When I read this paper, I recalled a news report from several months ago that describes a robot that can cut and sew fabric into garments. It is so sophisticated that it can handle patterned fabrics so that seams match and pockets are inconspicuous in the finished garment. This machine can produce shirts and dresses that a skilled textile worker would traditionally make. The implications of this invention in less developed countries would be enormous since two of their most important economies are apparel and textiles, as Nagano states in this paper. These are two industries that initiate industrial development in less developed countries. The deployment of this robot in large numbers would displace a labor force that is beginning to develop manufacturing skills and starting the process of rising from poverty.

The paper espouses the opinion that a new digital technology age is the fourth industrial revolution. In developed countries, the effects of new digital technologies are apparent and often cause economic dislocation, resulting in political alienation and instability as machines displace workers on the lower economic rungs. Factories are manned by robots, with only a few highly skilled workers to operate them. Autonomous vehicles are anticipated, and their deployment will displace those whose primary skill is driving a vehicle. The situation in less developed countries will be similar, but more severe in its effects. The economic growth expected by industrialization will be short-circuited and the poor will have no way to improve their situation. This is a recipe for trouble on a global scale.

During the Cold War, global economic development was a political tool of both the Western powers and the Soviet bloc. With the end of the Cold War, the economic development of poor nations is no longer a political tool. Rather, it takes place in an opportunistic way by multinational corporations. The author identifies two ways of dealing with the problem--economic protectionism and a global commitment to tax wealthier nations in support of the less developed. Protectionism contributed to the depth and length of the Great Depression and World War II. The likelihood of the wealthy taxing themselves to help the poor is unlikely. Unfortunately, with either option, the prognosis is grim.