfer” will require for each country or region a suitable number of trained scientific specialists; means for maintaining the competency of these leaders will need to be developed by each nation or region.

　　參考譯文

　　1．“技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)讓”的基本設(shè)想是：發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家利用新發(fā)現(xiàn)開發(fā)技術(shù)會(huì)給發(fā)展中國(guó)家?guī)�來適用的成果。

　　2．問題在于：這種結(jié)果是不是轉(zhuǎn)讓過程中不可避免的、固有的；是不是僅僅反映了資源的缺乏和管理不當(dāng)。

　　3．這種殖民主義方式不考慮其發(fā)展過程是否能被“技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)讓”接受國(guó)的人們執(zhí)行�！凹夹g(shù)轉(zhuǎn)讓”始于培訓(xùn)，終于應(yīng)用，其哲學(xué)基礎(chǔ)是由制度化的科學(xué)結(jié)構(gòu)內(nèi)的一整套社會(huì)文化和經(jīng)濟(jì)所決定的價(jià)值觀所構(gòu)成的。這些價(jià)值觀選擇那些被認(rèn)為有意義的問題，決定優(yōu)先的研究計(jì)劃，評(píng)估所取得的成果的意義。

　　4．這種情況必須用一種新的方法予以取代，作為發(fā)展中國(guó)家前沿科學(xué)發(fā)展的一部分。這種方法即所謂的“基礎(chǔ)知識(shí)轉(zhuǎn)讓”。

　　5．內(nèi)部的“技術(shù)轉(zhuǎn)讓”要求每個(gè)國(guó)家或地區(qū)有一定數(shù)量的訓(xùn)練有素的科學(xué)家；每個(gè)國(guó)家和地區(qū)都需要?jiǎng)?chuàng)造方式，以保持帶頭人能始終勝任工作。