In the Social-Liberal coalition under Chancellor Brandt expanding

    In the early
1970s, two critical changes concerning the substance of S&T approaches
triggered by the Social-Liberal coalition under Chancellor Brandt expanding its
majoritian position in the Federal Parliament and existing oil price crises of
1973 and 1978. To begin with, the Social Democrats won in their traditionary
position that S&T arrangements to a specific degree must be controlled (or
guided) by the officials. Furthermore, the government chose to eliminate
instruments,for example, capital investment (indirect measures) and specific
depreciations which had been practiced to encourage S&T activities. Their
aim was to use S&T strategies as a piece of alleged “modernisation
strategy”. Rather, the government favored direct measures, for example, program
financing. Second, the first oil price shock of 1973 moved the focus towards
nuclear energy, industrial efficiency and the reformation of working
conditions. The emphasis on nuclear energy was fortified after the second oil
price shock in 1978. As a result, in 1982 %25 of aggregate government spending
in S&T was credited to energy hunt. In addition, the second oil price
crisis expanded the spending limitations of the Federal Government, and again
faced with a move in strategy instruments: this time from direct to indirect

    This lessening
also was an outcome of replacement in the government coalition from
Social-Liberal to Christian-Liberal in 1982. After their traditional economic
regime, the new government tried to turn towards a more liberal S&T
approach. This approach primarily concentrated on more commercialisation of
technology by focusing on applied research and defining key innovations, for
example, biotechnology.  Different
components of this approach have been the start of the alleged
‘Verbundforschung’, fortified exercises in technology evaluation and in
providing venture capital. Notably, the meaning of, for instance, biotechnology
as a key innovation has been a vital strategic tendency. The four national
habitats for genetic research in Berlin, Cologne, Heidelberg and Munich, which
were set up in 1984, empowered the succeeding biotechnology industry.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

    ‘External shocks’
showed up as causes for replacement in strategies. In 1986 the Chernobyl
nuclear disaster changed the general mentality towards research in nuclear
energy. The cut in nuclear energy investment diminished from %12.1 in 1985 to
%4.2  in 1990 and to %1.3 in 2000 of the
aggregate government research spending plan. In the meantime government
improved their practices in environment and health. After the end of The Cold
War German Unification has taken place in October 1990. The Unification Treaty
stipulated that the strategies and projects being practiced in West Germany
must be implemented to the new Länder too. Clearly, this situation constrained
the government to expand its spendings for the alleged ‘Trägerorganisationen’
importantly, from %11.6 of the aggregate research spending budget in 1989 to
&15 in 1991. This method was unavoidable since the East German research
scene must be modified before the typical strategies, instruments and projects
could be practiced.

    In the early
1990s, the Federal Ministry for Education and Research (Bundesministerium für
Bildung und Forschung, BMBF) put biotechnology in the center of it’s exercises.
However, biotechnology has seen as a key innovation during the 1980s and it has
started to be commercialized in the early 1990s in the USA. The German
government had aspiring plans for this developing field in Germany. Two
projects, BioRegio-Competition and Biotechnologie 2000, have been practiced to
accomplish that aim, and the research spending budget increased from €141
million to €256 million between 1991 and 2000. Spesifically
BioRegio-Competition, which focused on the commercialisation of
biotechnological study, became the government’s purpose since it encouraged
network building on an competitive infrastructure by empowering regions to
practice monetarily encouraging techniques.

    In October 1998,
Red-Green coalition has replaced the Christian-Liberal coalition and it was a
radical experience for Germany. Following the vote, the political administration
of the rebuilt BMBF shifted from a Christian-Democratic minister to a
Social-Democratic one. The new government at first put a much more grounded
importance on direct program financing because of it’s Social-Democratic
convention. There were new activities with communicative innovations. The new
government relaunched programs that had been ceased by it’s forerunner. The
program which is called as PROINNO focused on encouraging advancement in little
and medium-sized organizations (SMEs), is one of the greatest activities in
this unique circumstance can be given as example. Federal Ministry for
Economics and Technology (Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Technologie,
BMWi) has revived it: at first, with respect to worldwide competition the new
government predicted the need to help SMEs in their endeavors to
internationalize; furthermore, subsequent to increasing new skills in
innovation practices following the votes of 1998, it was the expectation of the
BMWi to separate itself from the Research Ministry by working up its own

At the end, the national government confronted an occasion
when the sale of UMTS licenses returned a benefit of about €51 billion for the
spending plan in the August 2000. Germany could only benefit this situation as
the Wide Liberalisation of Telecommunications recognised it as an essential
telecom market. The administration planned to utilize this ‘window of occasion’
to spend an extra €900 million for S&T between 2001 and 2003. Most of the
cash planned to be used in colleges and genome practices. Remarkably, in
several regions like energy search, the BMBF and the BMWi will fortify
techniques that couldn’t have been acknowledged without the benefits of the
UMTS auction.



Prange, H. (2010, June 04). Rethinking the impact of
globalisation on the nation-state: the case of science and technology policies
in Germany. Retrieved December 27, 2017, from