What Makes an Economy Productive and Progressive? What Are the Needed Institutions?

Institutions again have become the focus of the theorizing and empirical work of economists concerned with the determinants of economic growth, and of cross country differences in income levels. One central argument of this paper is that institutions and institutional change need to be understood as tightly intertwined with the technologies used in an economy, and with technological change. A second argument is that, in general, societies have very limited ability to design institutions that are effective, and that the processes of institutional reform work erratically.Institutional and Behavioral Economics,

What Makes an Economy Productive and Progressive? What Are the Needed Institutions?

Institutions again have become the focus of the theorizing and empirical work of economists concerned with the determinants of economic growth, and of cross country differences in income levels. One central argument of this paper is that institutions and institutional change need to be understood as tightly intertwined with the technologies used in an economy, and with technological change. A second argument is that, in general, societies have very limited ability to design institutions that are effective, and that the processes of institutional reform work erratically.

The Market Economy, and the Scientific Commons

It is widely believed that while society allows technology to be private property, scientific knowledge is public and open. However, over the past quarter-century there has been increasing patenting of quite basic scientific knowledge. This essay argues that this is potentially a very serious problem. The future development of technology, as well as the future progress of science, is greatly facilitated when basic scientific knowledge is public and open. The paper explores the various factors that have led to the growing privatization of scientific knowledge. And it explores a variety of policy changes that can stop, and even reverse, these trends.Science, Technology, Patents, Open Knowledge.

Economic Development from the Perspective of Evolutionary Economic Theory

The purpose of the article is to discuss the differences between the evolutionary economic theory and the neoclassical theory from the appreciative viewpoint that aims to capture the basics of what actually is going on, leaving aside formal mathematical modeling in the two theories. As the result, evolutionary theory sees the economy as always in the process of change that involves economic actors taking actions that break from previous behavior, and an environment in continuing flux because of the innovation. While neoclassical theory sees the economy as at rest, or undergoing well anticipated change it has nothing to say about these kinds of conditions. Therefore the author believes the processes of economic catch-up have to proceed under the implicit or explicit guidance of an evolutionary economic theory.

The Asian miracle and modern growth theory

In the past 35 years, China, Hong Kong, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan (China) have transformed themselves from technologically backwards and poor economies to relatively modern, affluent economies. Each has experienced more than a fourfold increase in per capita income. In each, a significant number of firms are producing technologically complex products competitive with firms in Europe, Japan, and the United States. Their growth performance has exceeded that of virtually all comparable economies. How they did it is a question of great importance. Virtually all theories about how they did it placed investments in capital stock at the center of the explanation. The authors divide most growth theories about the Asian miracle into two groups: 1) The"accumulation"theories stress the role of capital investments in moving these economies along their production functions. What lies behind rapid development, according to this type of theory, is very high investment rates. If a nation makes the investments, marshals the resources, development will follow. 2) The"assimilation"theories stress the entrepreneurship, innovation, and learning these economies went through before they could master the new technologies they were adopting from more advanced industrial nations. They see investment in human and physical capital as an essential but far from sufficient part of assimilation. In addition, people must learn about, take the risk of operating, and come to master technologies and other practices new to the country, if not the world. The emphasis for assimilation theorists is on innovation and learning, rather than on marshaling. If one marshals but does not innovate and learn, development does not follow. These are complex theories that raise as many questions as they answer. The authors discuss differences in the way the two groups of theorists treat four matters: entrepreneurial decisionmaking; the nature of technology; the economic capabilities possible with a well-educated work force; and the role exports play in a country's rapid development.The differences between the theories matter because they affect our understanding of why the Asian miracle happened and because they imply different things about appropriate economic development policy.General Technology,Environmental Economics&Policies,Labor Policies,International Terrorism&Counterterrorism,Economic Theory&Research,Economic Theory&Research,Environmental Economics&Policies,Economic Growth,General Technology,Inequality

The Roles of Research at Universities and Public Labs in Economic Catch-up

We draw upon historical evidence from several countries and contemporary studies of national innovation systems to argue that indigenous systems of academic training and public research have been in the past important elements of the institutional structures supporting a country’s economic catch up. Recent changes in the international economic environment, and the growing scientific basis for contemporary technologies, will make those systems even more important in the future. The contributions of universities and public labs to the development of indigenous technological capabilities have taken different forms in different countries and economic sectors. However, we note that, in contrast with current emphasis on university-based embryonic inventions and fundamental research, effective research programs have predominantly occurred in the application-oriented sciences and engineering, and have been oriented towards problem-solving, and the advancement of technologies of interest to a well-defined user-community.Catch-up, Public Research, Indigenous Technological Capabilites

Bounded Rationality, Cognitive Maps, and Trial and Error Learning

The term "bounded rationality" is meant to connote the reasoning capabilities of an actor who, on the one hand, has a goal to achieve and an at least partially formed theory as to how to achieve it, and on the other hand, that the theory is somewhat crude, likely will be revised in the course of the effort, and that success is far from assured. This article presents a theory of how trial and error learning interacts with theory modification in the course of problem solving under bounded rationality. The empirical focus is on efforts to advance a technology, especially medical practice, but the analysis is quite general. A central question explored is what makes progress in a field hard or easy.Bounded Rationality, Search, Progress