The relevance of science and technology indicators: the case of pulp and paper

Abstract

This paper is based on a detailed analysis of knowledge formation and technical development within pulp and paper (p&p) technology. In section two it is shown that aggregated published statistics are not reliable for a deeper understanding of R&D activities in p&p technology. The third section contains an in-depth study of the development of thermopulp technology—an incremental innovation creating a more energy efficient process for thermomechanical pulping. It is shown that only some 20% of total development costs are accounted for as R&D. In the fourth section it is argued that project groups responsible for ventures like the recently installed paper machine in Braviken, Sweden, in fact carry out important innovative activities characteristic for this technological system. The innovativeness of these concentrations of engineers is not accounted for as R&D. The long-term potential for p&p technology is probably related to the ability of the actors to transform products and processes to a more intensive use of biotechnology. This transformation process may be classified as a radical technological change, or even a shift of `technological paradigm'. The dominant science and technology (S&T) indicators do not capture this process, however. The conclusion formulated in section six is that the dominant S&T indicators provide us with very blunt tools for understanding and explaining industrial and technological change.