https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09538259.2023.2243845
35:4, 913-932
L/O: Understanding the production and use of knowledge (innovation) as an economic concept and grasping the ability to deconstruct the idea that innovation means progress.
Introduction:
This paper explores a historical shift in how we viewed development. In the past, knowledge accumulation was seen as the primary driver of progress. However, during the late 18th century, with the rise of machines, the focus shifted to accumulating capital. Although knowledge remained important, it took a backseat. Some argued that human knowledge, rather than capital, drove productivity, while others emphasised the role of both technological and scientific knowledge alongside capital.
As we moved into the 20th century, the significance of science in the economy became more evident. By the end of the century, it was widely accepted that knowledge accumulation played a central role in progress. This paper suggests that understanding the types of knowledge we possess, how we store, share, and use it can reveal insights about how social relations of production impact development. It also sheds light on who benefits from this knowledge and how production relationships might need to change to foster knowledge development.
Analysis (summary)
This paper aims to bring to light a historical tradition that considered knowledge accumulation as the primary driver of progress. (as opposed to a newer idea that capital accumulation drives change).
This perspective is captured in a statement by Luigi Pasinetti, which underscores the idea that humans learn from past experiences and share their learning over generations.
A sufficient condition [to explain technical and economic change] is to suppose that human beings are able to learn from past experience and to communicate amongst themselves the results of their learning activity. Then, if men, on the average, are born with the same degree of intelligence in time, each generation is bound to go further than the previous one; not because it is more intelligent but because it starts from a better position, by taking advantage of longer experience. (Pasinetti Citation1983, p. 22)
This cumulative vision was common during much of the 18th century but faded with the advent of the machine age, which shifted the focus to capital accumulation. However, emphasis on knowledge did not entirely disappear and remained in the background for about a century and a half.
Throughout history, from Bacon onwards, many authors recognized that societal progress required building upon inherited knowledge. This entails transmitting knowledge across generations and adding innovations in each generation for progress to continue.
The transmission of knowledge has been a recurring challenge, and the paper discusses the importance of education, households, communities, and schools in this process. It highlights that the division of labor is not only crucial for productivity but also for the transmission of knowledge, as it simplifies the learning process. A failure in transmission can result in the loss of knowledge, which may be either positive (outdated) or negative (valuable but deemed too costly to maintain).
—
Adam Smith wrote about knowledge accumulation under the guise of the division of labour. He emphasised that the division of labour is important for the ease of transmission of knowledge and not just for its contribution to productive efficiency. By dividing the knowledge to be transmitted and reducing what each actor was required to learn, the division of labour facilitates the transfer of vast bodies of knowledge which would otherwise be infeasible.
^I DO NOT AGREE WITH THIS because you are also deskilling each actor involved in this type of knowledge exchange. Yes they be experts within their role on the production line but this drives a very binary version of knowledge with productivity and therefore capital accumulation as the primary driver.
—
Innovation is necessary to prevent economic stagnation, and it can occur gradually, intermittently, or in waves. The processes of knowledge transmission and innovation are interconnected, and effective transmission supports innovation. However, mechanisms that facilitate transmission, such as emulation and rote learning, may also hinder change, while easy copying due to low transmission costs can reduce incentives for innovation.
The paper also explores how the ways knowledge is stored, transmitted, and deployed impact social relations of production, ownership forms, bargaining power, and ideological claims. The embodiment of knowledge in machinery during the industrial revolution changed the landscape of production and ownership.