1 Instructor: David Alan Grier Associate Professor International Science and Technology Policy Contact: Grier@Gwu.Edu Office

Syllabu For IAFF 6158:12 The Elliott School of International Affairs George Washington University

Instructor: David Alan Grier Associate Professor International Science and Technology Policy

Office: Skype: dagrierdc Physical Office: 403O in 1957 G Street NW. I hold office hours on Skype, as the most common requests are for appointments in the evening.

COURSE DESCRIPTION This course gives an introduction to the policies and institutions of Information Technology and related industries. It will international and comparative issues, though it is fundamentally grounded in the American experience.

Hybrid Class: This class is listed as a hybrid class, which means that it is taught equally on the internet and in the classroom. It makes heavy use of podcasts as a medium of transmitting lectures so that we can devote the class time to discussions. Over the course of the semester, we will conduct some of our discussions over Skype.

GOALS OF THE COURSE (LEARNING OUTCOMES) To impart to students the intellectual skills needed to engage policy process for information and related technologies. The course will present an overview of the institutions and information.

For this version of the course, the issue is to understand how the ideas that shape scientific and technical communities create natural gaps between them and the greater industrial society.

This course has are two specific learning outcomes. First, students should be sufficiently knowledgable about the policy issues and institutions that they should be able to research a policy question and feel that gathered all the necessary information and contacted all the important players.

Second, students should be able to formulate a policy and a policy argument in a way that engages fully the existing policies, policy frameworks and institutions.

[4] GRADE COMPUTATION

1 Course Grade is calculated as follows: Class Participation: 40% Final paper: 60% All calculations are done with the standard GW 0-4.0 using the divisions for letter grades given in the GW Bulletin.

PROJECT: The major graded work is the project. It is a 5,000-6,000 word paper that treats some policy aspect of information technology. The project has four major components: Prospects: Description of project. One page, see sample below Short paper: a 2,500 word paper plus bibliography. A first attempt to address the policy issue. Draft Paper: 5,000-6,000 word plus bibliography draft of the paper. It will be returned with detailed notes. Final Paper: Finished 5,000-6,000 word plus bibliography completed draft of the paper. It must address all detailed notes.

You may include information in appendices, should you believe that you have more than 6,000 words of material. You may reference this material in your paper. However, the grade of the paper will be based on the central text not the appendices.

This project is a policy paper. Policy papers attempt to solve policy problems. They generally do one of three things. They identify a problem and provide a solution for that problem; or they identify a problem, an existing problem for that solution, and then modify that solution; or they identify a problem and an existing solution and critique the existing solution. It is not an academic paper or a speculative document that reviews the literature and suggests how things might ought to be. It should be grounded in a solid, policy framework.

The paper should have the following form:

Executive Summary One page summary of recommendation of paper Statement of problem and summary of recommendation Short, generally less than 750 words, statement of the policy problem and your solution. Describe the problem as quickly as you can and give a clear statement of how you intend to solve it. You cill develop both sets of ideas in subsequent sections. Background Background to the policy including policy framework, forces shaping discussion, and other efforts to address problem. Full statement of Policy Solution

2 Full statement of Policy solution including the laws or regulations or treaties that would be needed to support the solution and the agencies that would be involved. Summary Roughly 400 word summary of problem and solution. It should give an honest assessment of the weaknesses of the policy or the work that needs to be done. Argument A section that makes the case that this solution is the best way to address the problem.

Bibliography Works used and cited in paper. If you use works that you don’t cite, they are to go in a section entitled “Additional Reading” or something similar.

Grading Rubric Clarity & Expression of text 20% Is the paper readable and make its points logically? Organization of paper 20% Does it follow standard structure and does the argument make sense? Research and Background 30% Does paper include all the appropriate materials for the policy and argument? Policy Construction 30% Does proposed policy make sense within current policy environment?

NOTES ON READINGS: This class makes extensive use of government and think tank reports. The quality of these reports varies widely. Some are carefully conceived and thorough studies of a problem. Many are fairly balanced position papers. They are promoting a specific idea but they do an honest job of considering alternatives. At least a few are lightly varnished advocacy presentations. They pushing a specific point of view and care little for any opposing point of view. This course does not endorse the point of view of any of its readings. If anything, it has the goal of making you a more critical reader and better able to detect a specific point of view.

CALENDAR Recommended Book

Neal, Homer; Smith, Tobin, and McCormick, Jennifer; Beyond Sputnik, University of Michigan, 2008

Week 1: Introduction I: Governments and Information

Cortada, James, “Public Policies and the Development of National Computer Industries in Britain, France and the Soviet Union,” Journal of Contemporary History, 44:3, 2009, 493-512. (http://www.jstor.org/stable/40543045)

Campbell-Kelly, Martin, “Not Only Microsoft,” Business History Review; Spring 2001; 75, 1; pg. 103 -145 Focus on Pages 103-128 and 144-145

Norberg, “Changing Computing,” IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, 18:2, p 40- 54.

Discussion: Price, Michelle Publication info: Wall Street Journal (Online) [New York, N.Y] 15 Feb 2011

Week 2: A little Theory

Bush, Vannevar, “Science the Endless Frontier, A Report to the President of the United States,” Washington, Government Printing Office, 1945.

Dewey, John “Search for the Public,” in The Public and Its Problems, New York, Henry Holt, 1927. The Rise of Big Data: How It's Changing the Way We Think About the World

Cukier, Kenneth; Mayer--Schoenberger, Viktor. Foreign Affairs 92.3 (May/Jun 2013): 28--40.

Week 3: Administrative Procedure, Interagency Process, & Contracts Jackson, Robert, Final Report on Administrative Procedure, 1941. Whittaker, Alan, etc, The Interagency Process, Annual Update 2011, pages 24-42.

______, 21st Century Interagency Process, 2009. Discussion

Castro, Regulating 3D Printing, ITIF, 2013.

Week 4: Regulation - Roadmap

Byron, Sematech, Case Study, NPGS, 1993.

ITRS International Technology Roadmap for Semiconductors, 2011 Update, Overview. Pages (1-4)

Samuel H. Fuller and Lynette I. Millett, Editors , The Future of Computing Performance: Game Over or Next Level?, National Academy of Sciences, Introduction.

Van Atta and Slusarczuk, The Tunnel at the end of the Light, Bridges, 2010.

Discussion Clark and Tan, Taiwan’s Boxed in Economy, Korean Observer, 2012.

______, Taiwan after the Personal Computer, Economist, 2013.

Week 5: Regulation – Standards

Olshan, Standards-Making Organizations and the Rationalization of American Life, : The Sociological Quarterly, Vol. 34, No. 2 (May, 1993), pp. 319-335

Brander, Internet Standards Process Version 3, 1996.

Hurd, John and Issac, Jim, “IT Standardization,” International Journal of IT Standards & Standardization Research; Jan-Jun 2005; 3, 1; pg. 68

Mattli and Buthe, Setting International Standards: Technological Rationality or Primacy of Power?: World Politics, Vol. 56, No. 1 (Oct., 2003), pp. 1-42

Krechmer, Ken, “Standardization and Innovation Policies in the Information Age,” International Journal of IT Standards & Standardization Research; Jul-Dec 2004; 2, 2; pg. 49

______, Overview of the U. S. Standardization System, ANSI, 2010.

______, U. S. Standards Strategy, ANSI, 2000.

Breitenberg, Maureen, “The ABCS of Standards Activities,” NIST NISTIR 7614.

Discussion:

5 Hui, From Self-Innovation to International Standardization: A Case Study of TD-SCDMA in China Seoul Journal of Economics 26.1 (Spring 2013): 113-146.

Extra: RFC-2026 Internet Standards, 1996 Endre Grøtnes , “The Work of an International Standardization Consortia: Paths Towards its Current Structure,” IGI Publishers 2008. ,

Week 6: Procurement: - Research Litan et al, Commercializing University Innovations: Alternative Approaches, Innovation Policy and the Economy, Vol. 8 (2007), pp. 31-57

______, Assessing Impacts of Changes in the Information R&D Ecosystem, National Research Council, 2009, Chapter 2.

______, TRANSFORMATION AND OPPORTUNITY: THE FUTURE OF THE U.S. RESEARCH ENTERPRISE, PCAST, 2012.

______, Report on the future of IT Research, NAS, 2012.

Harsha, Peter and Norr, Melissa, Computing Research in the FY 2015 Budget., AAAS, 2014.

2015 FYI R&D Budget, and Introduction, AAAS

2013 AAAS Sequestration Brief

Kennedy, Joseph, V., “Sources and Uses of US Science Funding,” New Atlantis, 2012.

Hourinan, AAAS Brief, Federal R&D Sequestration, 2013

Malakoff, Sequestration would Cut US Science Budgets by 8.2%, Science Insider, 2013.

Discussion Information Technology Annual Report 2012-2013, Government of India.

Week 7: Procurement - Egoverment Services

6 Jefferson, David, “What Happened in Sarasota County?”, The Bridge Summer 2007, vol 37 no 2, p 17-23

Spafford, Eugene, “Voter Assurance”, The Bridge Summer 2007, vol 37 no 2, p 28-34.

Alvarez, Michael R., and Antonson, Erik, , “Bridging Science, Technology and Politics in Election Systems?”, The Bridge Summer 2007, vol 37 no 2, p 6-10

Hiullman, Grace, “E-voting and Democracy in America”, The Bridge Summer 2007, vol 37 no 2, p 11-16

Holt, Rush, “Legal Issues, Policy Issues and the Future of Democracy”, The Bridge Summer 2007, vol 37 no 2, p 24-27

______, PCAST report on BYOD.

Discussion:

Coleman, et al, New Democracies, new media, what is new?, 2009

Kim, Soonhee and Kim Donghwan, “South Korean Public Officials’ Perceptions of Values, Failure, and Consequences of Failure in E- Government Leadership, Public Performance & Management Review, Vol 26, no 4, Jun 2003, p 360-375

Background:

______, Egovernment Report to Congress, PCAST, 2012.

______, EAC Annual Report, 2009.

______, Helps America Votes Act, 2002

______, Egovernance act of 2003

Weeks 8 & 9: Collective Action – Networks

______, Report To The President And Congress Designing A Digital Future: Federally Funded Research And Development In Networking And Informaation Technology, PCAST, 2013.

7 Colar and Girasa, “Who Governs the Internet?”, The Business Review, Cambridge, Vol. 16, Num. 2, December, 2010

Hellerstein, Walter, “Deconstructing the Debate over State Taxaction of Elecctronic Commerce,” Harvard Journal of Law and Technology, September 2000.

______, Global Networks and Local values, National Academies of Science, 2001, Chapters 7 & 9.

______, “Designed for Change,” ITIF, 2009.

Geist, Michael, “Approaches to Preserving the Open Internet,” Presentation at FCC Workshop, April 28, 2010.

Kruger, Lennard, Internet Governance and the Domain Name System, Congressional Research Service, 2014.

Gilroy, Angele, Access to Broadband Networks, Congressional Research Service, 2014.

Wilkie, Simon, “A Primer on the Economics of Net Neutrality,” Presentation at FCC Workshop, April 28, 2010.

______, Tier 1 ISPs, IDG White Paper, 2006.

Hass, Douglas, “The Network was never was neutral,” Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 2007

______, China’s Social Networking Problem, Spectrum, 2011.

Background: Atkinson, Robert D and Weiser, Philip, “A ‘Third Way’ on Network Neutrality,” ITIF, 2006

______, Measuring Broadband American, FCC, 2012.

?? Berners-Lee, Tim, WWW, Past Present and Future, Computer, October, 1996, p 69-78.

Weiss, Allen, “The Commercialization of the Internet,” Electronic Networking, Vol. 2 No. 3, 1992.

8 Cannon, The legacy of the federal communications commission's computer inquires, Federal Communications Law Journal; Mar 2003; 55, 2; pg. 167

Week 10: Collective Action - Cybersecurity/Smartgrid ______, Cybersecurity, a Crisis of Prioritization, Washington DC, 2005. Chapters 1 & 2 & 3,

______, Policy Framework for the 21st Century Grid, PCAST 2012, Chapters 5, & 6.

______. Cyberspace Policy review, 2010, PCAST.

______, A Report to Congress Pursuant to the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2011, Section 934, November 2011

______, International Strategy for Cyberspace, Prosperity, Security, and Openness in a Networked World, PCAST, 2011

Informing Strategies and Developing Options for U.S. Policy Committee on Deterring Cyberattacks; National Research Council 2010

Kostyk and Herkert, Societal Implications of the Emerging Smart Grid, CACM, 2012

Council on Foreign Relations, Defening an Open, Global, Secrure and resilient Internet, Independent Task Force Report No. 70, 2013.

Week 11: Procurement – Big Data & Medical Records Mir, Sarah, “The Hipaa Privacy Rule, Maintinaing the Confidentiality of Medical Records Part I,” Journal of Health Care Compliance, March April 2011, 5-14.

Mir, Sarah, “The Hipaa Privacy Rule, Maintinaing the Confidentiality of Medical Records Part II,” Journal of Health Care Compliance, May June 2011, 35-78.

______, Report To The President Realizing The Full Potential Of Health Information Technology To Improve Healthcare For Americans: The Path Forward, Pcast, 2010.

Castro, The Role of Information Technology in Medical Research, ITIF, 2009.

9 Troy, Health Information Technology: The Case for a Sound Federal Policy, Heritage, 2009

DeHaven, Subsidies for Electronic Medical Records Leads to Higher Medicare Bills, CATO, 2013

______, “National Plan for Civil Earth Observation”, PCAST, July 2014. ______, “Report to the President: Big Data and Privacy,” PCAST, May 2014.

Discussion

Krakovsky, Indians Elephantine Effort, CACM, 2011.

Week 12: Collective Action - Workforce Autor, David; Levy, Frank; and Murnane, Richard, “The Skill Content of Recent Technological Change,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol 118 no 4, November 2003.

Levy, F. (2010), “How Technology Changes Demands for Human Skills”, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 45, OECD Publishing

______, Networking and Information Technology Workforce Study: 2009, NITRD. Chapters 2 & 4

Discussion: NASCOMM and Naitonal Skills Registry

______, White Paper On Hr’s Role In ‘Nurturing Innovation In Organizations’ Nascomm, 2013

Background: Aspray et al, Globalization and Offshoring of Software, ACM.CRA, 2006, Chapter 8.

Week 13: External Action – Intellectual Property Protections

Gaff et al, Open Source Software, Computer, 2012. Gaff et al, Intellectual Property I, 2012. Gaff et al, Intellectual Property II, Computer, 2012. Gaff et al, The Troll Under the Bridge, Computer, 2013.

______, The Economic Impact of Properly liscenced software, BSA, 2013.

Samuelson, “Do Software Copyrights Protect What Programs Do?” CACM, 2012.

Discussion ______,Shadow Market, 2012 Software Piracy Study, BSA.

Week 14: External Action: Trade & WTO

______, Introduction to the WTO, WTO, Chapters 1, 2.1. 2.2, 2.6, 2.7, 2.8, 4.

Maskus, “Intellectual Property Right and Global Intellectual Challenges,” in Private Rights and Public Problems: The Global Economics of Intellectual Property in the 21st Century, Peterson Institute, 2012.

Maskus, Regulatory Standards in the WTO Peterson Institute for International Economics January 2000

Chaturvedi and Mohanty, “The WTO and Trade in Electronically Delivered Software,” Journal of World Trade, 2008.

Gaff, Brian, Understanding US Trade Controls, Computer, November 2013.

Kiriyama, Nobuo, Trade in Information and Communications Technology and its Contribution to Trade and Innovation, OECD Working Paper 115. 2011.

Wunsch-Vincent and McIntosh, WTO, E-commerce, and Information Technologies From the Uruguay Round through the Doha Development Agenda A Report for the UN ICT Task Force Peterson Institute, 2003. Pages 1-36.

11 ______, The Compliance Gap, Business Software Alliance, 2014.

______, Powering the Digital Economy, Business Software Alliance, 2014.

Samuelson, Pamela, “Does Copyright Law Need to be Reformed?” CACM, 2012, 54:7, p 29-31.

Samuelson, Pamela, “Too Many Copyrights?” CACM, 2007, 50:10, p 19- 23.

Background: ______, “Ministerial Declaration on Trade in Information Technology Products,” WTO, 1996.

Vernon, Raymond, “International Investment and the International Trade in the Product Cycle,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol 80, no 2, May 1966.

Lipton, Bad Faith In Cyberspace: Grounding Domain Name Theory In Trademark, Property, And Restitution. Harvard Law review, 2010.

Gary Cook, How Green is your Cloud, Greenpeace International, 2012.

First Day of Final Exams: Final Draft Due

Fall 2014 Dates Week 1: August 28 Week 2: September 4 Week 3: September 11 – Week 4: September 18 Week 5: September 25 Due: Prospectus Week 6: October 2 Week 7: October 9 Week 8: October 16 Due: Short Paper Week 9: October 23 - Rescheduled because of CCF Meetings Week 10: October 30 Week 11: November 5 – Rescheduled because of IEEE meetings Draft Paper Due Week 12: November 12 Week 13: November 19

November 26 - University Holiday Week 14: December 4

12 Final draft of final paper due: December 13

Class Policies Blackboard: This course does not use the blackboard system. It uses the site itpolicy.dagrier.net. Submissions: All work should be submitted as a Word (.doc or .docx file) from Microsoft Word 98 or later.

[NOTE: for other university policies on teaching, see http://www.gwu.edu/~academic/Teaching/main.htm ]

[b] Academic Integrity Academic dishonesty is defined as cheating of any kind, including misrepresenting one's own work, taking credit for the work of others without crediting them and without appropriate authorization, and the fabrication of information. For the remainder of the code, see: http://www.gwu.edu/~ntegrity/code.html

[d] Support for Students Outside the Classroom DISABILITY SUPPORT SERVICES (DSS) Any student who may need an accommodation based on the potential impact of a disability should contact the Disability Support Services office at 202-994-8250 in the Marvin Center, Suite 242, to establish eligibility and to coordinate reasonable accommodations. For additional information please refer to: http://gwired.gwu.edu/dss/

UNIVERSITY COUNSELING CENTER (UCC) 202-994-5300 The University Counseling Center (UCC) offers 24/7 assistance and referral to address students' personal, social, career, and study skills problems. Services for students include: - crisis and emergency mental health consultations - confidential assessment, counseling services (individual and small group), and referrals http://gwired.gwu.edu/counsel/CounselingServices/AcademicSupport Services

[d] Security In the case of an emergency, if at all possible, the class should shelter in place. If the building that the class is in is affected, follow the evacuation procedures for the building. After evacuation, seek shelter at a predetermined rendezvous location.

13 Sample Prospectus

Proposed Policy: This policy we must support the development of innovative communities by funding long term internship in innovative areas such as Bangalore or Silicon Valley for city planners and technology managers.

Background: So much innovation has come from tight-knit technology communities such as Seattle or Singapore but little has been done to truly transfer the experience of those communities to other areas. This policy proposes that the US government establishes a grant program for city and technology managers to have a long term internship in an innvoatinve area and learn how research and industry work in that area.

Locus of Policy: This policy would produce a new program that would be administered by the National Science Foundation.

Organizational or Legal change: In theory this program might require an act of Congress but in could easily be done with an information understanding between The Chiar of the Science & Technology Committee in the House and the Head of the NSF with a change in the budget.

Support and Material for Policy: This policy will draw heavily from the ideas developed in the innovative communities and from work done at Brookings about 8 years ago.

Sources: ______, Knowledge-Based Industries in Asia, Paris, OECD, 2000.

Leslie, Stuart “Regional Disadvantage: Replicating Silicon Valley ,” Technology and Culture, Vol 42, No 2, April 2001, 236-264.

Kostoff, R. N., Johnson, D., Bowles, C. A. and Dodbele, S. Assessment of India’s Research Literature, Defense Technical Research Center Technical Report, Fort Belvoir, VA, 2006.

Sringivasan, T. N., “Information Technology Enabled Services and India’s Growth Prospects,” Brookings Trade Forum, 2005.

Varma, U. K and Sasikumar, S. K, “Information and Communication Technology and Decent Work: A Study of India’s Experience,” ILO/JILPT Networking of National Institutions of Labour Studies in the Asia Pacific Region, 2004.