Ha-Joon Chang Quotes

One of the major problems with China is that its innovation is largely borrowed technology.

Technology is probably the single biggest driver of productivity gains for the developed countries. For example, I think it's much more important than free trade.

Absorbing foreign capital and technology and even allowing foreigners to construct plants in China can only play a complementary role to our effort to develop the productive forces in a socialist society. Of course, this will bring some decadent capitalist influences into China. We are aware of this possibility; it's nothing to be afraid of.

Technology paces industry, but there's a long lag in the process.

Japan will change. Let's create a country where innovation is constantly happening, giving birth to new industries to lead the world, when I visit Silicon Valley I want to think about how we can take Silicon Valley's ways and make them work in Japan.

Mass application of technological innovations, which constitutes much of the distinctive substance of modern economic growth, is closely connected with the further progress of science, in its turn the basis for additional advance in technology.

We're not necessarily the ski boat, we're the skier. There are countries like Japan and Korea and others who are the ski boat at this point, but we're getting pulled right behind them.

… countries that are behind in their industrial and scientific development are tempted at times to steal those technologies from other countries.

The spirit of manufacture has taken deep root among us, and its foundations are laid in too great expense to be abandoned.

There is no question but … science is the weakest in the lands of Islam. The dangers of this weakness cannot be overemphasized since honorable survival of a society depends directly on strength in science and technology …

We must creep before we can walk. Protect the manufacturers for the present, and in a little time, they will protect themselves and us. They have the potential of releasing us from our dependence on foreigners and quieting their intrigues.

...industrialisation took centuries, rather than decades

Innovation - the heart of technological change - is fundamentally a learning process.

The building of ships is antediluvian; the building of aircraft is of the 20th century, But there are similarities: both activities have to do with security as well as economy; almost everyone wants some capacity in the field, usually more than can be sustained by ordinary commerce.

South Korea’s research and development output has increased from half the size of the Arab world to 20 times as large, and Israel’s research output on a per capita basis is 26 times as large as the Arab world’s.

We can go into the Chinese market, develop the engine, new models of cars. Proton can compete. What is the point of giving the company to foreigners? It will revert to the same situation where foreigners just assemble their cars here. We learn nothing.

Industrialisation only can generate large-scale employment.

We envision a more Germany-style economy, where 20 percent of our workforce is in manufacturing. And we're not talking about banging tin in the back room. We're talking about high technology across the board, whether it's computer chips or cars or anything in between.

With whomsoever or wheresoever may rest the present causes of difficulty that apparently exist towards either the completion of the old engine, or the commencement of the new one, we trust they will not ultimately result in this generation's being acquainted with these inventions through the medium of pen, ink and paper merely; and still more do we hope, that for the honour of our country's reputation in the future pages of history, these causes will not lead to the completion of the undertaking by some other nation or government.

Societies will, of course, wish to exercise prudence in deciding which technologies that is, which applications of science are to be pursued and which not. But without funding basic research, without supporting the acquisition of knowledge for its own sake, our options become dangerously limited.

When you visit countries that don't nurture these kinds of ambitions, you can feel th absence of hope...people are reduced to worrying only about that day's shelter or the next day's meal. It's a shame, even a tragedy, how many people do not get to think about the future. Technology coupled with wise leadership not only solves these problems but enables dreams of tomorow.

it [is] possible to suppose that, if Russia is allowed to have peace, an amazing industrial development may take place, making Russia a rival of the United States.

Everyone who lives in an industrialized society is obliged gradually to give up the past, but in certain countries, such as the United States and Japan, the break with the past has been particularly traumatic.

I shall not be deterred by people who don't see where the future of Africa lies. It is the short-sighted people who put their opinions in writing. They don't understand that the future of all countries lies in processing.

We're looking at the dawn of a new arms race. For example, Germany technically opposes the US space militarization program, but is bound to get involved. Otherwise it will be left behind in the development of advanced technology. Germany understands that very well. The US understands it too, and they fully expect that Germany and other countries that they want on board will go along with the program.