US mining : Have we done enough? Are we doing enough for the future?

There are many reasons why the US mineral and primary metals industry is in its present state. Undoubtedly, a flood of imported goods in all sectors is playing a major role in the plight of our raw materials industry. Domestic industry is becoming increasingly aware of the importance of its international competitiveness. And we are beginning to wonder what is happening to our technological edge. A number of factors affect the international competitiveness. Engineers cannot do much about some of these factors - labor costs, tax policy, government relations, interest rates, dollar strength, and labor-management relations. Something can be done about technology, however. Some say technology is so easily transferable today. But I would like to believe that we have the ability to apply it better than others. Not too many years ago, "made in Japan" meant cheap and shoddy products. Today, Japan has completely changed its image. The US is beginning to feel the threat from Japan's low-cost, defect-free products with dependable delivery. With worldwide recession and the strength of the dollar, we were shocked at the sudden weakness that developed in America's industries, not only in the international market, but domestically as well. What went wrong and what can we do about it? Senior executives from 300 large American manufacturing companies were surveyed. These executives believe US companies must: • invest in more efficient plants and equipment (27%); • invest in more research and development (23%); • improve the quality of service to customers (23%); and • adopt more aggressive marketing tactics and strategies (14%). Are we not doing enough research? The US has nearly four times as many people engaged in research and spends four times as much for research as Japan (Fig. 1). There is little doubt about the excellence of the US performance in basic science as indicated by the number of Nobel prize recipients. Japan has produced only four winners since World War II. Look at technology trade of five countries (Fig. 2). Again, US performance has been remarkable. An interesting observation here, is that the United Kingdom, another country with economic woes, is also in the black, West Germany and Japan, both with trade surpluses, are net technology importers. It is apparent that the US' performance in the commercialization of new knowledge is much more in question. Japan had $50 billion of trade surpluses with the US last year, which led to some friction between Washington, DC and Tokyo. Comparing the technology trade of Japan and the US in more detail, Japan imports disproportionately large amounts of technology from the US and Europe. This data is rather old, 1978, but the general trend is not too different even today. It is generally believed that scientific research leads to innovative technology, then to economic payoff. But, after seeing the current technological challenge by Japan, we are forced to change this traditional view. Investment in research may eventually lead to economic payoff, but not directly. There is a middle ground between new knowledge and its commercialization. This is an area where the Japanese have been successful. Until the 1970s, many western companies licensed patents to Japan for quick profits. But, in recent years, these companies have become more discrete about the terms of technological transfer. As a result, a number of scientists and engineers are expressing deep concern over the future of technological developments in Japan. A survey was conducted on 450 research managers of private industries in Japan on how they viewed the level of breakthroughtype original research in Japan as