Journeys and Technology Transfer@Journeys and Technology Transfer@(ÜB)@vorankündigung2013

Introduction

The act of travelling is never neutral or devoid of intentions, whether political, economic, scientific, military or cultural. No wonder it has also been associated with technical motives. Official or unofficial, open or hidden, public or private, authorised or illegal, premeditated or spontaneous, it has activated the circulation of knowledge and the transfer of ideas, experiences and objects from one place to another, via its authors.

Whatever the cause and whatever the place where it appears, a new device or a new process does indeed spark curiosity, attract attention, and make those who are able to see it want to acquire it. In order to understand its mechanisms, reproduce its fundamental principles and benefit from it oneself, one must implement the means to obtain the required information. In the sphere of devices, travel is a widely used tool. But by defining travel as a means to a clearly identified, predefined end, we run the risk of forgetting the accidental or fortuitous opportunities that bring every traveller, wherever their travels take them and for whatever reasons, face to face with unexpected events or unforeseen demonstrations that they believe to be worthy of interest and which, in their opinion, need to be brought back to their homeland.

The relationship between travel and technology transfer thus opens up a very wide spectrum of actors and actions that implements, over time and depending on the circumstances, a process which not only causes one or more individuals to travel, but which simultaneously transports the thing that is seen or heard in a well-understood trajectory of profit and self-interest. The questions surrounding this process are numerous and deserve clear answers: who travels, to what place, in what circumstances, for what reasons? They also touch on the modalities that draw attention to the objects in question, and the benefits sought: why make such a transfer, how is it organised, what are the selection criteria and what impact will it have in its new place of reception? From this perspective, we should take account of the chronological dimension when considering this profusion of interactions, on the understanding that the very awareness of such an act will be perceived differently and with varying intensity depending on the circumstances. The concept of technology transfer in the sense of something defined and formalised is a very contemporary one, and the risk of anachronism is great if we apply it without caution in other contexts. Hence the need to first define the concepts used, in order to understand what is being discussed.

Terminology

While the term “travel” entered into usage and everyday language very early - at the dawn of humanity, one might say - it is not the same with the concept of technology transfer. The formal origin of the concept dates back to 1945. It is linked to the publication of the famous report by Vannevar Bush which, in response to a request from President Franklin D. Roosevelt, pinpointed the need to view scientific research from a broader, more systematised angle, so that it could serve as the foundation for the entire economy¹. Technology transfer is meant to ensure a happy and virtuous combination of research proper, whether public or private, and its application and impact on the communities involved. In this context, a legal system regulates the dissemination of innovations while ensuring the protection of industrial property. The transmission of results and discoveries was therefore supported by a very specific set of regulations. This resulted in a standardisation of its definition, which can be stated as follows:

Technology transfer is commonly understood as the set of skills and technical results developed and kept up-to-date in laboratories, assigned or licensed to third parties, mainly through the sale of patents or granting of patent and know-how licences, but also through the recruitment of personnel trained in research.

Transmission is therefore based on the full recognition by all parties, subject to a fee which, if not negotiated, is at least accepted by the issuing party. On the basis of this definition, efficiency strategies are implemented, again on behalf of the parties, to derive maximum benefit from the results and ensure that the transfer and implementation process runs smoothly.

From a historical perspective, the value of the concept goes far beyond the simple definition provided. The crucial point in the chain of events lies in the nature of the mediation. Recognised and rewarded in its contemporary form, transfer in fact feeds into more indecisive, more invisible modes in the long term. In terms of state-accredited agencies and private institutions that are remunerated as such, the actors are multiform and interchangeable: students, scientists, engineers, pilgrims, missionaries, diplomats, soldiers, merchants, travelling salespeople, tourists, artists, painters, members of the clergy or, more laconically, professional spies, are just a few entries in the long list of forms that the transmitter can take. Not to mention the fact during the journey, the latter can take mischievous pleasure in shedding their skin: behind the tourist hides a certified engineer, behind the soldier lies an experienced technician. In short, all these people can turn into a battle-hardened spy in a flash, upon coming across something deemed interesting and worthy of inclusion in the ‘dossier’ they intend to pass on. From a theoretical point of view, there seems to be no limit to the process. We must also take account of the fact that the thing being transmitted may present itself in different material forms - by transferring the very object that will simply need to be identically reproduced upon arrival - and immaterial forms - based on sketches, photographs or simply the traveller’s memory, the device will be reconstructed at a later date. Transferring a watch that can be hidden in one’s pocket seems simple, while the model for a steam machine involves recourse to other modes. Yet the same process is at work in both cases.

Recent developments in interconnected history have also shown, clearly and with great relevance, the impact of so-called contact situations “on the dynamics of the circulation of people, ideas, technology and resources from one point to another in long-distance trade networks in the modern age”. From this perspective, the technology being transmitted is not disseminated in its original form in its place of reception. Without going into the question of the forms taken by these encounters - fusion, hybridisation - we may suppose that transmission also alters the properties of the objects or ideas being transmitted, depending on the circumstances. We must also consider the influence of the transfer itself on the technology being transported, which challenges the linearity of the process when other operations - translations or unexpected events during the journey, for instance - take place along the way, so that when the product arrives at its destination, it often appears different and sometimes bears no resemblance to what it was originally.²

The history of technology has also shown clearly that the receptacle is tied to a social, political, cultural and economic context, which may be more or less favourable to innovation depending on the case in point, since it is more than just a passive space that greedily ingests everything brought to it, like a goose.³ That is, technology transfer itself in no way anticipates the end purpose of the thing being transported. In the same way that no encounter leaves its various participants unaffected, technology transfer is not simply a vehicle for the added value demanded or expected by the recipient country. While rejection is just as common as acceptance, the latter can only be understood in the context of a ‘shared history’ without presuming its authors’ consent or otherwise.⁴ This perspective thereby re-evaluates the role of the traveller, who goes from being a simple transmitter to taking on the role of a contributor, to an extent which remains to be evaluated but is not always easily identifiable.

From the Middle Ages to the Renaissance

It may seem arbitrary to start from the Middle Ages, since Antiquity is teeming with evidence of technological transfers. The flows coming from the Near East and to a lesser extent the Far East reveal the intensity of the contribution and production. While avoiding the temptation to create a scale of technical and scientific superiority in ancient civilisations, historiography recognises the achievements of the pre-Islamic and Islamic civilisations of the Near East and Central Asia, and the ways they benefited the West, in particular Spain, Sicily and Byzantium, in the areas of irrigation, agriculture and hydraulics, as well as manufacturing.⁵ The same can be said for ancient Greece and the Roman Empire.⁶ The East carried on adding to the constant flows of knowledge and objects. These flows clearly grew in intensity from the end of the first millennium A.D.

In this respect, the Crusades certainly played an accelerating role.⁷ One example of a transfer with extremely important consequences is the dissemination of gunpowder and the cannon in England, which the Earls of Derby and Salisbury brought back in 1340-1342 from the Al-Jazira siege in Al-Andalus, and which were used for the first time in Western Europe at the Battle of Crecy in 1346 against the French. According to Carlo Cipolla, this transfer triggered the great shift in power which enabled Europe to begin its conquest of the world in the late 15^th century.⁸ The Crusades were no obstacle to more peaceful transfers, which provided ideal opportunities for dissemination through business relations. Craftspeople are a notable example of this kind of process. Architectural features such as the rib, a central feature in Gothic architecture, seem to have been imported to Italy thanks to the close ties between the Fatimids in Egypt and the Italian city of Amalfi. These ties made it possible to build a church including such features for the first time in Monte Cassino in 1071.

To what extent did these transfers influence the degree of technical inventiveness that many stress when talking about the Middle Ages?⁹ It is hard to say. For this period as for the ones that went before it, the problem lies in identifying the traveller and his or her actual involvement in the process. While the transfer may be proven to have taken place, the history of the transfer is much less clear. Many studies content themselves with merely listing items, revealing the origin of a particular device. They observe the existence of transfers, without demonstrating exactly how an object appeared or how a process came to be disseminated. Simply naming inventions and their origins tells us nothing about the modes of transfer that may or may not have led to these ‘innovations’ coming into use. It has been abundantly demonstrated, for example, that the Mediterranean has always been a place of exchange where ideas have circulated at the same rate as goods, yet with a few exceptions, no real explanation of the transfers made has been provided, due to a lack of sources. The importance of major civil or religious projects, such as cathedrals, in the flow of knowledge has been established, and the use of espionage too, but that is as far as it goes.¹⁰

This is a difficult task, as the mere fact of the objects in question being present in two places at the same time (even if the two places are close to each other) does not allow us to draw any conclusions. Is there any link whatsoever to explain their transfer from here to there? If so, the flow remains very imprecise and inadequately documented.¹¹ Based on the example of Lucera in Apulia, Julie Taylor was able to show how the deportation of Muslim craftspeople to this city, after the fall of the Emirate of Sicily following the Norman invasion in the 11^th century, led to the manufacturing boom linked to technology transfer in ceramics and weaponry, particularly crossbows.¹² In other cases, transfer was encouraged and stimulated. The influx of Italian doctors, craftspeople, architects and engineers into Russia from the 15^th century onwards was the result of the princes’ desire to make use of foreign technologies to meet the needs of the Russian Empire.¹³ Their arrival prompted a major economic and technical boom, the effects of which were felt for several centuries afterwards. The same can be said for the Republic of Venice, which was keen to welcome foreign workers who, at the turn of the 14^th century, brought with them the secrets of silk-making, and, in the 15^th century, silver-refining.¹⁴

The fact remains that the best documented transfers reveal the importance of translations of scientific works in mathematics and astronomy, as well as colour manufacturing. By travelling around and spending time in different places, figures such as Leonardo Fibonacci or Leo Africanus circulated knowledge, ideas and sometimes items of which their host countries made extensive use. They acted as couriers as much as innovators, by virtue of their personal contribution to the matters discussed: mathematics for the former and languages for the latter, all in a complex geometry in which flows intersected and intertwined.

From the Renaissance to the First Industrial Revolution

With travel becoming increasingly frequent as part of the Great Discoveries, the building of Empires, especially the colonial Empires, greatly facilitated transfer opportunities. In this regard, the technology that would be used by Western powers to dominate the world was considered in terms of unilateral dissemination, as Immanuel Wallerstein (born 1930) showed with the emergence in the 16^th century of the ‘world-economy’, of which North-West Europe was the starting point.¹⁵ From a geographically demarcated centre, flows would converge towards the peripheral areas, which were in its power and supplied with Western ‘products’ in a relationship of domination. The reverse is also true. The capitalist centre would pump into the peripheral areas, which was necessary for its own development in a very unequal exchange: raw materials certainly, but also knowledge, labour, know-how, etc.This pattern, which governs the organisation of trade on a global level, describes the flows according to a very rigid set of modalities: everything conspires to give the centre the means to impose its supply as well as its demand. Transfers are viewed from this perspective. This does not mean that the process has been simplified. Yet there is nothing to indicate that the interim phase, i.e. the transfer itself, does not intervene in the operation, and safe travel remain the thorniest issue.

This led Daniel Headrick to take a very narrow view of the transfers that took place. In his view, the conditions of colonisation did indeed not entail any in-depth dissemination of imported technologies in the peripheral areas. There was simply a geographical relocation of machines, methods and experts from one point to another without any proper cultural impact on the recipient country.¹⁶ With the Enlightenment, the ‘great’ scientific voyages of the 18^th century certainly helped to reinforce this pattern. While they promoted the flow of ideas, knowledge and people, they also contributed towards large-scale transfers, under the influence of naturalists in particular, of plants that were used to create the first botanical gardens in Europe, places of major scientific importance.¹⁷ Again, the converse is also true. When European populations settled in North America and New Zealand, and acclimatised to those areas, they benefited from a number of transfers from the Old World, especially species of fauna and flora.¹⁸ In both cases, the process is akin to relocation, even if improvements were made thanks to these imports in the long run.

As mentioned above, recent developments in colonial and post-colonial history nonetheless suggest more complex configurations.¹⁹ The history of the Dutch East India Company (or the VOC as it was known) founded in 1609 can be interpreted as a commercial enterprise which had a considerable effect on technology transfer by renewing contact with a number of countries. The rigidity of the process was tempered by a multitude of experiences which varied according to the degree of learning and understanding of the encounters that took place. Timothy Brook sums up the situation well. He describes the 17^th century as “a time when people had to adjust how they acted and thought in order to negotiate the cultural differences they encountered, to deflect unanticipated threats and respond cautiously to equally unexpected opportunities”.²⁰ In this context, the effects were not easy to predict, as improvisation underpinned all proceedings. While sharing did take place, it did not necessarily entail symmetry of intervention or equal acceptance of the various parties’ contributions as soon as experience was accumulated and strategies were developed. It should also be noted that while technology transfers did intensify due to an increase in travel and new encounters, they did not determine the evolution of power relations in the world economy to quite that extent. Indeed, how can we explain the ”great divergence”, as K. Pomeranz calls it in the title of his book, which occurred between China and Europe in the 19^th century, if not by the intervention of other factors, in particular ecological and politico-military ones?²¹

The situation is different if we focus more specifically on the centre of this world-economy. Technological transfers played a bigger role there than in the socio-economic transformations that coincided with the First Industrial Revolution. Here the term must take the plural form. The ”centres” (or ”central regions” to borrow Pomeranz’s terminology) competed more fiercely with each other to acquire the most advanced knowledge and the most reliable technologies. In this sense, the stakes are clearly identifiable in the transfer processes that link the Western powers when accessing new knowledge.²² François Caron rightly stresses the emergence, between the mid-17^th century and the start of the 19^th century, on a “corpus of formalised knowledge” whose modes of dissemination relied heavily on the treatises and technical encyclopaedia that were beginning to proliferate, and the tuition that was starting to be given in universities and grandes écoles. Yet the increasing frequency of travel also had a part to play.²³ On the historiographical level, the whole debate on the steam machine and its dissemination throughout the Western world resulted, for example, in the acquisition of components to replicate it outside of Great Britain. While the struggle to acquire knowledge in the 18^th century brought forth the practice of espionage,²⁴ it must also be seen within a wider context of illegal emigration of workers and technicians from England to the Continent.²⁵

From this perspective, the First Industrial Revolution was a particularly busy period in this respect, and there are a great many studies to show the full extent of its fruitfulness.²⁶ Travel became a fitting way to not only disseminate procedures and systems, but also to enable regions and countries to develop rapidly, especially in economic terms. Far from the relocation highlighted in the colonial context by Daniel Headrick, transfers resulted in instances of cultural anchoring which remodelled the scientific and technical structure of the recipient country. We cannot list them all here, but this undoubtedly became a strategic issue in many circles. With the emergence of the figure of the professional engineer, travel even became an obligatory method of acquisition and dissemination. The education of engineering students at the Ecole des Mines (School of Mining) in Paris in the 19^th century involved an epic journey that took them all over Europe, as well as the United States and Russia. Thus, the Ecole des Mines archives contain over 1600 travel journals, 1100 memoirs and 1100 visit reports.²⁷

This sum of knowledge, which was accumulated within a highly formalised context, was accompanied at the same time by more ad hoc journeys that were dictated by circumstance, but still provided the organisers with opportunities for business and enrichment. One example amongst many others is François Xavier Gressot, a man from Jura who, in the account he left to his children at the end of his life, described the importance of visits in his life as an entrepreneur, especially in tulle manufacturing.²⁸ Here, technology transfer was heavily influenced by the conviction that travel implied a wish to lead its beneficiaries (people, states, regions, etc.) towards economic growth or personal prosperity.

Second and Third Industrial Revolutions

It would be an exaggeration to say that there was a sudden change in these practices with the advent of the phenomena commonly known as the Second Industrial Revolution (around the mid-19^th century) and the Third Industrial Revolution (a hundred years later). Although innovations led to complete social change and were produced by new forms of institutional dynamics, the conditions that encouraged these transformations still involved methods that had proven successful in the past, at least partially. The use of espionage in particular remains common practice, and was until recently a cause for concern for the European Commission.²⁹ According to some authors, it is even likely to increase considerably with the ever-increasing sophistication of communication technology.³⁰ During the Cold War, along with other activities (military in particular), technological espionage was widespread to say the least. Each bloc attempted to outstrip the other one’s technological advances by any means necessary.³¹

In general, however, technology transfers followed updated operating methods. Apart from its ability to mobilise human and material resources for a common, collective purpose, the economy from the mid-19^th century onwards was characterised in particular by its increasing capacity to accumulate new skills and knowledge through sustained research efforts, which led to innovation (knowledge based economy).³² Thus, there was a transition from random discoveries to a mastery of innovation, the instrumentalisation and institutionalisation of which are central to theories of growth (innovation based growth). Economists were thus prompted to study the process that connected science, progression in knowledge, research activities and continuous technological improvements, in order to understand how the bases of this chain could affect industrial productivity and support economic growth in the long term. Grouped together under the generic term “innovation economics”, the analyses and models developed in recent years aim to both identify technical progress as a decisive growth factor, and to measure it empirically.³³ These fundamental transformations undoubtedly affected the view we have of knowledge dissemination and the role of travel in this context.

Several factors contributed to this. Firstly, the multi-polarisation of flows became more pronounced, which tended to make trade more complex. Next, the establishment of the multinationals as a key player in the economic and technical fabric of society certainly demoted the improvisation-based modes from the late 19^th century onwards.³⁴ The legal framework, especially in the area of patent legislation, made access to technical innovation more difficult and imposed stricter controls on transfers. In addition, the formalisation of skills and knowledge, and their institutionalisation, had an effect on trade, which from then on was regulated by international standards that prevented uncontrolled access.³⁵ In short, we cannot deny the highly formatted, highly organised nature of the construction of science and technology in contemporary societies, characteristics which provide more effective protection against unwanted transfers.

One of the events that still provided a means of dissemination for travellers’ discoveries was undoubtedly the World’s Fair. Upon seeing manufacturers, industrialists and entrepreneurs from all over the world, all keen to display their achievements, visitors could not help but want to share in the benefits. Curiously, this topic has not been explored by researchers studying the history of the World’s Fairs.³⁶ Presented as showcases, sometimes the subject of confrontation, and displaying the desire to show the world the degree of advancement and innovative power of the states involved, they did not prompt people to reflect on the fact that they may have served to facilitate technological pillaging, conveniently described as transfer. As Brigitte Schroeder-Gudehus and Anne Rasmussen point out, with the demise of free trade and the rise of scientific reviews as a means of transmission, the World’s Fairs gradually ceased to perform the function they had originally been designed for, particularly in the 20^th century.³⁷ With the change of purpose that was assigned to them, their specific economic and technical benefits faded away. Yet these events, which were a considerable success – several millions of visitors attended each fair – were a great opportunity to not just keep up with current trends and see what others had achieved, but also to amass new knowledge and share the benefits with others³⁸. In this respect, a good example of a visit to a World’s Fair and its technological benefits is provided by Jacques David, a Swiss engineer based in Saint Imier, where he worked at the Longines watch factory during its rise to prominence, under the direction of his cousin, Ernest Francillon. In 1876, he went to the Philadelphia World’s Fair, returning with a confidential report describing in minute detail all the innovations he had seen in the American watch-making business. Having adopted rationalised production based on interchangeable parts, it was capable of making inexpensive watches. Turning into a real industrial spy, David wanted to alert the Swiss watch-making business to its American competitors’ technical advances, and urged it to adopt the same principles.³⁹

Should the productivity missions organised between the United States and Europe after the Second World War be classed in the same category? Originally set up to study the production and management techniques which underpinned the United States’ domination in the early days of the Cold War, their aim was to provide the conditions for growth, not only in Western countries but also in Asian and South American countries.⁴⁰ Inspired by the American government, they involved a large number of players such as industrialists, businessmen and engineers, as well as workers.⁴¹ While these missions took place within a particular context, they still confirm the importance of travel as a means of action whose impact should not be underestimated. The example of Japan provides a special insight into these practices and has been the subject of many studies.

While important technological transfers took place from Great Britain to Europe during the First Industrial Revolution thanks to the migration of labour, engineers and workers (legal or otherwise), as we have seen above, Japan was unable or at least much less able to benefit from this opportunity. While racial, cultural and linguistic differences may have deterred foreign communities from settling in Japan, engineers and technicians from the West were certainly hired there, at least until the 1880’s⁴². Watch-making is an interesting case in point. While Swiss watch-makers were established there very early on, the Japanese manufacturers took inspiration from their presence, first by importing cheap watches and later by starting their own businesses⁴³. This modality enabled the industry to grow considerably from that point onwards.

Laurent Tissot

Appendix

Sources

Bush Vannevar, Science: The Endless Frontier, Washington, United States Government Printing Office, 1945 (http://www.nsf.gov/od/lpa/nsf50/vbush1945.htm).

David Jacques, Rapport à la Société intercantonale des industries du Jura sur la fabrication de l'horlogerie aux Etats-Unis, Saint-Imier, 1992.

François Xavier Gressot : artisans, contremaître et négociant (1783-1868). Histoire de ma vie. Au cœur de l’industrialisation alsacienne et jurassienne. Introduction, notes et édition par Alain Cortat. Neuchâtel, 2002.

Report on the existence of a global system for the interception of private and commercial communications (ECHELON interception system) (2001/2098(INI) - Rapporteur: Gerhard Schmid http://cryptome.org/echelon-ep-fin.htm

Literature

Al-Hassan Ahmad Y., « Transfer of Islamic technology to the West », http://www.history-science-technology.com/

Arnold Thomas and Guillaume Alfred (eds), The Legacy of Islam, Oxford, 1968.

Barjot Dominique (ed.), Catching up with America. Productivity Missions and the Diffusion of American Economic and Technological Influence after the Second World War, Paris, 2002.

Ben-Zaken Avner, Cross-Cultural Scientific Exchanges in the Eastern Mediterranean, 1560-1660, Baltimore, 2010.

Bertrand Romain, « Rencontres impériales. L'histoire connectée et les relations euro-asiatiques », in

Revue d'histoire moderne et contemporaine, 2007/5n° 54-4bis.

Birch Alan, “Foreign observers of the British iron industry during the eighteenth century” in Journal of Economic History, 1955, pp. 23-33.

Bradley Margaret, « Ingénieurs et espions ? Les missions des ingénieurs français en Angleterre à la fin du XVIIIe siècle » in André Guillerme (Textes édités par), De la diffusion des sciences à l’espionnage industriel, XVe-XXe siècles, Paris, 1999, pp.21-52.

Braunstein Philippe, « A l’origine des privilèges d’invention aux XIVe et XVe siècles » in François Caron (sous la direction de), Les Brevets. Leur utilisation en histoire des techniques et de l’économie, Paris, 1985.

Brook Timothy, Vermeer’s Hat. The Seventeenth Century and the Dawn of the Global World, London, 2008.

Bruland Kristine, British Technology and European Industrialization. The Norwegian Textile Industry in the Mid Nineteenth Century, Cambridge, 1989.

Buchanan R.A., “The Diaspora of British Engineering” in Technology and Culture, July 1986, pp. 501-524.

Caron François, Les deux révolutions industrielles du XXème siècle, Paris, 1997.

Caron François, La dynamique de l’innovation. Changement technique et changement social (XVIe-XXe siècle), Paris, 2010.

Carré Anne-Laure, Corcy Marie-Sophie, Demeulenaere-Douyère Christiane et Hilaire-Pérez Liliane (sous la direction de), Les expositions universelles en France au XIXe siècle. Techniques Publics Patrimoines, Paris, 2012.

Cipolla Carlo M., Guns, sails and empires: technological innovation and the early phases of European expansion 1400-1700, [S.l.], Minerva press, cop. 1965.

Cohen Yves und Manfrass Klaus (Hrsg. Von), Frankreich und Deutschland : Forschung, Technologie und industrielle Entwicklung im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert, München, 1990.

Crosby Alfred, Ecological imperialism. The biological expansion of Europe, 900-1900, Cambridge, 1986.

Delmas Jean, Kessler Jean (éd.), Renseignement et propagande pendant la guerre froide, 1947-1953, Bruxelles, 1999.

Drouin Jean-Marc, Les grands voyages scientifiques au siècle des Lumières. Conférence présentée à l’Universidad de verano de Adeje (Tenerife), le 14 juillet 2003 (http://humboldt.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/10.drouin.pdf).

Donzé Pierre-Yves, Humair Cédric, Mazbouri Malik (responsables du dossier thématique), Transferts de technologie : étude du cas suisse, 18e-20e siècles = Technologietransfer : Analyse der schweizerischen Entwicklung, 18.-20. Jahrhundert. Traverse 2010/3, Zürich, 2010.

Donzé Pierre-Yves, « Des importateurs suisses de Yokohama aux fabricants d’horlogerie japonais : le marché de la montre dans le Japon de Meiji, 1868-1912 » in Revue d’histoire  moderne et contemporaine, 2010, pp. 168-190.

Dupré Jérôme, Renseignement et entreprise. Intelligence économique, espionnage industriel et sécurité juridique, Paris, 2002.

Edgerton David, The Shock of the Old. Technology and Global History since 1900, London, 2006.

Findling J.E. (ed.), Historical Dictionary of World’s Fairs and Expositions, 1851-1988, New York, 1990.

Flinn M.W., « The Travel diairies of Swedish engineers of the eighteenth century as sources of technological history » in Transactions of the Newcomen Society, vol. XXXI, 1957-9, pp. 95-109.

Freemann Christopher, The Economics of Innovation, Aldershot, 1990.

Freudenberger Hermann, “Technologie-Transfers von England nach Deutschland und insbesondere Österreich im 18. Jahrhundert“ in Ulrich Troitzsch (Hg.), Technologischer Wandel im 18. Jahrhundert. Wolfenbüttel, 1981, pp. 105-129.

Frugoni Chiara, Le Moyen Âge sur le bout du nez. Lunettes, boutons et autres inventions médiévales, Paris, 2011.

Gerlier Forest Pierre, «Montrer pour démontrer: le Congrès des arts et des sciences de l’Exposition universelle de Saint-Louis», Relations internationales, 46, 1986, p. 131-152.

Gimpel Jean, La Révolution industrielle du Moyen Âge, Paris, 1975.

Gouzévitch Irina, « Le transfert technique et la Russie ancienne (fin du 15^ème-fin du XVIème siècle) », in Bulletin de la Sabix, 2003.

Gruzinski Serge, La pensée métisse, Paris, 1999.

Guillerme André (Textes édités par), De la diffusion des sciences à l’espionnage industriel, XVe-XXe siècles, Paris, 1999.

Harris John, Industrial Espionage and Technology Transfer. Britain and France in Eighteenth Century. Asghate, 1998.

Headrick Daniel, The Tentacles of Progress. Technology Transfer in the Age of Imperialism, 1850-1940, New York, 1988.

Henderson William O., Britain and Industrial Europe, 1750-1870: Studies in British Influence on the Industrial Revolution in Western Europe, Leicester, 1972.

Industrial Partnerships Office, Technology Transfer: The History (https://ipo.llnl.gov/).

Jeremy David, « Damming the flood: British government efforts to check the outflow of technicians and machinery, 1780-1843” in The Business History Review, Vol. 51, No. 1 (Spring, 1977), pp. 1-34.

Jeremy David, International Technology Transfer. Europe, Japan and the USA, 1700-1914, Aldershot, 1991.

Jeremy David (ed.), The Transfer of International Technology: Europe, Japan and the USA in the Twentieth Century, Aldershot, 1992.

Jeremy David, (ed.), Technology Transfer and Business Enterprise, Aldershot, 1993.

Kipping Matthias and Bjarnar Ove (eds), The Americanisation of European Business. The Marshall Plan and the Transfer of US Management Models, London, 1998.

Kogel Jean, Economie et technologie de 1880 à 1945, Paris, 1996.

Landes David, L’Europe technicienne : révolution technique et libre essor industriel en Europe occidentale de 1750 à nos jours, Paris, 1975.

Layton Edwin, "Technology as Knowledge", in Technology and Culture, 1974, pp. 31-41.

Le Bas Christian, Economie de l’innovation, Paris, 1995.

Le Bas Christian et Torre André, "Activités technologiques et structures industrielles dans une économie fondée sur les connaissances : approches analytiques et statistiques", in Economies et Sociétés, Cahiers de l’ISMEA, Série : Dynamique technologique et organisation, juillet 1996, pp. 5-22.

Lo Cascio E. (dir.), Atti convegno Innovazione tecnica e progresso economico nel mondo romano, Atti Incontri capresi, Bari, 2006.

Mathias Peter, (Ed. By) Innovation and Technology in Europe from the Eighteenth Century to the Present Day, John A. Davis, Oxford/Cambridge, 1991.

Mélanges de la Casa de Velasquez. Les transferts de technologie au premier millénaire av. J.-C. dans le sud-ouest de l’Europe, Paris, 2013.

Montgomery Watt W., The influence of Islam on Medieval Europe, Edinburg, 1982.

Okochi Akio, Uchida Hoshimi (ed. By), Development and Diffusion of Technology. Eletrical and Chemical Industries. Proceedings of the Fuji Conference, Tokyo, 1980.

Osterhamnmel Jürgen, Die Verwandlung der Welt. Eine Geschichte des 19. Jahrhunderts, München, 2009.

Parthasarathi Prasannan, Why Europe Grew Rich and Asia Did Not: Global Economic Divergence, 1600-1850, Cambridge, 2011.

Partington J.R., A History of Greek Fire & Gunpowder, Baltimore, 1999.

Pomeranz Kenneth, The Great Divergence. China, Europe, and the Making of the Modern World of Economy, Princeton, 2000.

Ray Kapil, Relocating Modern Science: Circulation and the Construction of Knowledge in South Asia and Europe, 1650-1900, Basingstoke & New York, 2010.

Rosenberg Nathan, Exploring the Black Box. Technology, Economics and History, Cambridge, 1994.

Saliba George, Islamic Science and the Making of the European Renaissance, Cambridge/London, 2007.

Schroeder-Gudehus Brigitte et Rasmussen Anne, Les fastes du progrès : le guide des expositions universelles 1851-1992, Paris, 1992.

Schröter Harm G. (ed), “Une américanisation des entreprises”, Entreprises et histoire, 1998.

Schumacher Martin, Auslandsreisen deutscher Unternehmer 1750-1851 unter besonderer Berücksichtigung  von Rheinland und Westfalen, Köln, 1968.

Stehr Mico, Arbeit, Eigentum und Wissen. Zur Theorie von Wissensgesellschaften, Frankfurt a.M, 1994.

Subrahmanyam Sanjay, Explorations in Connected History. From the Tagus to the Ganges, Oxford 2005.

Taylor Julie, Muslims in Medieval Italy. The Colony at Lucera, Lexington Books, 2003.

Thuillier Guy, « Une source documentaire à exploiter : les ‘Voyages métallurgiques’ des élèves-ingénieurs des Mines. » in Annales, ESC, 1962, pp. 302-307.

Troitzsch Ulrich (Hg.), Technologischer Wandel im 18. Jahrhundert, Wolfenbüttel, 1981.

Uchida Hoshimi, « Technology Transfer », in The Era of Industrialisation, Shunsaku Nishikawa and Takeji Abe (Eds), A History of the Japanese Economy, Vol. 4, Iwanami Shoten, 1990.

Von Tunzelmann Nick, Technology and industrial progress: the foundations of economic growth, Aldershot Hants, 1995.

Wallerstein Immanuel, Capitalisme et économie-monde, 1450-1640, Paris, 1980.

Wolfhard Weber, « Probleme des Technologietransfers in Europa im 18. Jahrhundert. Reisen und technologischer Transfer“ in Ulrich Troitzsch (Hg.), Technologischer Wandel im 18. Jahrhundert, Wolfenbüttel, 1981, pp. 189-217.

Wolton Thierry. Le KGB en France, Paris 1987.

White Jr. Lynn, Medieval Technology and Social Change, Oxford, 1965.

Notes

1. ^{^} Bush, Science: The Endless Frontier 1945. Cf. also Industrial Partnerships Office, Technology Transfer.
2. ^{^} As far as history of sciences is concerned, a very good example can be found in Kapil, Relocating Modern Science 2010.
3. ^{^} Edgerton, The Shock of the Old 2006.
4. ^{^} For a broader perspective, but related to the 19^th century, cf. Osterhamnmel, Die Verwandlung der Welt 2009, pp. 1147 ss.
5. ^{^} Very interesting examples are given by Al-Hassan, « Transfer of Islamic technology to the West ».
6. ^{^} Lo Cascio (dir.), Atti convegno Innovazione tecnica e progresso economico nel mondo romano 2006 ; Mélanges de la Casa de Velasquez. Les transferts de technologie au premier millénaire av. J.-C. dans le sud-ouest de l’Europe 2013.
7. ^{^} Baker, « The Crusades » 1968.
8. ^{^} Cipolla, Guns, sails and empires 1965; Partington, A History of Greek Fire & Gunpowder 1999.
9. ^{^} Frugoni, Le Moyen Âge sur le bout du nez 2011 ; cf. also Gimpel, La Révolution industrielle du Moyen Âge 1975 or White Jr., Medieval Technology and Social Change 1965.
10. ^{^} Caron, La dynamique de l’innovation 2010,  p.44.
11. ^{^} Montgomery, The influence of Islam on Medieval Europe 1982; Saliba, Islamic Science 2007.
12. ^{^} Taylor, Muslims in Medieval Italy 2003.
13. ^{^} Gouzévitch, « Le transfert technique et la Russie ancienne (fin du 15^ème-fin du XVIème siècle) » 2003.
14. ^{^} Braunstein, « A l’origine des privilèges d’invention aux XIVe et XVe siècles » 1985.
15. ^{^} Wallerstein, Capitalisme et économie-monde 1980.
16. ^{^} Headrick, The Tentacles of Progress 1988.
17. ^{^} Drouin, Les grands voyages scientifiques au siècle des Lumières 2003.
18. ^{^} Crosby, Ecological imperialism 1986.
19. ^{^} Ben-Zaken, Cross-Cultural Scientific Echanges 2010.
20. ^{^} Brook, Vermeer’s Hat. The Seventeenth Century and the Dawn of the Global World 2008, p. 33.
21. ^{^} Pomeranz, The Great Divergence 2000; in the same perspective, Parthasarathi, Why Europe Grew Rich and Asia Did Not 2011.
22. ^{^} Weber, « Probleme des Technologietransfers in Europa im 18. Jahrhundert. Reisen und technologischer Transfer“ 1981.
23. ^{^} Caron, ibidem, p. 60 sq.
24. ^{^} This issue is pointed out by Harris, Industrial Espionage and Technology Transfer 1998.
25. ^{^} Henderson, Britain and Industrial Europe 1972 ; Buchanan, “The Diaspora of British Engineering” 1986; Cf. also Jeremy, “Damming the flood” 1977.
26. ^{^} Bruland, British Technology and European Industrialization 1989; Freudenberger, “Technologie-Transfers von England nach Deutschland“ 1981.
27. ^{^} Thuillier, « Une source documentaire à exploiter » 1962. One can find an exploitation of the documents in Bradley, « Ingénieurs et espions ? » 1999; Cf. also Flinn, “The Travel diairies of Swedish engineers” 1957-9, or Birch, “Foreign observers of the British iron industry” 1955; Schumacher, Auslandsreisen deutscher Unternehmer 1968.
28. ^{^} Gressot : artisans, contremaître et négociant (1783-1868) 2002, p. 129 ss. One of his chapter is called : « I steal a secret », p. 284 ss.
29. ^{^} Report on the existence of a global system 2001.
30. ^{^} Dupré, Renseignement et entreprise 2002.
31. ^{^} Wolton. Le KGB en France 1987 ; Delmas/Kessler (éd.), Renseignement et propagande pendant la guerre froide 1999.
32. ^{^} For example, Le Bas/Torre, "Activités technologiques et structures industrielles " 1996; Stehr, Arbeit, Eigentum und Wissen 1994 ; Layton, "Technology as Knowledge" 1974.
33. ^{^} Innovation and Technology in Europe 1991 ; Caron, Les deux révolutions industrielles du XXème siècle 1997 ; Kogel, Economie et technologie 1996 ; Rosenberg, Exploring the Black Box 1994 ; Von Tunzelmann, Technology and industrial progress 1995 ; Frankreich und Deutschland 1990 ; Landes, L’Europe technicienne 1975.
34. ^{^} Jeremy (ed.), The Transfer of International Technology 1992.
35. ^{^} Caron, Les deux révolutions industrielles du XXe siècle 1999.
36. ^{^} One exception : Gerlier Forest, «Montrer pour démontrer » 1986.
37. ^{^} Schroeder-Gudehus/Rasmussen, Les fastes du progrès 1992. Cf. also, Findling, Historical Dictionary 1990.
38. ^{^} Carré/Corcy/Demeulenaere-Douyère/Hilaire-Pérez, Les expositions universelles en France au XIXe siècle 2012.
39. ^{^} David, Rapport à la Société intercantonale des industries du Jura 1992. The report is full of technical drawings.
40. ^{^} Barjot (ed), Catching up with America 2002.
41. ^{^} Kipping/Bjarnar (eds), The Americanisation of European Business 1998; Schröter (ed), “Une américanisation des entreprises” 1998.
42. ^{^} Uchida, « Technology Transfer » 1990.
43. ^{^} Donzé, « Des importateurs suisses de Yokohama aux fabricants d’horlogerie japonais 2010.