Forcing Technological Innovation

There may be occasions when a standard is set at a concentration below current analytical limits of detection (LODs) or limits of quantification (LOQs). This could be because high uncertainty leads to the application of large assessment factors to toxicity data to derive a standard or because analytical techniques for a particular environmental matrix have higher LODs/LOQs than those available for the medium in which the standard was derived (e.g., sewage effluent versus laboratory water). An inability to measure concentrations of a chemical at the standard does not necessarily render the standard totally useless. For example, a water quality standard set in a receiving watercourse may be below the LOD/LOQ, but measurement of concentrations from an effluent may be above these limits. Appropriate modeling may allow good estimation of whether the standard in the watercourse has been exceeded. 

However, it is likely that in most cases standards set at levels below detection and quantification limits should be regarded as considerably less useful than those set above such limits. They should therefore fall toward the screening or tentative end rather than the mandatory end of the standards spectrum. It may be appropriate, in some cases, to use a detectable concentration as a cause for concern or a trigger for remedial action, although in such cases it is important that the standards and how they are implemented are reviewed as the analytical LODs are gradually improved to the point at which the detectable levels may not necessarily be unacceptable. Also, the required accuracy and precision of the method of analysis to be used should be specified to make sure that all those who are potentially affected are being regulated on an equivalent basis. 

The aim should usually be to develop appropriate analytical techniques as soon as is practicable for any substance that cannot currently be determined at the concentration represented by the standard. 

---

The starting point for this study of British defence policy between 1904 and 1969 is the tendency for the costs of new weapons systems to rise more rapidly than the national income/ Three main insights are offered. First, British defence policy was based upon technological innovation. Second, reductions in the size of the armed forces to accommodate new weapons systems in defence budgets were not evidence of a decline in power. Third, British grand strategy, incorporating economic as well as military responses to external threats, was much more ambitious than is commonly believed. 

Historically, technological innovation has been a prime force in economic development. New processes and products have been credited with such diverse benefits as increased employment, increased labor productivity, new opportunities for preventing and curing disease, greater consumer comfort, and improvements in the balance of trade. 

Whereas assembly line methods have, for many decades now, been at the heart of industrial production (because of their capacity efficiently to combine distinct work steps), automation technology is increasingly replacing even these mostly manually performed work steps. Usually the two aspects go hand in hand with efficiency improvements, which is undoubtedly the strongest force driving technological innovation. 

The "Charple Report" to the Secretary of Commerce in 1967 presented succinct and timely proposals from a blue-ribbon panel of private citizens on "Technological Innovation Its Environment and Management." Many of these proposals were quite similar to those made by the private-sector Task Forces In the current Domestic Policy Review. 

Zero emission plants, environmentally benign or green chemistry, and sustainable development have become more and more important since the 1990s. Thus, environment-economics have become a major driving force in technological innovation. 

Galli, P. and Vecellio, G., Technology Driving Force Behind Innovation and Growth of Polyolefins, Prog. Polym. Sci., 26, 1287, 2001. 

It is proper to see World War I, in international perspective, as a watershed in the development of the modern chemical industry, a watershed typified less by the discovery of new methods or products than by the staggeringly rapid application of previously existing technological innovations to mass production. "War is a technological forcing house," L.F. Haber entitles the chapter of his comprehensive portrait of the history of the chemical industry that deals with the World War. ... 

Historically, governments have developed poHcies and created extensive regulatory frameworks or voluntary initiatives to force or induce industry to focus on waste emissions to air, land, and water. They have also focused on the reduction and elimination of toxics as opposed to preventing waste and toxics generation through chemistry and chemical technology innovations. As a result, and somewhat predictably, there is now an extensive industry to help companies identify hazardous properties of the chemicals routinely found in commercial products. Sadly there continues to be far less focus on, and certainly far less is understood, about how to transition from current unsustainable practices of making chemicals and the myriad of products made from chemicals. 

Manufacturing. Manufacturers have been a driving force for innovations in sports technology. They employ sports engineers for design and modification of... 

Gain P, Vecellio G (2001) Technology driving force behind innovation and growth of polyolefins. Prog Polym Sci 26 1287-1336... 

---