The long overhang of bad decisions in agro-industrial development: Sugar and tomato paste in Ghana

In theory, learning from past mistakes should result in adapted and improved development policy. However policy learning can be difficult to achieve, and the link between learning and policy change is neither direct nor immediate. In this study we look at learning in agro-industrial policy in Ghana, by tracing the interest in sugar production and tomato processing over six decades. Specifically we ask why four failed factories established in the early 1960s have continued to play central roles in both policy and public discourse. Using policy documents, academic material, and the popular press, we show that Ghana’s policy focus on sugar production and tomato processing has endured, despite the fact that the factories were misconceived, poorly sited, ill-equipped and poorly managed. Indeed, the political ideas that underpinned the establishment of these factories in the early days of independence can be seen in the current One District, One Factory policy. We suggest that it is their symbolic and political value, not their economic value, which keeps the discussion around these factories alive. Even when shut down, they are a physical manifestation of historic commitments by the state, and as such they guarantee the attention of politicians, and hold out hope of a next re-launch. Unfortunately as long as the factories continue to be incorporated into each new generation of agro-industrial policy, it is difficult for any alternatives to gain traction. This analysis highlights the very long overhang of bad decisions, particularly when they are associated with physical infrastructure. Learning from past mistakes will only happen if the short-term political cost of turning policy learning into policy action can be overcome.     

工业体系和民营企业兴起——基于252家中国最大民营制造业企业的经验研究

主流经济学家把改革开放后民营企业的大规模兴起，主要归因为市场经济条件下发挥企业家精神和遵循比较优势的必然结果。但是这无法解释为什么民营企业在兴起之初就广泛和快速地进入到各个工业，尤其是技术和资本密集型工业。基于中国工业史和252家中国最大民营制造业企业创业发展史的历史证据，文章找回"工业体系"这一被主流所忽略的重大历史现象和学术概念，从而首次提出一种理解中国民营企业发展独特性的结构性解释。文章发现：从计划经济时期继承而来的门类齐全和独立完整的工业体系，是解释民营企业创业和发展独特性的关键变量；已有的由国有企业和科研院所组成的工业体系，从市场机会、技术能力和组织资源等方面塑造了民营企业的创业选择和发展路径。所以，中国民营企业的快速发展不是仅凭自由市场就会自动出现的普遍现象，而是在市场条件下充分利用工业体系提供的技术和市场条件才得以出现的特殊现象。     

国家科技创新能力时空差异性评价

科技创新规模扩张和科技创新效率提升是增强国家科技创新能力的两条关键途径。基于现有研究鲜有结合科技创新规模和科技创新效率开展国家科技创新能力评价的现状，采用因子分析法，系统筛选国家科技创新规模影响因素，并结合科技创新效率影响因素，完善国家科技创新能力评价指标体系，通过构建DEA Malmquist指数模型，评价不同时期国家科技创新效率变化指数，以及中国与全球10个国家科技创新能力的时空差异性。研究表明，R&D投入强度、R&D研究人员、专利申请量、科技期刊文章数、高科技产品出口额占制成品出口总额的百分比、科技创新效率是影响国家科技创新能力的关键指标；1991-2014年中国科技创新能力水平呈指数增长态势，有力提升了国家科技实力；全球10个国家科技创新能力水平除日本出现一定波动外，其余九国整体呈小幅递增态势。     

试论人力资本的投资回报路径

人力资本与物质资本虽然在生产经营过程中关系密切,但由于两者的投入性质和方式不同,投资回报的性质和路径也不同。研究和区分人力资本与物质资本的不同投资回报路径,把握人力资本投资回报路径的特性,有利于政府在公共管理中推动人力资本的生成,有利于完善激励机制,发挥人力资本的潜能。     

基于我国货物出口轨迹及效应分析的出口贸易战略调整取向

改革开放以来,我国根据各个时期所处国际国内环境的变化,制定了不同的出口贸易发展战略,取得了举世瞩目的成就,从1981年到2005年六个五年计划期间,我国出口额增长了34倍,由世界32位成长为世界第三大贸易国。但根据六个五年计划的出口贸易轨迹来看,还存在一些问题,另外国际国内环境不断变化,需要我们调整贸易战略,以适应不同的环境,完成我国从贸易大国向贸易强国的转变。     

数字时代的银行业变迁——网点布局与行业结构

数字技术可以帮助市场主体重构组织模式,数字经济时代的金融业也因此迎来变革。本文基于2014年至2019年我国县级行政区数据,研究发现,数字金融的发展显著减缓了我国银行业金融机构实体网点的扩张势头,这种效应主要体现在股份制商业银行和城市商业银行上,并主要影响这两类银行的基层机构。同时,我们发现数字金融的发展加快了农村合作金融机构的转型和网点退出,但对国有“六大行”没有显著影响。进一步研究发现,数字金融的影响效果会随着经济发展程度提高和地区金融可得性增加而增强,但随着在位银行的市场势力提升而下降。本文为理解数字经济时代银行业的变迁提供了一定参考。     

论经济新闻人才培养的路径创新

财经传媒热及大众媒体的“经济化”,使经济新闻及传媒人才走俏。财经院校依托经济管理的学科优势培养经济新闻人才,应寻求经济管理学科与新闻学之间的契合点,处理好一般新闻学课程与经济新闻类课程的衔接关系,并强化实践教学和就业方向,以突出经济新闻专业特色,力戒“泛化”、“软化”和“硬化”。     

Evolutionary social science and universal Darwinism

How should social scientists, inclined to an evolutionary theory of aspects of human culture like science, technology, business organization and practice, react to proposals that they embrace a “Universal Darwinism”? The most prominent variety of Universal Darwinism argues for close counterparts between the variables and mechanisms of cultural evolution and biological evolution, for example proposing the concept of “memes” as units of culture. Other Universal Darwinists propose, more flexibly, that human culture and biological species both change over time through a process that involves variation and selection, but that the details of the processes may be very different. This essay argues that the narrower form of Universal Darwinism should not be acceptable to social scientists. The differences in the details of cultural evolution and biological evolution are considerable. On the other hand, if Universal Darwinism provides a roomy intellectual tent welcoming scholars studying a variety of topics, with the unifying element being a dynamic theory involving variation and selection, but with the key variables and mechanisms being recognized as perhaps differing greatly between biology and human culture, we can be happy in that camp. Evolutionary Social Science and Universal Darwinism.     

When is it coevolution?

This paper evaluates the differences between Norgaard's and Winder et al.'s approach to socio-environmental coevolution. Winder et al. emphasize the evolutionary dynamics of coevolutionary change. These were omnipresent in Norgaard's work but they have not been adequately explored by other ecological economists. I argue that Winder et al.'s definition of coevolution is in essence the same as Norgaard's and that their real differences are, how they see coevolution applied and how far they are willing to draw a priori a line between evolutionary and non-evolutionary socio-environmental dynamics. My thesis is that at this stage a more open approach to evolutionary dynamics and coevolution a la Norgaard is a wiser strategy than Winder et al.'s narrower approach.     

Evolutionary foundations of aggregate-taking behavior

Summary. I show that aggregate-taking behavior is often evolutionarily stable for finite population in symmetric games in which payoff depends only on own strategy and an aggregate. I provide economic examples exhibiting this phenomenon. Received: August 27, 2001; revised version: January 29, 2002 RID="*" ID="*" The paper has profited from the comments of Maria Montero, Burkhard Hehenkamp, Wolfgang Leininger, and Dave Furth. Financial support from the DFG via Postgraduate Programme at the University of Dortmund and via SFB 504 at the University of Mannheim is acknowledged. RID="*" ID="*" Present address: University of Mannheim, SFB 504, L 13, 15, 68131 Mannheim, Germany (e-mail: possajen@sfb504.uni-mannheim.de)