首页
登录
职称英语
Fifty years ago, Robert Solow published the first of two papers on economic
Fifty years ago, Robert Solow published the first of two papers on economic
游客
2025-01-11
19
管理
问题
Fifty years ago, Robert Solow published the first of two papers on economic growth that eventually won him a Nobel prize. Celebrated and seasoned, he was thus a natural choice to serve on an independent "commission on growth" announced last month by the World Bank. (The commission will weigh and sift what is known about growth, and what might be done to boost it.)
Natural, that is, except for anyone who takes his 1956 contribution literally. For, according to the model he laid out in that article, the efforts of policymakers to raise the rate of growth per head are ultimately futile.
A government eager to force the pace of economic advance may be tempted by savings drives, tax cuts, investment subsidies or even population controls. As a result of these measures, each member of the labour force may enjoy more capital to work with. But this process of "capital deepening", as economists call it, eventually runs into diminishing returns. Giving a worker a second computer does not double his output.
Accumulation alone cannot yield lasting progress, Mr. Solow showed. What can? Anything that allows the economy to add to its output without necessarily adding more labour and capital. Mr. Solow labeled this font of wealth "technological progress" in 1956, and measured its importance in 1957. But in neither paper did he explain where it came from or how it could be accelerated. Invention, innovation and ingenuity were all "exogenous" influences, lying outside the remit of his theory. To practical men of action, Mr. Solow’s model was thus an impossible tease: what it illuminated did not ultimately matter; and what really mattered, it did little to illuminate.
The law of diminishing returns holds great sway over the economic imagination. But its writ has not gone unchallenged. A fascinating new book, Knowledge and the Wealth of Nations by David Warsh, tells the story of the rebel economics of increasing returns. A veteran observer of dismal scientists at work, first at the Boston Globe and now in an online column called Economic Principals, Mr. Warsh has written the best book of its kind since Peter Bernstein’s Capital Ideas.
Diminishing returns ensure that firms cannot grow too big, preserving competition between them. This, in turn, allows the invisible hand of the market to perform its magic. But, as Mr. Warsh makes clear, the fealty economists show to this principle is as much mathematical as philosophical. The topology of diminishing returns is easy for economists to navigate: a landscape of declining gradients and single peaks, free of the treacherous craters and crevasses that might otherwise entrap them.
The hero of the second half of Mr. Warsh’s book is Paul Romer, of Stanford University, who took up the challenge ducked by Mr. Solow. If technological progress dictates economic growth, what kind of economics governs technological advance? In a series of papers, culminating in an article in the Journal of Political Economy in 1990, Mr. Romer tried to make technology "endogenous", to explain it within the terms of his model. In doing so, he steered growth theory out of the comfortable cul-de-sac in which Mr. Solow had so neatly parked it.
The escape required a three-point turn. First, Mr. Romer assumed that ideas were goods—of a particular kind. Ideas, unlike things, are "non-rival": Everyone can make use of a single design, recipe or blueprint at the same time. This turn in the argument led to a second: the fabrication of ideas enjoys increasing returns to scale. Expensive to produce, they are cheap, almost costless, to reproduce. Thus the total cost of a design does not change much, whether it is used by one person or by a million.
Blessed with increasing returns, the manufacture of ideas might seem like a good business to go into. Actually, the opposite is true. If the business is free to enter, it is not worth doing so, because competition pares the price of a design down to the negligible cost of reproducing it.
Unless idea factories can enjoy some measure of monopoly over their designs—by patenting them, copyrighting them, or just keeping them secret—they will not be able to cover the fixed cost of inventing them. That was the final turn in Mr. Romer’s new theory of growth.
How much guidance do these theories offer to policymakers, such as those sitting on the World Bank’s commission? In Mr. Solow’s model, according to a common caricature, technology falls like "manna from heaven", leaving the bank’s commissioners with little to do but pray. Mr. Romer’s theory, by contrast, calls for a more worldly response: educate people, subsidies their research, import ideas from abroad, carefully gauge the protection offered to intellectual property.
But did policymakers need Mr. Romer’s model to reveal the importance of such things? Mr. Solow has expressed doubts. Despite the caricature, he did not intend in his 1956 model to deny that innovation is often dearly bought and profit-driven. The question is whether anything useful can be said about that process at the level of the economy as a whole. That question has yet to be answered definitively. In particular, Mr. Solow worries that some of the "more powerful conclusions" of the new growth theory are unearned, flowing as they do from powerful assumptions.
At one point in Mr. Warsh’s book, Mr. Romer is quoted comparing the building of economic models to writing poetry. It is a triumph of form as much as content. This creative economist did not discover anything new about the world with his 1990 paper on growth. Rather, he extended the metre and rhyme-scheme of economics to capture a world—the knowledge economy—expressed until then only in the loosest kind of doggerel. That is how economics makes progress. Sadly, it does not, in and of itself, help economies make progress. [br] According to the passage, which of the following is NOT true?
选项
A、The author holds that Solow’s 1956 contribution was a substantial feat.
B、Solow thinks that progress can be made with more labour and capital.
C、The author concludes that manufacture of ideas is not a good business to go into.
D、It is impossible to challenge the two articles Mr. Solow issued.
答案
A
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3908698.html
相关试题推荐
DefenseSecretaryRobertGatespromisedThursdaytospeedupchangestothe
DefenseSecretaryRobertGatespromisedThursdaytospeedupchangestothe
Fiftyyearsago,RobertSolowpublishedthefirstoftwopapersoneconomic
InearlyJune,theOrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDevelopment(OE
InearlyJune,theOrganizationforEconomicCooperationandDevelopment(OE
[originaltext]Berlin,Germany—Germany’seconomicgrowthinthepastyearwas
[originaltext]Berlin,Germany—Germany’seconomicgrowthinthepastyearwas
[originaltext]Berlin,Germany—Germany’seconomicgrowthinthepastyearwas
【B1】[br]【B7】political→financial/economic本题属于语义衔接错误。第二段首句是该段主题句,之后对禽流感大范围爆发的潜在影
InBritain,popularnewspapersarealsocalled______.A、tabloidsB、qualityC、bro
随机试题
RitualChildKillingsSpreadAlarm,AngerinIvoryCoastAtleast21children
A.decreaseB.directlyC.goingD.keepE.lessF.mainG.mindH.moodI
A
与现券交易相比,远期交易的特点主要表现在以下( )方面。 ①远期交易买卖双方
下列哪一项不是病人在医患关系中的权力A.基本的医疗权 B.选择生与死的权力
下列哪种情况引起的体温升高属于生理性体温升高A.妇女月经前期B.恶性肿瘤C.甲状
黄某,2006年10月因医疗事故受到吊销医师执业证书的行政处罚,2008年9月向
(2019年真题)关于无形资产的企业所得税处理,下列说法正确的有()。A.无形
阴部动脉来自A、腹主动脉 B、髂内动脉 C、髂外动脉 D、肾动脉 E、肠
猩红热患儿皮疹特点,以下哪项不正确A.皮疹粗糙,鸡皮样瘆 B.常有散在糠屑样脱
最新回复
(
0
)