
Ingenuity Optimists I've long been intrigued, annoyed, and --
ultimately -- influenced by the ideas of the late Julian Simon, who taught in the
College of Business and Management of the University of Maryland. Simon fancied
himself a population economist; he was almost fanatically optimistic in his
belief that human beings could deliver copious ingenuity in response to any and
all challenges. I once playfully called an early draft paper about the ingenuity
gap "the ultimate response," since I saw it as a direct reply to Simon's book
The Ultimate Resource. For those unfamiliar with his work, I would
therefore strongly recommend The Ultimate Resource II: People, Materials, and
Environment. In a similar vein are the ideas and arguments of Jesse Ausubel
of Rockefeller University. I have huge respect for Jesse's work, although we
disagree about many things. Three good examples of his thinking are, "Resources
and Environment in the 21st Century: Seeing Past the Phantoms," World Energy
Council Journal; "The Liberation of the Environment," Daedalus; and
"Does Climate Still Matter?" Nature. A fascinating study of the progress of human
ingenuity in one particular domain, that of light-producing technology, is
William Nordhaus, "Do Real-Output and Real-Wage Measures Capture Reality? The
History of Lighting Suggests Not," in The Economics of New Goods.
Complexity and Chaos Complexity and chaos are extremely difficult
ideas, if one wants to understand them properly, but an excellent starting point
is the still classic article by James Crutchfield, J. Doyne Farmer, and Norman
Packard titled "Chaos" in the December, 1986 issue of Scientific American.
The most accessible and thorough treatment of chaos theory I've found is Garnett
Williams, Chaos Theory Tamed. If you're looking for a comprehensive
technical treatment of complexity theory, I would recommend Yaneer Bar-Yam,
Dynamics of Complex Systems. This is not a book for the faint-hearted, and
some knowledge of mathematics is helpful, but Bar-Yam is quite daring in his
treatment of the social and philosophical implications of complexity at the end
of his book. Overall, I found it immensely helpful. On the sources of
complexity in biological, technological, and social systems, I know of no better
analysis than W. Brian Arthur's article "On the Evolution of Complexity" in
Complexity: Metaphors, Models, and Reality. This is truly a ground-breaking piece
that has, Arthur tells me, received remarkably little attention since it was
published. My account of his argument in chapter 4 of The Ingenuity Gap cannot
possibly do it justice. Highly recommended!
Complex Adaptive Systems Closely related to the study of
complexity is the fascinating new field of complex adaptive systems, which I
discuss briefly in chapter 11 of The Ingenuity Gap. Stuart Kauffman
provides a good introduction to recent thinking in this area in At Home in the
Universe: The Search for the Laws of Self-Organization and Complexity; he
develops a more technical argument about self-organization in biological systems
in The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution.
Much of this work is centered on the concept of a "fitness landscape," an idea
first introduced by Sewall Wright in 1932 in an amazingly prescient article
titled "The Roles of Mutation, Inbreeding, Crossbreeding and Selection in
Evolution," Proceedings of the Sixth Internatihonal Congress on
Genetics.
Rising Complexity Countless writings discuss the technological
and social implications of rising complexity in our world, but I found four
particularly stimulating. The seminal discussion of the perils of complex
technological systems is Charles Perrow's book Normal Accidents: Living with
High-Risk Technologies; it has been recently update and reissued. Gene
Rochlin looks at some of the unexpected consequences of the communication and
information revolution in Trapped in the Net: The Unanticipated Consequences
of Computerization. On the social side, Langdon Winner's wonderful article,
"Complexity and the Limits of Human Understanding," is extraordinarily rich with
insights on the social and cognitive challenges posed by rising complexity. It
can be found in a book that's worth reading in its entirety: Organized Social
Complexity: Challenge to Politics and Policy. Finally, for a far more
apocalyptic but tremendously provocative study of the risks of increased social
complexity, see Joseph Tainter, The Collapse of Complex Societies.
Ecological Systems and Environmental Change Where does one start
if one wants to learn about the ecological and environmental changes humankind is
producing on Earth? There is a staggering amount of information available, but
much of it, unfortunately, is of dubious quality. As a standard reference, one
that I use regularly, I recommend the biennial publication World Resources
published by the World Resources Institute in Washington, D.C. Every two years,
this publication provides an in-depth treatment of selected issues relating to
global environmental change, as well as detailed data tables on everything from
population growth to deforestation and energy consumption for every country on
the planet. It is a high-quality publication that can quickly become
indispensable. An astonishingly thorough and comprehensive study of the
effects of human activities on Earth in recent centuries is B. L. Turner II et
al. eds., The Earth as Transformed by Human Action. Of course, not only do
we need to know something about what we're doing to the planet, we also need to
know how these activities affect the complex ecologies around us. Readers of
The Ingenuity Gap will remember that I have been particularly influenced
by the work of the renowned ecologist C.S. "Buzz" Holling. See especially his
article, "New Science and New Investments for a Sustainable Biosphere," chapter 4
in Investing in Natural Capital: The Ecological Economics Approach to
Sustainability. Also see C. S. Holling, "An Ecologist View of the Malthusian
Conflict," in Population, Economic Development, and the Environment. My
first real exposure to the implications of nonlinearities in complex
environmental systems came through Wally Broecker's famous 1987 article on ocean
current systems: "Unpleasant Surprises in the Greenhouse?" Nature. This article
is a blockbuster; it should be required reading for every senior policymaker in
the world.
Evolution of the Human Brain On the evolution of the human brain
and our cognitive and creative abilities, I have found the work of both Rick
Potts and Steven Mithen to be fascinating and compelling. I've corresponded with
them both, and I know they are a bit dubious about the way I integrate their
respective ideas. I'll leave it to readers of The Ingenuity Gap to judge
whether the integration succeeds. Regardless, I would heartily recommend their
books: Rick Potts, Humanity's Descent: The Consequences of Ecological
Instability; and Steven Mithen, The Prehistory of the Mind: A Search for
the Origins of Art, Religion, and Science.
New Growth (Endogenous Growth) Theory I began the intellectual
quest described in The Ingenuity Gap with an extended visit to the world
of New Growth (or Endogenous Growth) theory in economics (as described in chapter
9). The key person here, of course, is Paul Romer. He has written a large number
of path-breaking articles, most of which, unfortunately, are difficult going for
the non-economist. Those that particularly influenced my thinking are:
"Endogenous Technological Change," in the Journal of Political Economy;
"Idea Gaps and Object Gaps in Economic Development,"in the Journal of Monetary
Economics; and "Two Strategies for Economic Development: Using Ideas and
Producing Ideas," in the Proceedings of the World Bank Annual Conference on
Development Economics, 1992. If you want an account of the evolution of
thinking about endogenous growth see Paul Romer, "The Origins of Endogenous
Growth," in the Journal of Economic Perspectives. Philippe Aghion and
Peter Howitt provide a comprehensive technical treatment of this whole
perspective in Endogenous Growth Theory.
New Growth (Endogenous Growth) Theory I began the intellectual
quest described in The Ingenuity Gap with an extended visit to the world
of New Growth (or Endogenous Growth) theory in economics (as described in chapter
9). The key person here, of course, is Paul Romer. He has written a large number
of path-breaking articles, most of which, unfortunately, are difficult going for
the non-economist. Those that particularly influenced my thinking are:
"Endogenous Technological Change," in the Journal of Political Economy;
"Idea Gaps and Object Gaps in Economic Development,"in the Journal of Monetary
Economics; and "Two Strategies for Economic Development: Using Ideas and
Producing Ideas," in the Proceedings of the World Bank Annual Conference on
Development Economics, 1992. If you want an account of the evolution of
thinking about endogenous growth see Paul Romer, "The Origins of Endogenous
Growth," in the Journal of Economic Perspectives. Philippe Aghion and
Peter Howitt provide a comprehensive technical treatment of this whole
perspective in Endogenous Growth Theory.
Market-Induced Technological Innovation My ingenuity argument is,
in many ways, a reply to simplistic neo-classical models of market-induced
technological innovation. An especially important neoclassical treatise on the
sources of innovation is Jacob Schmookler's 1966 book Invention and Economic
Growth. Much early neo-classical thinking focused on market responses to
natural resource scarcity. The work of the induced-innovation theorists was key,
beginning in 1932 with J.R. Hicks, The Theory of Wages and culminating in
1985 in Yujiro Hayami and Vernon Ruttan, Agricultural Development: An
International Perspective. While Hayami and Ruttan deal mainly with
agricultural systems, a more general neo-classical analysis of scarcity is Harold
Barnett and Chandler Morse, Scarcity and Growth: The Economics of Natural
Resource Availability, published in 1963. Although dated, the Barnett and
Morse book remains important; for a more contemporary treatment, see V. Kerry
Smith, ed., Scarcity and Growth Reconsidered. One of the problems
with neoclassical theories of innovation is that they tend to ignore the social,
institutional, and political context within which markets operate -- a context
that largely determines whether markets work well. Mancur Olson argues decisively
that institutions and governance matter in "Big Bills Left on the Sidewalk: Why
Some Nations are Rich, and Others Poor," in the Journal of Economic
Perspectives. Non-economists reading this article might say "so what, we've
known that institutions matter all along"; but until recently mainstream
economists were surprisingly resistant to this idea. For a fun and down-to-earth
account of how technological innovation often works in practice -- an account
that is, once again, sensitive to the myriad non-market factors that affect
innovation -- see Henry Petroski, Invention by Design: How Engineers Get from
Thought to Thing.
Rational-Choice Theory Economics is the queen of the social
sciences. In chapter 11 of The Ingenuity Gap, I discuss some reasons why
the social sciences, especially political science, seem so unsuccessful at
generating truly useful knowledge. One problem may be the basic metaphor or
"model" of human beings that guides social science research. At the core of much
contemporary theory in political science and economics is rational-choice theory,
a set of axioms and hypotheses about human behavior that presumes we are,
essentially, utility-maximizing calculating machines. A powerful recent attack on
this theory is Donald Green and Ian Shapiro, Pathologies of Rational Choice
Theory: A Critique of Applications in Political Science. As I discuss in the
book, the political scientist Elinor Ostrom tries to redeem a version of
rational-choice theory in her impressive 1997 Presidential Address to the
American Political Science Association titled "A Behavioral Approach to the
Rational Choice Theory of Collective Action," published in American Political
Science Review.
Constraints on Science The social sciences may be generally a
mess, but we shouldn't assume that the natural sciences like physics, chemistry,
and biology are, in contrast, entirely free of constraints that restrict their
progress. John Barrow's book, Impossibility: The Limits of Science and the
Science of Limits, is a fascinating treatment of factors -- from chaos to
intractability -- that can keep science from doing everything that we want it to
do. And if you want a startling reminder of how past predictions of scientific
and technological progress, even by the foremost experts of the time, can be
largely wrong, read the mid-1960s forecasts of Herman Kahn and Anthony Wiener in
"The Next Thirty-Three Years: A Framework for Speculation," which appears in
Daniel Bell and Stephen Graubard, eds., Toward the Year 2000: Work in
Progress.
Limits to Social Ingenuity Finally, ingenuity supply, especially
the supply of social ingenuity, is often derailed by powerful elites and
subgroups whose interests would be hurt by institutional reform. New
communication and information technologies can make these groups more powerful
relative to government. Building on the pioneering work of the economist Mancur
Olson in his book The Rise and Decline of Nations: Economic Growth, Stagflation,
and Social Rigidities, Jonathan Rauch and Robert Wright dissect this phenomenon
in American society. See Jonathan Rauch, Demosclerosis: The Silent Killer of
American Government; and Robert Wright 1995 article, "Hyperdemocracy," in Time.
Jessica Tuchman Mathews makes a similar point about societies around the world,
and about international society too, in "Power Shift," in the January/February,
1997 issue of Foreign Affairs. The ultimate power shift will occur when subgroups
get access to weapons of mass destruction. It seems a far-fetched possibility,
until one reads Richard Falkenrath, Robert Newman, and Bradley Thayer, America's
Achilles' Heel: Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Terrorism and Covert
Attack.
Home |
Book Contents |
Book Excerpt |
Suggested Readings |
Ingenuity Theory |
About Thomas Homer-Dixon |
Order The Book
Copyright 2000 Random House, Inc. | Alfred A. Knopf |