Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Globalization has generated increasing interest in technology‐intensive industries as a way to sustain national economic competitiveness. High‐technology growth is often conceptualized as a “high road” to prosperity, more amenable to private–public, industry–labor, and interfirm cooperation than tax, regulatory, or cost competitive strategies. While specialization in technology‐intensive industries does deliver several benefits, this article uses F inland's successful transformation into a high‐technology economy to highlight the significant economic and political risks associated with this strategy. Economically, movement into electronics exposed F inland to cost competition and disruptive technological innovations. Politically, high‐technology competition weakened the solidaristic ties that characterized postwar capitalism and the coordinating capacities that underpinned economic growth. In short, high‐technology growth exacerbated the problems it was supposed to solve. The article concludes by generalizing the argument to several non‐Nordic states.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Darius Ornston (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: