Technology diffusion decides future global power rankings

Source: The post Technology diffusion decides future global power rankings has been created, based on the article “Diffusion is destiny” published in “Indian Express” on 19th April 2025. Technology diffusion decides future global power rankings.

UPSC Syllabus Topic: GS Paper3-Science and Technology- developments and their applications and effects in everyday life.

Context: Technology is shaping modern global power rivalries. The book Technology and the Rise of Great Powers by Jeffrey Ding challenges old beliefs about how nations gain technological dominance. It argues that power depends not on leading sector dominance but on the widespread diffusion of transformative technologies.

For detailed information on A global order as technology’s much needed pole star read this article here

Revisiting Conventional Wisdom

1. Dominance in Leading Sectors: Traditionally, nations were seen as powerful if they led in specific industries. Britain led in textiles, Germany in chemicals, and Japan in electronics and cars. Many now believe China may do the same with electric vehicles.
2. First-Mover Advantage Theory: This theory says that early innovators gain temporary advantages or monopoly profits, helping them rise in global rankings.

Ding’s Core Argument

1. Focus on General Purpose Technologies (GPTs): Ding argues that sectoral dominance is not enough. Real power comes from spreading General Purpose Technologies— innovations that boost productivity across many areas.
2. Impact of GPTs: Technologies like electricity, computerisation, and artificial intelligence create broad economic gains. These differ from sector-specific tools, as they can transform entire economies.

Historical Case Studies

1. Britain and the First Industrial Revolution: Britain’s strength came not from textiles alone, but from spreading iron-based machines and engineering skills across industries.
2. Germany, the US, and the Second Industrial Revolution: Germany led in many sectors, but the US pulled ahead by spreading GPTs like electricity and creating institutional standards that enabled widespread adoption.
3. Japan and the Third Industrial Revolution: Japan led in consumer electronics. However, it failed to diffuse computerisation effectively. The US succeeded again by broadly adopting digital technologies.

Policy and Institutional Implications

1. Diffusion Requires Different Institutions: Institutions built to dominate sectors differ from those needed to spread GPTs. The latter require strong education systems, infrastructure, and technological interoperability.
2. Shifting Policy Priorities: Governments often focus on headline-grabbing sectors. But long-term power requires investments in human capital and systems that enable widespread technology adoption.

Lessons for India and Other Developing Nations

1. Wider Reform Is Essential: India must move beyond sector-specific policies. It needs deep institutional reforms, broad-based skilling, and stronger technology channels across small and large firms.
2. Beyond Innovation Clusters: India should support small towns, local engineers, and small-sized firms that connect frontier innovation to the broader economy. The goal is system-wide diffusion, not isolated excellence.

Geopolitical Implications

1. China vs. the United States: While China dominates sectors like electric cars, Ding believes the US still leads in GPT diffusion. Unless policies change, the US may maintain its edge by spreading transformative technologies more effectively.
2. Evaluating Power: The true test is not invention alone, but the ability to diffuse technologies widely across society.

Conclusion

Ding’s work shifts the focus from leading sectors to technological diffusion. His key message: national strength depends on how broadly technologies are adopted. For countries like India, the way forward lies in enabling system-wide change — because diffusion is destiny.

Question for practice:

Examine how Jeffrey Ding challenges traditional views on technological dominance and what lessons his argument offers for countries like India.