The Competitiveness of Nations

in a Global Knowledge-Based Economy

2nd Draft March 2005

Table of Contents

11.0 End Notes

Index

1.0 Introduction

2.0 Problem

3.0 Methodology

4.0 Monad

5.0 Dyad

6.0 Triad

7.0 Qubit

8.0 Quintessence

9.0 Competitiveness

 

1.0 Introduction

[A] Derivation of knowledge in the tetraktys is captured in a short poem by Apatow:

The Monad is the Father Embracing all that will be.

The Dyad, the form of Difference, and

Mother of Multiplicity.

The Triad, the first actual number,

With Beginning, End, and Mean,

The Tetrad completes the arrangement

Of the Soul and what is seen.

(Apatow 1999)

 Index

2.0 Problem

 [A] In response to creation of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) among the market economies in 1947, the Soviet Union created the Council for Mutual Economic Cooperation (COMECON) that arranged trade between communist countries based on material balances rather than market prices.  In 1991, COMECON was formally dissolved and its former members joined, or are trying to join, the WTO.

[B] This bulwark is about to be tested because the so-called ‘peace clause’ exempting agricultural subsidies from WTO jurisdiction lapsed on December 31, 2003.  WTO ‘courts’ are now open to receive and hear complaints.  They are likely to rule against the Great Powers and their programs of agricultural subsidies.  Given the politically charged nature of agriculture, how will they respond – acquiesce, ignore (as France and Germany have recently done with EU deficit standards) or repudiate the WTO and, if so, with what consequences? (The Economist, “Ditching the peace”, January 1, 2004)

[C] Of Bentham, Marshall wrote: “On the whole the most influential of the immediate successors of Adam Smith was Bentham.  He wrote little on economics himself, but he went far towards setting the tone of the rising school of English economists at the beginning of the nineteenth century... [who] therefore were inclined to think that the influence of custom and sentiment in business affairs was harmful, that in England at least it had diminished, was diminishing, and would soon vanish away: and the disciples of Bentham were not slow to conclude that they need not concern themselves much about custom.  It was enough for them to discuss the tendencies of man's action on the supposition that everyone was always on the alert to find out what course would best promote his own interest and was free and quick to follow it.” (Marshall 1920: 628).

Marshall went on: “Another way in which he influenced the young economists around him was through his passionate desire for security.  He was indeed an ardent reformer.  He was an enemy of all artificial distinctions between different classes of men; he declared with emphasis that any one man's happiness was as important as any other's, and that the aim of all action should be to increase the sum total of happiness, he admitted that other things being equal, this sum total would be greater the more equally wealth was distributed.  Nevertheless so full was his mind of the terror of the French Revolution, and so great were the evils which he attributed to the smallest attack on security that, daring analyst as he was, he felt himself and fostered in his disciples an almost superstitious reverence for the existing institutions of private property.” (Marshall 1920: 628, ft 2).

Schumpeter credits Bentham with “having created something that was new in literature... namely, the shallowest of all conceivable philosophies of life that stands indeed in a position of irreconcilable antagonism to the rest of them.” (Schumpeter 1954:132-4).

Even more damming, John Maynard Keynes observed:  “I do now regard that as the worm which has been gnawing at the insides of modern civilization and is responsible for its present moral decay.  We used to regard the Christians as the enemy, because they appeared as the representatives of tradition, convention and hocus-pocus.  In truth, it was the Benthamite calculus, based on an over-valuation of the economic criterion, which was destroying the quality of the popular Ideal.  Moreover, it was this escape from Bentham, ... which has served to protect the whole lot of us from the final reductio ad absurdum of Benthamism known as Marxism.” (Keynes 1949, 96-7)

[D] According to Freeman: “Circular causality expresses the interrelations between levels in a hierarchy: a top-down macroscopic state simultaneously influences microscopic particles that bottom-up create and sustain the macroscopic state.  The state exists over a span of inner time in the system that can be collapsed to a point in external time.  Events in real time are marked by changes in the state of the system, which are discrete.” (Freeman, 1999)

[E] Accepting the strict assumptions of the Standard Model results in an outcome known as ‘perfect competition’ in which no consumer or producer exercises market power, all costs are internalized in market price and all benefits are captured by the consumer.  It is ironic that under these strict assumptions there is no role for the State in the economy, i.e., the same outcome as under perfect communism with its Marxian withering away of the State.

[F] Of industrial districts, Marshall notes: “inventions and improvements in machinery, in processes and the general organisation of the business have their merits promptly discussed: if one man starts up a new idea, it is taken up by others and combined with suggestions of their own; and thus it becomes the source of further new ideas.” (Marshall, 1920, p. 271) 

[G] Quoting Marshall: “Education in art stands on a somewhat different footing from education in hard thinking: for while the latter nearly always strengthens the character, the former not infrequently fails to do this. Nevertheless the development of the artistic faculties of the people is in itself an aim of the very highest importance, and is becoming a chief factor of industrial efficiency.... Increasingly wealth is enabling people to buy things of all kinds to suit the fancy, with but a secondary regard to their powers of wearing; so that in all kinds of clothing and furniture it is every day more true that it is the pattern which sells the things.” (Marshall 1920, 177-8)

Index

3.0 Methodology

 [A] “Economists have therefore to cope with two intrinsic difficulties of system analysis - the definition of system boundaries and the specification of system structure.  On the one hand, all economic systems are sub-systems - sub-systems both of larger economic systems (unless one is explicitly dealing with the world economy) and also of more broadly defined human and ecological systems; thus interdependencies transcend the bounds of [the system being studied.]” (Loasby 1971, 863)

[B] “Symbols gather round the thing to be explained, understood, interpreted.  The act of becoming conscious consists in the concentric grouping of symbols around the object, all circumscribing and describing the unknown from many sides.  Each symbol lays bare another essential side of the object to be grasped, points to another facet of meaning.  Only the canon of these symbols congregating about the center in question, the coherent symbol group, can lead to an understanding of what the symbols point to and of what they are trying to express” (Neumann 1954, 7).

[C] Loasby catches the dilemma in writing of organizational behaviour: “This is not an area in which the economist has any special skill; but it is work which comes naturally to psychologists, sociologists and organization theorists.  Unfortunately, psychologists, sociologists and organization theorists agree rather less often than economists, so that the economist who wishes to use their ideas is faced with the problem of choosing between them” (Loasby 1967, 172-173).

Index

4.0 Monad

[A] “The ultimate repositories of technological knowledge in any society are the men comprising it...  In itself a firm possesses no knowledge.  That which is available to it belongs to the men associated with it.  Its production function is really built up in exactly the same way, and from the same basic ingredients, as society’s.” (Graf 1957)

[B] One longs, indeed, for a unit of knowledge, which perhaps might be called a “wit,” analogous to the “bit” as used in information theory; but up to now at any rate no such practical unit has emerged.  It is certainly tempting to think of knowledge as a capital stock of information, knowledge being to information what capital is to income, and to use the bit itself in the form of a stock as the measure of knowledge.  Certainly the improbability of a structure, which is what the bit really measures, is highly related to the knowledge concept.  The bit, however, abstracts completely from the content of either information or knowledge, and while it is enormously useful for telephone engineers, who have no interest in what is being said over their telephones, for purposes of the social system theorist we need a measure which takes account of significance and which would weight, for instance, the gossip of a teenager rather low and the communications over the hot line between Moscow and Washington rather high.  Up to now we seem to have no way of doing this, short of a kind of qualitative guesswork, though even this will be better than nothing.” (Boulding 1966, 2-3)

[C] “… all through an organism's existence, from birth to death, it passes through a series of genetically programmed changes.  Plainly language growth is simply one of these predetermined changes.  Language depends upon a genetic endowment that's on a par with the ones that specify the structure of our visual or circulatory systems, or determine we have arms instead of wings.  (Chomsky, 1983, 116)

Take for example, the aesthetic sense.  We like and understand Beethoven because we are humans with a particular, genetically determined mental constitution.  The same thing is as true for art as it is for science.  The fact that we can understand and appreciate certain kinds of art has a flip side.  There must be all kinds of domains of artistic achievement that are beyond our mind's capacities to understand.  Much of the new work in art and science since (the late nineteenth century) is meaningless to the ordinary person.

Take modern music - post-Schonbergian music.  Many artists say if you don't understand modern music it's because you haven't listened enough.  But modern music wouldn't be accessible to me if I listened to it forever.  Modern music is accessible to professionals and may be to people with a special bent but it's not accessible to the ordinary person who doesn't have a particular quirk of mind that enables him to grasp modern music let alone make him want to deal with it.” (Chomsky, 1983, 172)

[D]  “Nothing is more characteristic and symptomatic in this respect than the gulf that has opened out between faith and knowledge:  The contrast has become so enormous that one is obliged to speak of the incommensurability of these two categories and their way of looking at the world.  And yet they are concerned with the same empirical world in which we live, for even the theologians tell us that faith is supported by facts that became historically perceptible in this known world of ours - namely that Christ was born as a real human being, worked many miracles and suffered his fate, died under Pontius Pilate, and rose up in the flesh after his death.  Theology rejects any tendency to take the assertions of its earliest records as written myths and, accordingly, to understand them symbolically.  Indeed, it is the theologians themselves who have recently made the attempt - no doubt as a concession to “knowledge” - to “demythologize” the object of their faith while drawing the line quite arbitrarily at the crucial points.  But to the critical intellect it is only too obvious that myth is an integral component of all religions and therefore cannot be excluded from the assertions of faith without injuring them.” (Jung [1918] 1970, 285)

[E] “It used to be that scientists learned about what their colleagues did by reading journals.  Actually they used to read books, then things moved so fast they read only papers, then even faster so they read only letters to the editor in their rapid publication journals. Now they are moving so fast that they do not read but telephone each other, and meet at society meetings and conferences, preferably in beautiful hotels in elegant towns around the world.  They get by in what are now called “invisible colleges” of little groups of peers.  They are small societies of everybody who is anybody in each little particular speciality.  These groups are very efficient for their purpose and, somewhere along the line, people eventually write [their findings and thoughts] up.” (Price, D. de S. 1963)

[F] “THERE is an island in the ocean where in 1914 a few Englishmen, Frenchmen, and Germans lived.  No cable reaches that island, and the British mail steamer comes but once in sixty days.  In September it had not yet come, and the islanders were still talking about the latest newspaper which told about the approaching trial of Madame Caillaux for the shooting of Gaston Calmette.  It was, therefore, with more than usual eagerness that the whole colony assembled at the quay on a day in mid-September to hear from the captain what the verdict had been.  They learned that for over six weeks now those of them who were English and those of them who were French had been fighting in behalf of the sanctity of treaties against those of them who were Germans.  For six strange weeks they had acted as if they were friends, when in fact they were enemies.” (Lippman 1922, 1)

[G]Although he (Mauryama) seems no longer to favour the term, he defined paradigmatology as the “science of structures of reasoning” whether between disciplines, professions, cultures or individuals.  He notes that the “problem of communication between different structures of reasoning had not been raised until recently”, since scholars tended either to advocate their own approach or describe that of others.  Contributing to this neglect is the fact that the choice between logics is based on factors which are beyond and independent of any logic.”

Encyclopedia of World Problems and Human Potential

http://www.uia.org/strategies/stratcom_bodies.php?kap=53

[H]Putting it this way, we become aware of the incommensurability of the two things combined in a technical performance.  Suppose you hammer in a nail.  Before starting, you look at the hammer, the nail and the board into which you will drive it; the result is knowledge which you can put into words.  Then you hammer in the nail.  The result is a deed: something is now firmly nailed on.  Of this you can have knowledge, but it is not itself knowledge.  It is a material change which counts as an achievement.  Knowledge can be true or false, while action can only be successful or unsuccessful, right or wrong.

It follows that an observing which prepares a contriving must seek knowledge that is not merely true, but also useful as a guide to a practical performance.  It must strive for applicable knowledge.

The conceptual framework of applicable knowledge is different from that of pure knowledge.  It is determined primarily in terms of the successful performances to which such knowledge is relevant.  Take hammering again.  This performance implies the conception of a hammer, which defines a class of objects that are (actual or potential) hammers.  It will include, apart from the usual tools of this kind, rifle butts, shoe heels and fat dictionaries, and establish at the same time a grading of these tools according to suitability.  The suitability of an object to serve as a hammer is an observable property, but it can be observed only within the framework defined by the performance it is supposed to serve.” (M. Polanyi, 1962a, 174-75)

[I] “In the progress of the division of labour, the employment of the far greater part of those who live by labour, that is, of the great body of the people, comes to be confined to a few very simple operations; frequently to one or two.  But the understandings of the greater part of men are necessarily formed by their ordinary employments.  The man whose whole life is spent in performing a few simple operations, of which the effects, too, are perhaps always the same, or very nearly the same, has no occasion to exert his understanding, or to exercise his invention, in finding out expedients for removing difficulties which never occur.  He naturally loses, therefore, the habit of such exertion, and generally becomes as stupid and ignorant as it is possible for a human creature to become.  The torpor of his mind renders him not only incapable of relishing or bearing a part in any rational conversation, but of conceiving any generous, noble, or tender sentiment, and consequently of forming any just judgment concerning many even of the ordinary duties of private life.  Of the great and extensive interests of his country he is altogether incapable of judging; and unless very particular pains have been taken to render him otherwise, he is equally incapable of defending his country in war.  The uniformity of his stationary life naturally corrupts the courage of his mind, and makes him regard, with abhorrence, the irregular, uncertain, and adventurous life of a soldier.  It corrupts even the activity of his body, and renders him incapable of exerting his strength with vigour and perseverance in any other employment, than that to which he has been bred.  His dexterity at his own particular trade seems, in this manner, to be acquired at the expense of his intellectual, social, and martial virtues.  But in every improved and civilized society, this is the state into which the labouring poor, that is, the great body of the people, must necessarily fall, unless government takes some pains to prevent it.”

Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations,

PART. II. Of the Expense of the Institution for the Education of Youth. 1776.

Index

5.0 Dyad

[A]  “There is a similar relationship between the things we make and a complex of human capacities that include skills, know-how, the ability to visualize, and, indeed, beliefs, the nexus often referred to as “tacit knowledge.”  (Baird 2004, 129)

[B] “But, in our twentieth century, we still have slaves who do most of the work.  These now are those mechanical devices.  Our native hands (organisms) are comparatively inactive while the mechanized extension does the job, for example, carving a turkey with an electrified knife or embroidering with a sewing machine.  Thus is the agent now being subtly induced into assuming an aristocratic, stand-offish relation to the work being done by automated things around him.  Or, if that is too strong, the agent is at least being deprived of actions of his native arms and legs that used to express and articulate him - actions in which he would come alive.  Automation is taking the place of some of these, and there is a caution to be issued about this.  A kind of aristocratic superiority to doing homely, expressive things with the native hand is growing, or becoming simply a boredom, and the result is a shriveling of the native organism as a whole, in favor of automata that crowd it out.  The psychology of this is complex and must be anxiously watched.” (Aldrich 1969, 383)

[C] Arguably, this emotional distancing from the object of investigation called scientific objectivity reflects a mélange of Platonic universalism, Stoic acceptance of life the way it is and the otherworldliness of Christianity that characterizes much of the western ethos. 

[D] “The term ‘design’ covers the mutual employment of the material and the propositional, as well as hybrid forms such as drawings, computer simulations, and material models.  However, design must be understood to embrace material knowledge as well as ideational knowledge.  The “design paradigm” is the most promising recent development in the epistemology of technology, but it must not lose track of this central insight about design.  Thought and design are not restricted to processes conducted in language.” (Baird 2004, 149)

[E] Today there are pattern recognition journals in computer science, engineering, mathematics and psychology.  Examples include: the  International Journal of Pattern Recognition and Artificial Intelligence (IJPRAI); the Journal of the Pattern Recognition Society (PR); Pattern Recognition Letters (PRL); Pattern Recognition and Image Analysis (PRIA); and, Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence (PAMI). 

[F] “Thus my thesis is that the major problem at present confronting us in scientific methodology, leaving aside creativity, namely how we choose between various hypotheses and data and come up with an “improved” scientific edifice, is just another aspect of a fundamental human capability, that of pattern recognition and processing.  Indeed I would go further and maintain that, since pattern processing is so characteristic a human activity, then if the logic of scientific discovery is something different from it, we need to find an explanation for this difference.” (Sparkes 1972, 36) 

[G] “Rule preference is of an essentially aesthetic nature.  Symmetry, simplicity, straightforwardness, analogy, and other formal features contribute to distinguish a good rule from a bad one.  The clarity of a rule is, however, not a number that can simply be attached to it or springs from a calculation of the clarity values of its components.  Just like beauty “is not in any of the parts or members of a pillar, but results from the whole,” the beauty or attractiveness of a rule depends on its overall pattern, and how well it fits in with other rules in the prevailing set of customs.” (Schlicht 2000, 40)

[H] “Design is clearly distinct from philosophy, including natural philosophy.  It is, as both Aristotle and modern engineers have held, an attribute of a human being which may be expressed in an object but which is not identical with the object itself.  At the outset, design is an adaptation of means to some preconceived end.  This I take to be the central purpose of technology… Design involves a structure or pattern, a particular combination of details or component parts, and it is precisely the gestalt or pattern that is of the essence for the designer.”  (Layton 1974, 37)

[I] “The dramatic new evidence that altered completely the nature of cosmology did so, not by any intellectual prowess on Galileo’s part, but by revealing new evidence, the existence of which had never been suspected.  The telescope was not devised to seek such evidence, and it was not used primarily to gain more.  Its purpose was to inject each new telescope owner into this world of what can only be called “artificial revelation”.  The term is not used lightly.  Galileo was not so conceited as to think that he was brighter than all previous authorities; he knew that he had been presented with decisive new evidence of the structure of nature.” (Price 1984, 9)

[J] I am, however, supported in my choice of terms, by a number of scholars including Erich Jantsch (1967; 1975). From working on technological forecasting and assessment in the 1960s he moved on to ‘systems philosophy’ in the 1970s in an attempt to integrate understanding of human knowledge from astrophysics to table manners.  His unifying concept is captured in the title of his 1975 book Design for Evolution: Self-Organization and Planning in the Life of Human Systems.   In this use, the term ‘design’ captures the organic, mutable and fuzzy nature of this realm of knowing.

[K] “Just how special that community must be if science is to survive and grow may be indicated by the very tenuousness of humanity’s hold on the scientific enterprise.  Every civilization of which we have records has possessed a technology, an art, a religion, a political system, laws, and so on.  In many cases those facets of civilization have been as developed as our own.  But only the civilizations that descend from Hellenic Greece have possessed more than the most rudimentary science.  The bulk of scientific knowledge is a product of Europe in the last four centuries. No other place and time has supported the very special communities from which scientific productivity comes.”  (Kuhn 1996, 167-168)

[L] “I do recognize, however, that there is something unique in any evolved scientific attitude, which is neither philosophic nor aesthetic but only itself, and it is precisely this sense of uniqueness that we also find in the psychological attitude which animates the heuristic method of our present study.  It may be that this method will reveal not only the existence of a psychological attitude but that of a scientific attitude of which the psychological is a part.  But certainly, because of their so very recent appearance in history, we cannot claim for science or psychology the same epistemological authenticity that we can demonstrate in the four basic cultural attitudes as they originated and grew out of history into their contemporary forms.”  (Henderson 1984, 77)

[M] Of Newton, Goethe writes: “A great mathematician was possessed with an entirely false notion on the physical origin of colour; yet, owing to his great authority as a geometer, the mistakes which he committed as an experimentalist long became sanctioned in the eyes of the world ever fettered in prejudice.” (Goethe [1970] 1810, para 726)

[N] Using its opposable thumb, humanity reached out to shape the material world to compensate for its elemental frailty – no great size, no claws or talons and tiny canine teeth.  To eat and survive predation, the human brain reached out with finger-thumb coordination to grasp and shape parts of the world into tools with which to then manipulate other parts, e.g., to kill game or plant seeds.  It appears, from the fossil record, that the opposable thumb preceded, and in a path-dependent manner contributed to, the subsequent and extraordinarily rapid evolutionary growth and development of the human brain itself. 

Index

6.0 Triad

[A] “But, more than having become merely another overly vague bit of fashionable economic jargon, ‘tacit knowledge’ now is an increasingly ‘loaded’ buzzword, freighted with both methodological implications for micro-economic theory in general, and policy significance for the economics of science and technology, innovation, and economic growth.  Indeed, references to ‘tacitness’ have become a platform used by some economists to launch fresh attacks upon national policies of public subsidization for R&D activities, and equally by other economists to construct novel rationales for governmental funding of science and engineering research and training programs.” (Cowan, David & Foray 2000, 212-213)

[B] “The dramatic new evidence that altered completely the nature of cosmology did so, not by any intellectual prowess on Galileo’s part, but by revealing new evidence, the existence of which had never been suspected.  The telescope was not devised to seek such evidence, and it was not used primarily to gain more.  Its purpose was to inject each new telescope owner into this world of what can only be called “artificial revelation”.  The term is not used lightly.  Galileo was not so conceited as to think that he was brighter than all previous authorities; he knew that he had been presented with decisive new evidence of the structure of nature.” (Price 1984, 9)

[C] “Such is the power of instrumentalities, old and new, that they are probably also the chief agent for the sociological and substantive disaggregation of the chief scientific and technological disciplines into their constituent subdisciplines and invisible colleges.  Scientists and engineers seem to be bound together in their invisible colleges, not so much by any communality of their paradigms, ways of thought, and cognitive training, as by a guild-like communality of the tools and instrumentalities that they use in their work.” (Price 1984, 15) 

[D] “It appears also that instrumentation requirements sometimes serve as a powerful device for bringing together research scientists from separate disciplines.  X-ray crystallography played such a role in the development of molecular biology, precisely because it is, in effect, an instrument-embodied technique.”  (Rosenberg 1994, 156)

[E] “Think, for example, of the physical knowledge embodied in a thermometer.  To contest that knowledge would be to fight on many fronts against many institutionalized activities that depend upon treating the thermometer as a “black box.”  Intercalating science or technology into larger and larger networks of action is what makes them durable.  When all the elements in a network act together to protect an item of knowledge, then that knowledge is strong and we come to call it scientific.  The central modern scientific phenomenon to which attention is directed is thus metrology - the development of standards and their circulation around the world.” (Shapin 1995, 306-307)

[F] “Take for example the identification of a thing as a tool.  It implies that a useful purpose can be achieved by handling the thing as an instrument for that purpose.  I cannot identify the thing as a tool if I do not know what it is for - or if knowing its supposed purpose, I believe it to be useless for that purpose.” (Polanyi 1962a, 56)

[G] “The polis is the place of art... The magus, the. poet who, like Orpheus and Arion is also a supreme sage, can make stones of music.  One version of the myth has it that the walls of Thebes were built by songs, the poet's voice and harmonious learning summoning brute matter into stately civic forum.  The implicit metaphors are far reaching: the “numbers” of music and of poetry are cognate with the proportionate use and division of matter and space; the poem and the built city are exemplars both of the outward, living shapes of reason.  And only in the city can the poet, the dramatist, the architect find an audience sufficiently compact, sufficiently informed to yield him adequate echo.  Etymology preserves this link between “public”, in the sense of the literary or theatrical public and the “republic” meaning the assembly in the space and governance of the city.” (Steiner, 1976)

[H] “… the fact that the soldier could [now] choose any bayonet and still fit it on to the muzzle of his gun - even though the two pieces of metal had been manufactured several hundred kilometres apart - testifies to the fact that technical knowledge had been taken out of the domain of private and local knowledge, and moved up to a more general level of organization… It is no accident that these mass interchangeable bayonets proved eminently suitable for the mass army fielded by the French régime during the Revolutionary wars.” (Alder 1998, 536)

[I] “A central point for Babbage is that an extensive division of labor is itself an essential prerequisite to technical change.  This is so for two related reasons.  First of all, technical improvements are not generally dependent upon a few rarely gifted individuals, although the more “beautiful combinations” are indeed the work of the occasional genius (p. 260).  Rather, and secondly, inventive activity needs to be seen as a consequence as well as a cause of the division of labor.  This is so because “The arts of contriving, of drawing, and of executing, do not usually reside in their greatest perfection in one individual; and in this, as in other arts, the division of labor must be applied” (p. 266; emphasis Babbage’s). (Rosenberg 1994, 32)

[J] “Before 1854, British gunmaking was concentrated in a large but complicated structure of handicraft firms, mainly located in Birmingham, and producing firearms to individual order or in very small batches.  American gunmakers were at this time engaged in mass production of both civilian and military weapons.  These weapons had interchangeable parts, a fact which the British found to be almost unbelievable.  This production required a number of machines which were virtually unknown in Britain before the hearings.  The Enfield Arsenal was equipped almost entirely with machinery of American design and manufacture; and American workers were brought to England to introduce the machines and to train English workers in their use.” (Ames & Rosenberg 1968, 827-828)

[K] “Nineteenth-century English observers frequently noted that American products were designed to accommodate the needs of the machine rather than the user.  Lloyd, for example, noted of the American cutlery trade that “where mechanical devices cannot be adjusted to the production of the traditional product, the product must be modified to the demands of the machine.  Hence, the standard American table-knife is a rigid, metal shape, handle and blade forged in one piece, the whole being finished by electroplating - an implement eminently suited to factory production.” (Ames & Rosenberg 1968, 36)

[L] “Today, artifacts travel with increasing ease over much of the globe.  Transformers adapt personal computers to local currents; bicycle parts are sized in metric dimensions (even in the USA!); quantitative standards for copper, wheat and air pollution are monitored by international agencies; and digital high-definition television is coming.  In factories from Thailand to Tennessee to the Czech Republic, digitally controlled machine tools can be programmed (and reprogrammed) to produce functionally identical artifacts in short production runs.  For all the diversity of our consumer cornucopia, the banal artifacts of the world economy can be said to be more and more impersonal, in the sense that they are increasingly defined with reference to publicly agreed-upon standards and explicit knowledge which resides at the highest level of organizations, rather than upon local and tacit knowledge that is the personal property of skilled individuals.  This is true even though the heyday of Fordist mass production is said to be over.  Flexible production depends on standards of production as much as, perhaps even more than, Fordism: in part because shared values and common standards enable congeries of independent producers to pool their efforts and simultaneously compete against one another.” (Alder 1998, 537)

[M] Current ISO Categories

 01 Generalities. Terminology. Standardization. Documentation  

03 Sociology. Services. Company organization and management.  Administration. Transport  

07 Mathematics. Natural Sciences  

11 Health care technology  

13 Environment. Health protection. Safety  

17 Metrology and measurement. Physical phenomena  

19 Testing  Analytical chemistry, see 71.040

21 Mechanical systems and components for general use  

23 Fluid systems and components for general use

 Measurement of fluid flow, see 17.120

25 Manufacturing engineering  

27 Energy and heat transfer engineering  

29 Electrical engineering  

31 Electronics  

33 Telecommunications. Audio and video engineering  

35 Information technology. Office machines  

37 Image technology 

39 Precision mechanics. Jewellery  

43 Road vehicles engineering  

45 Railway engineering  

47 Shipbuilding and marine structures  

49 Aircraft and space vehicle engineering  

53 Materials handling equipment  

55 Packaging and distribution of goods  

59 Textile and leather technology  

61 Clothing industry  

65 Agriculture

67 Food technology  

71 Chemical technology

73 Mining and minerals  

75 Petroleum and related technologies  

77 Metallurgy  

79 Wood technology

81 Glass and ceramics industries

83 Rubber and plastic industries

85 Paper technology  

87 Paint and colour industries  

91 Construction materials and building 

93 Civil engineering

95 Military engineering

97 Domestic and commercial equipment. Entertainment. Sports

International Standards Organization

List of ISO Fields, Geneva, 2003

[N] The economic term ‘tied-good’ requires explanation.  An example is the old 'punch card' computer.  The computer could not operate without such cards which, technically, were an output of the pulp, paper and publishing industries, sequentially.  The computer and cards were tied-goods in production of computational results.  Similarly, there can only be a market for audio-visual software, e.g. records and tapes if there is a market for home entertainment hardware, e.g. cameras, record players, TV sets, etc.  They are tied-goods in consumption fitting hand in glove.  In this regard, it is likely, but not proved, that the home entertainment center (HEC) is the third most expensive consumer durable purchased by the average consumer after house and car.  Similarly, private collections of audio-visual software including phonographs, photographs and video tapes constitute an enormous stock of American cultural wealth. (Chartrand 2000, 24)

[O] “At the beginning of this study, Cambrosio undertook a comparison of several different experimental protocols for the production of hybridomas.  He had not yet been able to attend a fusion experiment but relied, to a great extent, on his previous biological training.  While one might expect that it would be relatively easy to determine variations between the protocols, this was true only in a “mechanical” or literal sense; to the untrained eye, the protocols appeared to be arbitrary lists of instructions lacking any overall sense.  The situation changed fundamentally when he was able to attend a training session in the technique.  Once these instructions were embodied in a series of gestures, they became confounded with other factors such as the manual skills of a given person or that person’s degree of familiarity with a piece of equipment.  The comparison between protocols now became possible, each line of instruction evoking shapes, colors, time spans, and gestures that could be compared.” (Cambrosio & Keating 1988, 249)

[P] “It appears also that instrumentation requirements sometimes serve as a powerful device for bringing together research scientists from separate disciplines.  X-ray crystallography played such a role in the development of molecular biology, precisely because it is, in effect, an instrument-embodied technique.  In a very different way the increasing reliance on supercomputers is serving to bring members of different disciplines together.  The impetus in this case is, to a considerable degree, the high cost of the technology and, consequently, the small number of locations where users need to convene.” (Rosenberg 1994, 156) 

[Q] In Zen-like terms of a monk transcending technique (Suzuki 1959), Polanyi  notes:

“Our subsidiary awareness of tools and probes can be regarded now as the act of making them form a part of our own body.  The way we use a hammer or a blind man uses his stick, shows in fact that in both cases we shift outwards the points at which we make contact with the things that we observe as objects outside ourselves.  While we rely on a tool or a probe, these are not handled as external objects.  We may test the tool for its effectiveness or the probe for its suitability, e.g. in discovering the hidden details of a cavity, but the tool and the probe can never lie in the field of these operations; they remain necessarily on our side of it, forming part of ourselves, the operating persons.  We pour ourselves out into them and assimilate them as parts of our own existence. We accept them existentially by dwelling in them.”  (Polanyi 1962a, 59)

[R] “… not only in after-dinner speeches, which are not necessarily to be taken seriously, but also in framing membership criteria for the professional grades of engineering societies, a matter which engineers take with deadly seriousness.  The professional engineer is usually considered the creative practitioner, the “real” engineer.  In the definition of such a person, the “ability to design” has been almost universally acknowledged as the crucial test, though in practice only the most professionally oriented societies have actually adopted it.  It is interesting to note that “ability to design” and “reasoned state of capacity to make” are very similar, both in form and in substance.” (Layton 1974, 37)

[S] Referencing Herbert Simon, Layton writes: “… there are a body of sciences associated with practice, which he terms the “sciences of the artificial…  He argues for engineering that: “We speak of engineering as concerned with ‘synthesis,’ while science is concerned with ‘analysis.’  Synthetic... and more specifically, prospective artificial objects having desired properties - are the central objective of engineering activity and skill.  The engineer is concerned with how things ought to be - ought to be, that is, in order to attain goals, and to function.”  Simon concludes that sciences of the artificial, such as “engineering science,” have certain characteristics that distinguish them from natural sciences.” (Layton 1988, 90-91) 

[T] “… a machine can be smashed and the laws of physics and chemistry will go on operating unfailingly in the parts remaining after the machine ceases to exist.  Engineering principles create the structure of the machine which harnesses the laws of physics and chemistry for the purposes the machine is designed to serve.  Physics and chemistry cannot reveal the practical principles of design or co-ordination which are the structure of the machine…Consequently, and the consequences reach far beyond the example at hand, the meaning of the higher level cannot be accounted for by reductive analysis of the elements forming the lower levels.  No one can derive a machine from the laws of physics and chemistry…  At each consecutive level there is a state which can be said to be less tangible than the one below it.”  (Polanyi 1970)

[U] “Design is clearly distinct from philosophy, including natural philosophy.  It is, as both Aristotle and modern engineers have held, an attribute of a human being which may be expressed in an object but which is not identical with the object itself.  At the outset, design is an adaptation of means to some preconceived end.  This I take to be the central purpose of technology… Design involves a structure or pattern, a particular combination of details or component parts, and it is precisely the gestalt or pattern that is of the essence for the designer.” (Layton 1974, 37)

[V] “Indeed, it is the oldest part of engineering knowledge to be recorded; the early engineering and machine books are in the nature of portfolios of design, and there is a deep kinship between engineering design and art, running back to the artist-engineers of the Renaissance and earlier.  The natural units of study of engineering design resemble the iconographic themes of the art historian.” (Layton 1976, 698)

[W] “… only… science is already injected in documentary form in a way that mirrors the content of the science.  The similar mirroring process in technology gives rise to the artifacts and processes, and it is necessary to transform this evidence into written form through the medium of descriptions which savor of the antiquarian.” (Price 1965, 565-566)

[X] “One essential aspect of this expansion in use has been modification of design so that instruments can be employed by people with lower levels of training.  Often, in fact, it has proven worthwhile to redesign to lower performance ceilings in order to permit the substitution of automatic control for control by a highly trained operator.” (Rosenberg 1994, 257-258)

[Y] “Black-boxed instruments also hide their thing-y-ness.  This is one of the ironies that confronts thing knowledge.  Instruments, when they are working, connect seamlessly with theory; they provide information, data that can be enfolded into the propositional life of theory.  This is why epistemology has been able to carry on under the illusion of knowledge solely as a play of ideas.  The materiality of instruments only surfaces in their making and breaking.  One needs to appreciate this essentially Heideggerian point to recognize that and to see how material knowledge complements knowledge borne by ideas.” (Baird 2004, 146)

 [Z] “Reverse engineering is fundamentally directed to discovery and learning.  Engineers learn the state of the art not just by reading printed publications, going to technical conferences, and working on projects for their firms, but also by reverse engineering others’ products.  Learning what has been done before often leads to new products and advances in know-how.  Reverse engineering may be a slower and more expensive way for information to percolate through a technical community than patenting or publication, but it is nonetheless an effective source of information.  Of necessity, reverse engineering is a form of dependent creation, but this does not taint it, for in truth, all innovators, as the saying goes, “stand on the shoulders of giants” as well as on the shoulder of other incremental innovators.  Progress in science and the useful arts is advanced by dissemination of know-how, whether by publication, patenting or reverse engineering.” (Samuelson & Scotchmer 2002, 70-71).

[AA] “A technology claiming acceptance irrespective of economic considerations is meaningless.  Indeed, any invention can be rendered worthless and altogether farcical by a radical change in the values of the means used up and the ends produced by it.  If the price of all fuels went up a hundredfold, all steam engines, gas turbines, motor cars, and aeroplanes would have to be thrown on the junk heap.  Strictly speaking, a technical process is valid, therefore, only within the valuations prevailing at one particular moment and at one particular time… By contrast, no part of science can lose its validity by a change in the current relative value of things. (Polanyi 1960-61, 404)

[BB] The tacit dimension of money and financial capital in general, is captured by Adam Smith:  “every prudent man in every period of society, after the first establishment of the division of labour, must naturally have endeavoured to manage his affairs is such a manner, as to have at all times by him, besides the peculiar produce of his own industry, a certain quantity of some one commodity or other, such as he imagined few people would be likely to refuse in exchange for the produce of their industry.” (quoted in Dooley 2003, 9-10) [HHC: emphasis added]

[CC] “Social capital refers to the values and beliefs that citizens share in their everyday dealings and which give meaning and provide design for all sorts of rules.  The use of the word capital implies that we are dealing with an asset.  The word social tells us that it is an asset attained through membership of a community.  Social capital is accumulated within the community through processes of interaction and learning.  But social capital is not a commodity for which trade is technically possible or even meaningful.” (Maskell 2001, 2)

[DD] “The market, in Smith’s total scheme, operated within and gave effect to the rest of the institutional system as well as to individual choice within the system.  Voluntary exchange takes places only within legal and moral rules as well as the market.  The market, according to Smith, must be comprehended within the larger system involved in the continuing resolution of the problem of order, however much it may contribute thereto.  The order produced by markets can only arise if the legal and moral framework is operating well; as Rosenberg has written, the “decisive superiority” of the price system “as a way of organizing economic life lay in the fact that, when it was surrounded by appropriate institutions, it tied the dynamic and powerful motive force of self-interest to the general welfare.”  The market does not do so alone.” (Samuels 1977, 197) 

[EE] “It concerns the relation between designing, making, and building, under the head of technology.  In the present sophisticated stage of development of our society, there is a division of labor here.  He who designs does not usually build or make, and the makers and the builders are the skilled laborers who do not themselves design what they make or build.  The architect designs the building, the carpenters, plumbers, electricians, and bricklayers build it.  Thus the total operation is a performing art with blueprints for score or choreography, the difference being that in this technological case neither the co-ordinated performances (ballet) of the skilled workers nor the finished product is put on exhibit simply to be looked at, contemplated.  It is a useful performing art.  Its value is instrumental.”  (Aldrich 1969, 381-382)

[FF] “Take for example the identification of a thing as a tool.  It implies that a useful purpose can be achieved by handling the thing as an instrument for that purpose.  I cannot identify the thing as a tool if I do not know what it is for - or if knowing its supposed purpose, I believe it to be useless for that purpose.” (Polanyi 1962a, 56)

[GG] “But, in all this, what is not ‘objective’?  As soon as we realize that observation is affected essentially by the observer, we have to incorporate that observer into the phenomena to be observed, and make him an object too.  This fact has transformed the physical sciences, and of course the social sciences are based entirely on the sense of the need to observe the community of observers.  That leaves us with nothing genuinely “subjective” except a structure of language, including as said mathematical language, which is the only thing left that can be distinguished from the objective world.  Even that structure is objective to each student of it.  People are “subjects,” then, not as people, but only to the extent that they form a community within a linguistic structure which records some observation of the objective.  In this context the word “subject” incorporates its other meaning of what is treated by language, as when we speak of the subject of a book.” (Frye 1981, 21-22)

[HH] This is the negative side to a ‘narrowcast’ economy.  The concept of a ‘cultured person’ in the European tradition is one who is well ‘rounded’.  The cultured European is one who is interested in, and knowledgeable about literature, painting, cuisine, dance, and theatre, not just about work.  The North America tradition, however, is characterised by specialisation, particularly with respect to production skills.  The result is the one dimensional person who knows everything about his or her business, and little or nothing about life in general.  Even when the North American decides to enhance his or her cultural appreciation it tends to be one dimensional.  One tends to specialise in selected activities such as wine-tasting, or specific types of theatre or painting.  Rounding is not the objective.

[II] “We have paid a terrible price for our education, such as it is.  The Magian World View, in so far as it exists, has taken flight into science, and only the great scientists have it or understand where it leads; the lesser ones are merely clockmakers of a larger growth, just as so many of our humanist scholars are just cud-chewers or system grinders.  We have educated ourselves into a world from which wonder, and the fear and dread and splendour and freedom of wonder have been banished.  Of course, wonder is costly.  You couldn't incorporate it into a modern state because it is the antithesis of the anxiously worshipped security which is what a modern state is asked to give.  Wonder is marvellous, but it is also cruel, cruel, cruel. It is undemocratic, discriminatory, and pitiless.” (Davies 1987, 836)

 [JJ] “In terms of our education, the entire establishment has been built on the assumptions of the left hemisphere and of visual space.  This establishment does little to help the transition to the electronic phase of simultaneous or acoustic man.  Our educational procedures are still oriented towards preparing people to cope with specific industrial products and distribution of same.  Electronic man, on the other hand, is in need of training in… empathy and intuition.  Logic is replaced by analogy, and communications are being superseded by pattern recognition.” (McLuhan, 1978)

[KK]Increasingly, performance in these new knowledge-based industries will come to depend on running the institution so as to attract, hold, and motivate knowledge workers.  When this can no longer be done by satisfying knowledge workers’ greed, as we are now trying to do, it will have to be done by satisfying their values, and by giving them social recognition and social power.  It will have to be done by turning them from subordinates into fellow executives, and from employees, however well paid, into partners.”  (Drucker 1998, 57)

[LL] “Such intrinsic motivation is, as a rule, less perspicuous and less tangible than clearly discernible external rewards.  As a consequence, it can be destroyed if such a reward is offered.  The effect has been referred to as ‘the hidden costs of reward’ and by the saying ‘extrinsic motivation destroys intrinsic motivation’.” (Schlicht, 1998, 125)

[MM] “Custom is, thus, an amalgam comprising habitual, emotional, and cognitive elements, which cannot easily be separated.  There is a strong interplay between habits, emotions, convictions, and deliberation.  Each supports the other, and influences go back and forth.”  (Schlicht, 1998, 12-13)

Index

7.0 Qubit

 [A] “Mr. James Ward, in Encycl. Brit. XX. 49 s.v. Psychology, assigns to the word two main meanings: ‘To know may mean either to perceive or apprehend, or it may mean to understand or comprehend...  Thus a blind man, who cannot know about light in the first sense, may know about light in the second, if he studies a treatise on optics.’  Others hold that the primary and only proper object of knowing is a fact or facts (as in our sense 10), and that all so-called knowing of things or persons resolves itself, upon analysis, into the knowing of certain facts about these, as their existence, identity, nature, attributes, etc., the particular fact being understood from the context, or by a consideration of the kind of fact which is usually wanted to be known about the thing or person in question.  Thus, ‘Do you know Mr. G.?’, ‘Do you know Balliol College?’ have different meanings according to the kind of facts about Mr. G. or Balliol College, which are the objects of inquiry.”  (OED, know, v, Signification 2003)

[B] “The conceptual framework of applicable knowledge is different from that of pure knowledge.  It is determined primarily in terms of the successful performances to which such knowledge is relevant.  Take hammering again.  This performance implies the conception of a hammer, which defines a class of objects that are (actual or potential) hammers.  It will include, apart from the usual tools of this kind, rifle butts, shoe heels and fat dictionaries, and establish at the same time a grading of these tools according to suitability.  The suitability of an object to serve as a hammer is an observable property, but it can be observed only within the framework defined by the performance it is supposed to serve.” (Polanyi 1962a, 175)

 [C] “At the beginning of this study, Cambrosio undertook a comparison of several different experimental protocols for the production of hybridomas.  He had not yet been able to attend a fusion experiment but relied, to a great extent, on his previous biological training.  While one might expect that it would be relatively easy to determine variations between the protocols, this was true only in a “mechanical” or literal sense; to the untrained eye, the protocols appeared to be arbitrary lists of instructions lacking any overall sense.  The situation changed fundamentally when he was able to attend a training session in the technique.  Once these instructions were embodied in a series of gestures, they became confounded with other factors such as the manual skills of a given person or that person’s degree of familiarity with a piece of equipment.  The comparison between protocols now became possible, each line of instruction evoking shapes, colors, time spans, and gestures that could be compared.” (Cambrosio & Keating 1988, 249)

[D] Coined by Rudy Rucker with his 1988 science fiction novel Wetware, the term has been adopted by ‘hacker culture’ as well as education and economics.  In economics, Paul Romer uses the term in his 1995 article “Beyond the Knowledge Worker”:

Wetware captures what economists call human capital and what philosophers and cognitive scientists sometimes call tacit knowledge. It includes all the things stored in the ‘wet’ computer of a person’s human brain. (Romer 1995) 

As I will subsequently argue, Romer confuses distinct forms of knowledge including personal & tacit with ‘human capital’ as well as human-readable (codified knowledge) and machine readable (soft-tooled knowledge).  With respect to education, in his 1995 testimony to the U.S. House of Representatives Joint Hearing on Educational Technology in the 21st Century, Professor Chris Dede of George Mason University uses the term in the context of pattern recognition:

For example, “visualization” is an emerging type of rhetoric that enhances learning by using the human visual system to find patterns in large amounts of information.  People have very powerful pattern recognition capabilities for images; much of our brain is “wetware” dedicated to this purpose.  As a result, when tabular data of numerical variables such as temperature, pressure, and velocity are transfigured into graphical objects whose shifts in shape, texture, size, color, and motion convey the changing values of each variable, increased insights are often attained.  For example, graphical data visualizations that model thunderstorm-related phenomena (e.g., downbursts, air flows, cloud movements) are valuable in helping meteorologists and students understand the dynamics of these weather systems. (Dede 1995)

 [E]In this final chapter, I wish to turn to science itself and point out that it too, and even my entire essay, can be read as a response to the breakdown of the bicameral mind.  For what is the nature of this blessing of certainty that science so devoutly demands in its very Jacob-like wrestling with nature?  Why should we demand that the universe make itself clear to us?  Why do we care?... It is something about understanding the totality of existence, the essential defining reality of things, the entire universe and man’s place in it… It is a direction whose far beginning in the mists of history can be distantly seen in the search for lost directives in the breakdown of the bicameral mind… It is a search that is obvious in the omen literature of Assyria where… science begins.  It is also obvious a mere half millennium later when Pythagoras in Greece is seeking the lost invariants of life in a theology of divine numbers and their relationships, thus beginning the science of mathematics.  And so through two millennia, until, with a motivation not different, Galileo calls mathematics the speech of God, or Pascal and Leibnitz echo him, saying they hear God in the awesome rectitudes of mathematics.

We sometimes think, and even like to think, that the two greatest exertions that have influenced mankind, religion and science, have always been historical enemies, intriguing us in opposite directions.  But this effort at special identity is loudly false.  It is not religion but the church and science that were hostile to each other.  And it was rivalry, not contravention.  Both were religious.  They were two giants fuming at each other over the same ground.  Both proclaimed to be the only way to divine revelation.” (Jaynes 1976, 433-44)

[F] This conclusion is consonant with Jaynes’ ‘bicameral mind’ but not dependent upon it.  It is also consonant with the continuing Western ‘cult of the genius’. (Woodmansee 1984, 446, 47ff [Zilsel 1918])  Western ‘ego dominance’ can meaningfully be contrasted with Eastern thought through the I Ching or The Book of Changes. (Wilhelm, 1950) to which Jung wrote an introduction.  All human relationships are played out in eight possible roles – father and mother as well as first, second and third born son and daughter.  Each role entails distinct entitlements and obligations. (Schlict 1998)  These roles are vertically extended up the social hierarchy, i.e., the Emperor plays the role of father to whom others act appropriately as first, second or third son or daughter.  Out of these eight roles, sixty-four possible patterns of human entanglement are defined as lined hexagrams.  Social space and human situation is defined and one can know one’s place.  This codified patterning of human relationships was built up over thousands of years beginning as early as 2700 B.C.E. with the tortoise shell oracle.  And the I Ching was one of very few ‘ancient’ books to survive the great book burning of 213 B.C.E. by the First Emperor of China - Ch’in Shih Huang Ti (who built the Great Wall) who believed: Before Me, No History! 

[G] In a CBS interview with the former President he was asked: “The central question, if I may, and I know this is difficult, the central question is why?”  Clinton answered: “I think I did something for the worst possible reason -- just because I could.  I think that’s the most, just about the most morally indefensible reason that anybody could have for doing anything.  When you do something just because you could ... I’ve thought about it a lot.  And there are lots of more sophisticated explanations, more complicated psychological explanations.  But none of them are an excuse ... Only a fool does not look to explain his mistakes.” CBS Evening News, “Clinton Cheated ‘Because I Could’”, June 17, 2007.2

[H] In discussing Foucault’s concern about the effect of instrumental perception, Idhe notes:  “In short, perception becomes weighted in favor of vision, is virtually reduced to vision; but more, it also selects that which, within the visible, is to count, a reduction of vision.  This is so much the case that the metaphysics of primary and secondary qualities even enters into what can count within vision.  “The area of visibility in which observation is able to assume its powers is thus only what is left after these exclusions: a visibility freed from all other sensory burdens and restricted, moreover, to black and white.”  Finally, this vision is structured according to geometrical values with emphasis upon lines, surfaces, forms, and reliefs.” (Idhe 1991,41)

[I] With respect to analytic psychology, Jung observed:

“Experience shows that it is practically impossible, owing to adverse circumstances in general, for anyone to develop all his psychological functions simultaneously.  The demands of society compel a man to apply himself first and foremost to the differentiation of the function with which he is best equipped by nature, or which will secure him the greatest social success.  Very frequently, indeed as a general rule, a man identifies more or less completely with the most favoured and hence the most developed function.  It is this that gives rise to the various psychological types.” Quoted in Sharp 1991, ‘Primary Function’.

With respect to computers, the technical term is master/slave rather than dominant/subordinate.  Some Black American commentators have objected to the term for obvious reasons.  The terminology may also reflect, however, Aldrich’s concern that the classical contempt towards technology continues today but with the mechanical device cast in the role of slave. (Aldrich 1969, 383)

 [J] “Nature is given to man ready-made; we may try to elucidate it, but we cannot improve it.  But language, literature, history, politics, law, and religion, as well as economic and social life, are constantly on the move, and they are advanced by poets, playwrights, novelists, politicians, preachers, journalists, and all kinds of other, non-scholarly, writers.  These are the primary initiators of cultural changes, rather than the Faculties of Arts which contribute to the advancement of culture mainly at second-hand, by studying language, literature, history, law, religion, and so on, as produced outside the universities.  Hence, academic science has an advantage over the humanities similar to that it holds over technology…

We may conclude that the profound distinction between science and technology is but an instance of the difference between the study of nature on the one hand and the study of human activities and the products of human activities, on the other.  The universities cannot be the main source of progress either in humanistic or in material culture, as they are in the natural sciences.” (Polanyi 1960-61, 406)

[K] “It is probable that research-front technology is strongly related only to that part of scientific knowledge that has been packed down as part of ambient learning and education, not to research-front science… Similarly, research-front science is related only to the ambient technological knowledge of the previous generation of students, not to the research front of the technological state of the art and its innovations… This reciprocal relation between science and technology, involving the research front of one and the accrued archive of the other, is nevertheless sufficient to keep the two in phase in their separate growths within each otherwise independent cumulation.” (Price 1965, 568)

[L] Layton referencing Benjamin F. Isherwood’s Experimental Researches in Steam Engineering, 2 vols. (Philadelphia, 1863) notes:

“He acknowledged that his own work was simply “a collection of original engineering statistics with the general laws deduced from them.”  But he insisted that “science is nothing but a similar collection of statistics.”  Isherwood similarly imputed to science a strongly utilitarian cast.  To him sound theory consisted of “the whole of the knowledge we possess on any subject, put in such order and form that we can make a reliable practical application of it.”  While Isherwood was proposing to limit drastically the idea of science and general law in one direction, he was expanding it in another.  The general laws which he had deduced from his statistical tables were not statements about nature at all but rather rules for the design of a man-made object.  In short, Isherwood incorporated engineering principles into the laws of science. (Layton 1976, 692-693)

[M] There is a distinct Islamic copyright tradition based on Islamic law - the Shar'ia.  The following summary is based on private correspondence between the author and Mustafa Salman Habib, Ph.D, Barrister at Law (Lincoln's Inn) in London England (Habib 1998).  The roots of Islamic copyright lay in the Koran and the traditional portion of Islamic law based on the Prophet Mohammed's words or acts but not written by him and known as the "Sunna".  This traditional portion of Islamic law is accepted as authoritative by the Sunni branch of Islam but rejected by the Shi'ite branch. One relevant saying in the Sunna is: “the works of a person do not cease even after his death are three: a continuing charity, a beneficial know-how or a worthwhile son”.  Such ‘know-how’ is recognized as generating a continuous benefit that outlives the author.  Sunni jurists are also unanimous in their high regard for the author, researcher and scientist who are collectively called “A'Lem” to whom several references are made in the Koran and the Sunna.

Early Islamic jurists recognized copyright and offered protection from pirates.  Unlike written legal codes of today, traditional Islamic copyright treated copyright infringement as a breach of ethics, i.e. a moral rather than a criminal act.  Punishment took the form of defamation of the infringer and casting shame on his tribe.  An exception was blasphemy or incitement against Islam.  The infamous case of Salman Rushdi is an example of what an author can expect if convicted of writing such a work.  Only in recent years have formal copyright statutes been drafted, e.g. in Saudi Arabia twelve years ago.

[N] “Although economists have written on topics of intellectual property for a long time, the impact of economics on public policy in this area has been slight, especially as compared to the influence of professional writings in areas such as antitrust and taxation.  We believe that too few of the profession’s resources have been devoted to these issues and that, of those resources that have been employed, too few have been devoted to empirical analyses.” (Besen & Raskind 1991, 4)

[O]  “Mr. Justice Yates had very clear and definite notions as to the limits of property, but a reference which he makes to the civil law throws a stronger light on his view of the whole subject than any of his direct reasoning.  What the Institutes have to say relating to “wild animals,” he observes, “is very applicable to this case.” And he then proceeds to draw a comparison between these two singularly related subjects.  Animals ferae naturae are yours “while they continue in your possession, but no longer. “ So those wild and volatile objects which we call ideas are yours as long as they are properly kenneled in the mind.  Once unchain or publish them, and they “become incapable of being any longer a subject of property; all mankind are equally entitled to read them; and every reader becomes as fully possessed of all the ideas as the author himself ever was.” (Sedgwick 1879)

[P] “From the 14th century to the early 18th century in Europe, the issuance of letters patent’ and granting of royal privileges’ conferring monopoly rights in exchange for the disclosure of technological information was aimed primarily at effecting the transfer and application of existing industrial arts and engineering practices, i.e., techniques already known to master-craftsmen and engineers in other territories; and not at inducing fresh inventive activity.  Many early patent monopolies were, in effect, local franchises designed to shelter immigrating expert-practitioners from the subsequent competition of the apprentices and journeymen they were expected to train, or others who would try imitate them once their particular ‘mysterie’ had been successfully established in the new cities and principalities to which they were recruited.”   (David 2001, 7, ft. 7)

[Q] “The body of knowledge that is called ‘science’ consists of an immense pool to which small annual increments are made at the ‘frontier.’  The true significance of science is diminished, rather than enhanced, by extreme emphasis on the importance of the most recent “increment” to that pool.” (Rosenberg 1994, 143)

[R] “Although the concept of a distinct sphere demarcated as the “public domain” is well recognized under conventional intellectual property laws, what it contains is not defined and legal “rights” to its use are not delineated; “property” is what is defined by the law, and the public domain holds the residuum.” (David 2000, 15)

[S] “In the fourteenth century, such grants were employed to encourage the introduction of foreign technologies through the emigration of skilled artisans from abroad, as in the case of the letters patent given to the Flemish weaver, John Kempe, by Edward II in 1331, or the protection granted to two Brabant weavers to settle at York in 1336, or the similar grant conferred in 1368 upon three clock-makers from Delft.  England at his time was technologically laggard in comparison to many regions on the continent of Europe, and, understandably, was endeavouring to “borrow” the more advanced industrial practices.  It was hoped that the foreign master craftsmen would introduce English apprentices to the “mysterie” of their respective arts; but, because they were not likely to remain in control of the newly skilled workers once these had passed into journeyman’s status, a cohort of potential domestic competitors would thereby be created from whom the foreign master obviously wished to be protected.” (David 1992)

[T] “Queen Mary incorporated the Stationers’ Company “to set up a mode of regulating the English printing trade that would facilitate the efforts of the Romish clergy to stamp out the Protestant Reformation.”  But the motives of the stationers “were of a less exalted kind.”  Thus, Elizabeth, relying on the stationers’ self-interest, confirmed the Charter to turn the stationers to support the English, rather than the Romish church, and the Stationers’ Company became, in turn, the instrument of the Stuarts against the Puritans, in the early seventeenth century; the instrument of the Puritans, against their royalist enemies, when the Puritans came to power; the instrument of the royalists against the Puritans, after the Restoration; and, for a brief time, the instrument of the triumphant Whigs, after “the glorious Revolution” of 1687.5.  But through all these vicissitudes, the stationers themselves steadfastly remained, what they had always been, eminently practical men; and they consistently protected their monopoly.” (Patterson 1993)

[U] Under Cromwell, the Licensing Act of the Long Parliament (1640-1660) affirmed the rights of individual publishers to their copies and forbade other publishers to “counterfeit” works of other publishers.  This was necessary because Parliament had done away with the King’s Star Chamber, under whose provisions the copyright system had developed.  

[V] “One of the earliest writers to agitate against the booksellers’ perpetual monopolies was John Locke.  In 1693, the Licensing Act, [10] the instrument through which the Stationers’ Company was empowered to regulate the trade, faced renewal.  Concerned particularly with the guild’s monopolies in Latin writers, Locke wrote to his friend, Edward Clarke, a Member of Parliament, urging him to speak in Parliament for the interests of the educated public at large:.. One year later, when the Licensing Act was again being considered, Locke drafted a formal Memorandum for Clarke in which he repeated his objection to the guild’s monopolies in the Latin classics and argued that copyrights in contemporary authors should also be limited in term.” (M. Rose 2004, 78)

[W] That the Statute of Queen Anne, the first modern copyright act, was primarily a trade regulation bill is supported by the three facts: 

“First, a part deleted from the original draft of the 1710 statute clearly emphasized that authors were to be given priority over others with respect to copyright.  Parliamentary records reveal that this particular part was removed under pressure from monopolistic booksellers…

Second, there is the similarity between the Statute of Monopoly of 1623 and the 1710 statute. The Statute of Monopoly was, needless to say, intended to abolish the monopolies so rampant during the Elizabethan age.  It allowed 21-year monopolies for existing privileges granted without specific terms and 14-year monopolies for forthcoming inventions.  The structure of the statute is similar to the first section of the 1710 statute…

Third, there are the claims made by intellectuals around 1710.  The Licensing Act of 1662, which gave legal authority to the monopoly in the book trade, was repealed in 1695.  John Locke contributed much towards its repeal, writing to peers in the House of Lords and strongly condemning the restrictions on science caused by the provisions of the Act and the monopolies of Stationers Company.”  (Shirata 2000)

[X] “The court of King's Bench, the highest court of the common law, divided on the question, the majority supporting Lord Mansfield, who went to the furthest possible extreme in his identification of the right of exclusive copying and selling the copies of one's manuscript with the right of exclusive holding and selling physical things and their products… copyright … like the ownership of physical objects, the perpetual property of the author, his heirs and assigns forever.  This outcome Mansfield expressly contemplated, saying, “property of the copy thus narrowed (i.e. defined as a common-law right] may equally go down from generation to generation, and possibly continue forever.”  This conclusion was vigorously protested by Justice Yates, the only dissenting justice, saying, “This claim of a perpetual monopoly is by no means warranted by the general principles of property.”  (Commons 1924: 275)

[Y] “The most significant point about Donaldson is that it was a compromise, i.e., a political, decision.  The Lords, by holding that the common law was the source of the author's copyright prior to publication, appeared to give the author a victory.  But the common-law copyright, being only the right of first publication, was no copyright at all since it did not entail the exclusive right of continued publication.  The common-law copyright concept, however, proved to be very useful to those claiming that the natural law was the source of the statutory copyright.  Their argument was that the common-law copyright, clearly a product of natural law, was the source of the statutory copyright and therefore that the statutory copyright was merely the securing of a natural-law right.  Thus, the harm of the Donaldson ruling was that it laid the groundwork for the future enhancement of the copyright monopoly on the basis of the natural-law-property theory.  In a sense, the booksellers, while losing the battle, won the war for their successors.” (Patterson 1993)

[Z] “The most compelling advantage of encouraging copyright industries to work out the details of the copyright law among themselves, before passing the finished product on to a compliant Congress for enactment, has been that it produced copyright laws that the relevant players could live with, because they wrote them.  If we intend the law to apply to individual end users’ everyday interaction with copyrighted material, however, we will need to take a different approach.  Direct negotiation among industry representatives and a few hundred million end-users would be unwieldy (even by copyright legislation standards).  Imposing the choices of the current stakeholders on a few hundred million individuals is unlikely to result in rules that the new majority of relevant players find workable.  They will not, after all, have written them.  There are, moreover, few signs that the entities proposing statutory revision have taken the public’s interests very seriously.  Instead, they seem determined to see their proposals enacted before they can be the subject of serious public debate.”  (Litman1996).

[AA] The expression ‘a measure of our economic ignorance’ describing technological change was used in my first year economics course by Professor Harvey Lithwick at Carleton University in Ottawa in 1968.  

 [BB] JSTOR Economics keyword search April 2003.  The related term ‘embodied technical change’ first appears in 1964 (Nelson 1964).  The first reference to ‘disembodied technological change’ also appears in 1964 (Fei and Ranis 1964) while ‘disembodied technical change’ appears somewhat earlier in 1962 (Colm, Cornwall & Smithies May 1962; Solow June 1962).

[CC] “Implicitly, it modeled technology as designs for machines.  This line of work lost its momentum, perhaps because of the difficulty people had in reconciling what is known about machine design with an initial cut that makes technology a public good… Recent generations of neoclassical growth theorists have not followed up … and have contented themselves with a force locomotif explanation: ‘Technological change causes economic growth.’” (Romer 1996, 204).

[DD] JSTOR Economics keyword search April 2003.  The term ‘exogenous technological change first appears in 1970 (Starrett 1970).  However, the related term ‘exogenous technical change’ appears in 1952 (Hanson 1952).

[EE] JSTOR Economics keyword search April 2003.  The term ‘endogenous technological change first appears in 1966 (Lucas 1966) as does the term ‘endogenous technical change’ (Shell 1966).

[FF] “Development, of course, covers a range of activities whose content differs widely from one industry to another.  It generally includes the designing of new products, testing and evaluating their performance (which in some industries may involve the building and testing of prototypes, or experimentation with pilot plants), and inventing and designing new and appropriate manufacturing processes.  In each of these activities, the role of minor modifications and small improvements that better integrate design and production, establish closer feedbacks from users to suppliers, and more effectively “tune” existing production methods, are critically important.  Individually, each of these modifications and improvements will bring about some slight reduction in cost or improvement in performance.  Their cumulative effects may, however, be immense.” (Rosenberg & Steinmueller 1988, 230)

[GG] “New growth theorists now start by dividing the world into two fundamentally different types of productive inputs that can be called “ideas” and “things.”  Ideas are nonrival goods that could be stored in a bit string.  Things are rival goods with mass (or energy).  With ideas and things, one can explain how economic growth works.  Nonrival ideas can be used to rearrange things, for example, when one follows a recipe and transforms noxious olives into tasty and healthful olive oil.  Economic growth arises from the discovery of new recipes and the transformation of things from low to high value configurations.” (Romer 1996, 204)

[HH] Technically, the short-run is that time period in which at least one factor is fixed.  Increases in other factors leads to eventually diminishing marginal returns to such increases in inputs.

Index

8.0 Quintessence

[A] The Merriam Webster Collegiate Dictionary also defines ‘nation’ as a non-Jewish nationality based on the Biblical reference in Psalms 2:1- why do the nations conspire.  This catches another dimension of nation as a ‘chosen people’, i.e., chosen by God without regard to ethnic origin, tradition or language.  Thus Abraham sealed a covenant with God naming the Jewish nation “God’s Chosen”.  With Jesus, Christians believed the covenant was transferred forming medieval ‘Christendom’, or, the nation of Christ.  Then with Mohammed, the covenant was believed transferred for the last time to the ‘nation of Islam’.  Hence, Mohammed is called ‘the seal of the Prophets’.  The openness of these monotheistic religions to converts paved the way for the multicultural nation-states of today such as the United States, Canada, Australia and New Zealand that welcome immigrants from varied origins, traditions and languages.  Other peoples have, however, also felt ‘chosen’ by God.  Thus the Japanese trace their national origins to the ‘Sun Goddess’ of whom the emperors of Japan claim to be direct descendents.  Unlike the ‘People of the Book’, an Islamic term used to refer to Jews, Christians and Moslems, the Japanese nation does not accept ‘converts’.  Rather the nation is racially or ‘folk’ based.

[B] OED, nation-state, n: 1918 J. A. R. Marriott European Commonw. ii. 18.

[C] OED, nation-state, n: 1895 Polit. Sci. Q. 10 294.

[D] Arguably, Hong Kong is the exception that proves the rule.  It is the only non-nation-state member of the WTO.  All other non-nation-state entities are 'observers'.  The peculiar status of Hong Kong in the WTO results from to its historic status as a ‘free port’, at least as I read Robin Gill, Assistant Director-General of Trade, Hong Kong Government:

“Between 1948 and 1986, Hong Kong participated in the work of the GATT as a member of the UK delegation. However, once the UK joined the EEC, Hong Kong effectively maintained a separate seat in the GATT (but still technically part of the UK delegation) under the name of United Kingdom Hong Kong. Interestingly, there were times when Hong Kong became embroiled in disputes with the EEC. However, on 23 April 1986, with the agreement and support of both the British and Chinese governments, Hong Kong became a Contracting Party to the GATT in its own right. We participated very actively in the Uruguay Round as befits the eighth largest trading entity in the world. And on 3 October 1994, Hong Kong ratified the WTO Agreement thereby completing all the necessary procedures to become a founding member of the WTO when it. commenced operation on 1 January this year. As to the future, the Sino-British Joint Declaration provides that Hong Kong will remain a free port and separate customs territory with full autonomy in the conduct of its external trade affairs after 1997. Hong Kong's separate status in the WTO will therefore continue after 1 July 1997.”   (Gill 1995)

[E] More formally, a nation state is like a biological life form in that:

a) it is organized like a cell separated one from the other and from an external environment by semi-permeable osmotic borders of exchange, trade and sometimes ‘violent’ acquisition of resources from other nations (war);

b) it is fueled by an internal metabolism involving conscription, taxes and spending on its own part as well as the revenues and expenditures of its constituent institutions and citizens;

c) it exhibits homeostasis, i.e. it strives to maintain internal conditions separate from the outside environment;

d) it grows purposively by converting environmental materials into itself, refining and upgrading its institutions and citizens and in reacting to and selecting external stimuli;

f) it reproduces, traditionally, by transferring institutions and citizens to ‘colonies’ and maintains its internal structures through the reproduction and education of its citizens and the acquisition of immigrants; and,

g) it evolves, unless disturbed by external forces, towards ever more complicated structures and forms.  Thus, “the longer a society has been able to enjoy stability the more numerous will be the number of special interest groups it sustains.  Revolutions, foreign invasions and dictatorships, and so on, are inimical to the slow and difficult growth of special interest organizations.”  (Beckerman 1983, 916-917)

[F] “Over the last two decades, straightforward advertising has given way to branding -- giving products and services an emotional dimension with which people can identify.  In this way, Singapore and Ireland are no longer merely countries one finds in an atlas.  They have become “brand states”, with geographical and political settings that seem trivial compared to their emotional resonance among an increasingly global audience of consumers.  A brand is best described as a customer's idea about a product; the “brand state” comprises the outside world's ideas about a particular country.” (van Ham 2001)

[G] “In the history of myths of national origins few have been as influential and have had such a curious development as those popularized by Geoffrey of Monmouth in his History of the Kings of Britain.  His writings, appearing about 1138... had a marked influence in subduing the social animosities of the Bretons, Anglo-Saxons, and Normans and drawing them together into a single nation.  Geoffrey's fanciful account was used by early Plantagenet monarchs to support their regal claims and for both Tudors and Stuarts it came to constitute a useful prop to their dynastic ones.  Though confidence in its historical reliability had almost evaporated by the eighteenth century, as the chief source of the Arthurian legend its influence carried on ... as a spur to Celtic imagination... into our own day.”  (MacDougall 1982: 7)

[H] “At one time only a handful of countries were capable of developing and producing the most sophisticated forms of military hardware; but as demonstrated recently and dramatically by Iraq that number has now increased substantially.  Drawing on assistance from friendly governments, the services of foreign scientists and corporations, and, increasingly, their own domestic resources, a lengthening list of states has acquired the capability to manufacture everything from tanks to fighter aircraft to ballistic missiles.  The number of nations able to assemble weapons of mass destruction (whether nuclear, chemical, or biological) has also been increasing, as has the ability of even less developed countries to provide themselves with secure channels of communication (through the use, among other things, of fiber optic cables and commercially available encryption devices) and advanced intelligence (through access to satellites, whether nationally or privately launched). (Freidberg 1991, 270)

[I] “The second level of Polanyi’s argument centers on the role of the state in the economy.  Even though the economy is supposed to be self-regulating, the state must play the ongoing role of adjusting the supply of money and credit to avoid the twin dangers of inflation and deflation.  Similarly, the state has to manage shifting demand for employees by providing relief in periods of unemployment, by educating and training future workers, and by seeking to influence migration flows.  In the case of land, governments have sought to maintain continuity in food production by a variety of devices that insulate farmers from the pressures of fluctuating harvests and volatile prices.  In urban areas, governments manage the use of the existing land through both environmental and land use regulations.  In short, the role of managing fictitious commodities places the state inside three of the most important markets; it becomes utterly impossible to sustain market liberalism’s view that the state is “outside” of the economy.” (Block 2000, 9-10) 

[J] “But the more fundamental point that we learn from Polanyi is that market Liberalism makes demands on ordinary people that are simply not sustainable.  Workers, farmers, and small business people will not tolerate for any length of time a pattern of economic organization in which they are subject to periodic, dramatic fluctuations in their daily economic circumstances.  In short, the neoliberal utopia of a borderless and peaceful globe requires that millions of ordinary people throughout the world have the flexibility to tolerate - perhaps as often as every five or ten years - a prolonged spell in which they must survive on half or less of what they earned before.  Polanyi believes that to expect that kind of flexibility is both morally wrong arid deeply unrealistic.  To him it is inevitable that people will mobilize to protect themselves from these economic shocks.” (Block 2000, 19) 

[K] “It can be personified as the action of two organising principles in society... The one was the principle of economic liberalism, aiming at the establishment of a self-regulating market... using largely laissez-faire and free trade as its methods; the other was the principle of social protection aiming at the conservation of man and nature... using protective legislation, restrictive associations, and other instruments of intervention as its methods.” (Polanyi quoted in Munck 2002, 17)

[L] “By a fiction, or, as some would say, by an abstraction, it is claimed that the General Will, which in reality emanates from the persons invested with political power, emanates from a collective being, the Nation, of which the rulers are nothing more than the instruments; and the rulers are always anxious to drive this idea into the heads of their peoples.  They well understand its usefulness to them in making their power or their tyranny acceptable.(de Jouvenal 1949, pp. 8-9)

[M] “In an interview on NBC’s Exposé in September 1991, Pierre Marion, a former Director of the French intelligence service, stated that: “It would not be normal that we do spy on the (United) States in political matters; we are really allied.  But in the economic competition, in the technological competition, we are competitors; we are not allied.” (quoted in Whitney & Gainsford 1996, S627)

[N] “In defense policy, the 1990s information-edge thesis appeared in different guises. Concepts such as information superiority, dominant battlespace knowledge, and decision superiority emerged as key elements of joint doctrine.  National security strategy discussions focused on national information highways and critical infrastructure protection — key components of sustaining information-edge capabilities. In the most significant intelligence organizational reform of the decade, the National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA) was founded with the mission of “guaranteeing the information edge.”  By the end of the decade, the Department of Defense, the Central Intelligence Agency, and other national security agencies presented strategic plans aiming to sustain and expand America’s information edge while planning for increased volumes of information gathered from an increasingly diverse range of sources.”  (O’Connell & Tomes 2004)

[O] Concerning a European Union report by Duncan Campbell, the Times reporter notes several alleged examples including: “… information learned through Echelon had been given to Boeing and the old McDonnell Douglas when they were trying to win a $6 billion contract from Saudi Arabia. His report said the spy network had intercepted calls between Airbus, the European consortium, and the Saudi airline and government officials.” (Dailey February 24, 2000)

Index

9.0 Competitiveness

[A] “Definition of the “production function”: the technical relationship telling the amount of output capable of being produced by each and every set of specific inputs (or factors of production).  It is defined by a given state of technical knowledge.  (Samuelson  1961, 570)

[B] “Within the university ... you can study without waiting for any efficient or immediate result. You may search, just for the sake of searching, and try for the sake of trying.  So there is a possibility of what I would call playing.  It’s perhaps the only place within society where play is possible to such an extent.” Jacques Derrida (b. 1930), Columbia Quotations, #16117

[C] “In the 1980s a management book that revived Sun-tzu’s thought and employed the revitalized figures of several ancient martial heroes to instruct companies in the basics of business and marketing became a bestseller in the draconian Communist environment of the People’s Republic of China and eventually in capitalist Hong Kong as well.  Japanese companies have regularly held study groups to seek insights from the Art of War that may be implemented as corporate strategy.  Koreans, enduring intense international pressure to revalue their currency, open their markets, and submit to trade limitations just when prosperity is attainable, are discovering strategies for international business warfare in these books.

In Taiwan, where companies confront a situation similar to Korea’s, books applying the thoughts of the ancient strategists to life, business, sports, and the stock market have suddenly surged in popularity, even though modernists have ignored and scorned them for decades.  Perhaps more astounding is the penchant of Japanese writers to apply principles and tactics from the Seven Military Classics to all the complexities of modern society; they use such tactics, for example, for successful human relations, romantic liaisons, and company infighting.  In addition to at least one scholarly translation, several new paperbacks offering simplified renditions and popularized expansions of selected teachings are published annually in Japan.  The ubiquitous salaryman may be seen reading them while commuting to work, and there are even comic-book editions of the Art of War and novels about Sun-tzu to satisfy those so inclined.” (Sawyer 1994, 15-16)

 [D] “The basic point is a simple one, and it applies to the widest range of industrial products: after things work well people want them to look well.  After utility comes design.  And design depends not alone on the availability of artists; it invokes depth and quality of the whole artistic tradition. It is on this that industrial success comes to depend.

Proof is wonderfully evident once we learn to look for it. One of the miracles of modern industrial achievement has been Italy. Since the war Italy has gone from one public sector disaster to another with one of the highest rates of economic growth of any country in the western industrial world. No one has cited in explanation the superiority of Italian engineering or science. Or of industrial management.  Or the precision of the Italian government policy and administration. Or the discipline and cooperativeness of the Italian unions and labour force… The Italian case is only the most vivid.” (Galbraith 1983)

[E] With respect to publications in the NES: “Whereas the number of publications in the E.U. is steadily increasing, the rate is declining in the U.S.  The average annual growth has risen, on average, by 3 percent from 1995 to 1999 in the E.U., while it has essentially flat-lined in the U.S.  Citations for these papers (a proxy for measuring their impact) also lessened in the U.S.  In 1996, the last year for which these data are available, citations were higher in the E.U. for all research fields.” (Pistoi 2002)

[F] “The Physiocrats would have influenced the allocation of resources directly, as they deemed necessary; and, moreover, pervasively, by controlling the particular institutional environment within which resource allocation takes place, to wit, so as to direct resources to agriculture - neither of which is Smithian.  The free market of Smith was relatively spontaneous, autonomous and viable; that of the Physiocrats would not be the opposite but it would be a manipulated economy.  To Smith, government had positive tasks but was to be relatively passive insofar as resource allocation and economic development were concerned; to the Physiocrats, government was to supervise actively the performance of the economy (thus antedating contemporary programs of economic development).” (Samuels 1962, 159)

Index

Table of Contents

12.0 References

The Competitiveness of Nations

in a Global Knowledge-Based Economy