WHOI-90-52

More documents

Recommendations

Info

the case with many advance tehnology industries, the industral organization of the MEI field is complex and does not lend itself easily to analysis. There are in fact severa identifiable, overlapping markets, and the field is "unified" through end user similarties as well as product complementaty or substitutabilty. Here we do not attempt a complete description of the industrial organization of the Europe MEI industry. 4 Our purpse is to characterize broad economic parameters of relevance to this industr and to examine domestic and international government policies that may influence the competitiveness of products manufactured by U.S. firms in Europe markets. Europe Marne Sectors The markets for advance marne technologies in Western Europe are large and growing. The capabilties for resech and development, manufacturing, and marketing of marne technologies are well established in France, Germany, Itay, Norway, and the Unite Kingdom. Similar capabilties are nascent but growing in Denmark, Finland, and the Netherlands. Traditionally, U.S. firms have maintaned strong competitive positions in advanced marne products markets worldwide -- including Europe. 5 However, the strcture of the Europe market is changing rapidly, due mostly to government influences as well as other factors. In the Unite States, base upon a preliminar review, we estimate tota saes of MEI products to be approximately $5 billion annually. 6 Comparble estimates for the size of economic activity in the Europe MEI industr are rougher than those for the United States becuse of a paucity of similar industr data. Severa Western Europe countres are "leaders" in the MEI field. These countries are importt not only becuse of their production capabilties but also 4 Such a description wil be even more difficult for the industry in Europe than for the industr in Nort America becuse of data inadequacies. Recnt attempts to begin describing the strcture of the MEI industr in Europe have been initiated by the Deparment of Trade and Industr (OT!) in the United Kingdom, IFREMER in Frace, and the Europe Communities in Belgium. We report on some of these studies below. 5 Base upon limited trde data obtaned from the U.S. International Trade Commission, we estimate that in 1987 of the tota U.S. exports of MEI products (about $1 bilion) about 30 percent went to Europe end users. We have only limited and incomplete data on trade balances, but these data appe to suggest that the U.S. has.a trde surplus in MEI products with Europe and a trde deficit with Japan and Canada. 6 Several methods have been use for this estimation, resulting in a range of estimates of from $3-5 bilion. The world market is estimated at roughly double the U.S. market. Methods for makg these estimates are described in Broadus et al. (1988). Two fundamenta statistical sources have been the U.S. government's "Current Industral Reports" and "Census of Manufactures" series. It has been possible in many cases to identify the value of U.S. "shipments" down to the seven digit industral classification leveL. Statistics are available on U.S. exports and imports as well, although the coverage is less complete. 15
ecause they are major end users of MEI products and services. Table 1 presents these countres and compares varous indicators of the significace of the marne setor to each of these countries. Table 1: Imprtance of the Marine Sector to MEI Countries: Som Indicators 1989 Nunr of 1984 1988 Estimated Exclusive Est imated Ports Est imated Offshore Production Economi c Mercha~t Fi shing (SUSx106) Coast Zone Ships Major Minor Vessels Oil Gas (kmx103) (kinx103) Dervrk 300* 16 44 340 2IT 107 3 69 France 300* 23 165 480 3 341 Germany 850 10 11 125 51 4 1 41 Italy 550 16 22 260 296 64 5 5<strong>52</strong> Neth. 450* 8 5 440 88 993 0.5 85 U.K. 950 23 350 340 9939 2760 12 943 Finland 150* 11 15 20 1 98 Norway 750 9 69 600 4304 1748 6 2025 Canada 100* 19 300 4<strong>90</strong> 365 91 4699 Japan 3100 53 large 2820 6 29 12 3862 U.S.A. 1300 25 large 3130 5357 6519 20 7621 * Based on 1984 data. Sources: Fairplay(1989); Offshore(1989); Mangone(1986); Lloyd's(1984); Borgese and Ginsburg(1982). 11ncludes ships registered under Panamanian or Liberian flags of convenience. 16
Page 2: -- !! -== -I" 0- ;; .- -rt õ=.. ai
Page 5 and 6: ABSTRACT Thirteen short papers addr
Page 7 and 8: The Status and Promise of Electroni
Page 9 and 10: During the two yeas we have been at
Page 11 and 12: There is currently a major debate r
Page 13 and 14: The Inuence of Japanes Industrial T
Page 15 and 16: profier, an ocea acoustic tomograph
Page 17 and 18: manufacturing would predict between
Page 19 and 20: References Advisory Committee for T
Page 21: e both winners and losers from the
Page 25 and 26: A final, but not insignificat, set
Page 27 and 28: Europen Programs in Marne Science a
Page 29 and 30: proposa included a line item speifi
Page 31 and 32: from 12 Europe countres, has been a
Page 33 and 34: ut other industres have been affect
Page 35 and 36: Indee, if barers fall, the effect c
Page 37 and 38: References Andre, M. 1987. Resech a
Page 39 and 40: Peet, G. 1986. Techniques and metho
Page 41 and 42: These statistics becme a reaity dur
Page 43 and 44: should make it easier to coordinate
Page 45 and 46: proposas submitted to SBIR and appr
Page 47 and 48: An Overview of Technology Transfer
Page 49 and 50: follow the fortunes of that industr
Page 51 and 52: choosing resech paths. In general,
Page 53 and 54: Foundation (NSF) in 1985 and 1988,
Page 55 and 56: In the field of ocography, spin-off
Page 57 and 58: Opponunities for technology transfe
Page 59 and 60: "Strategic Allnces" as an approach
Page 61 and 62: summar then, the desired result of
Page 63 and 64: international ecnomic competitivene
Page 65 and 66: NAT LABS , .. R&D .... ... í7 I DE
Page 67 and 68: the radar were "burned in" for a pe
Page 69 and 70: Differences between ~ Defense am ~
Page 71 and 72: chemica industr's 1989 R&D.2S Bang
Page 73 and 74:
We are seing a high use of facsimil
Page 75 and 76:
pretty nealy global. Except for the
Page 77 and 78:
Stadard-C wil disappoint some users
Page 79 and 80:
Introduction The Status and Promi o
Page 81 and 82:
optional feature of some systems. T
Page 83 and 84:
in order to tae full advantage of t
Page 85 and 86:
Fishermen and operators of workboat
Page 87 and 88:
of the inherent limitations of rada
Page 89 and 90:
One example is an America Petroleum
Page 91 and 92:
intensification of domestic aquacul
Page 93 and 94:
System Output The system output inc
Page 95 and 96:
Although the geographica sce of pro
Page 97 and 98:
In contrast with the heavily use wa
Page 99 and 100:
"works." The tida data (Figure 2, p
Page 101 and 102:
". o ,. - LI u . '- 0 o .c 0: 0: ::
Page 103 and 104:
Concluding Remarks Obviously we are
Page 105 and 106:
All is not new. Commentators someti
Page 107 and 108:
of academic resech is critica, both
Page 109 and 110:
stang point, the model allows the p
Page 111 and 112:
of exchange among the university an
Page 113 and 114:
and progras. Benefits, on the other
Page 115 and 116:
14: 10 Technology Transfer and Inte
Page 117 and 118:
15:30 Where do we stad now? Gary Gl
Page 119 and 120:
Dr. Allyn C. Vine Mr. Malte von Mat
Page 122:
50272.101 PAGE WHOI.90.52 REPORT DO
show all

WHOI-90-52

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?