The Knowledge-based Economy: A Sisyphus Model

Notes and References

• Support from the Telstra Fund for Social and Policy Research in Telecommunications is gratefully acknowledged.
   Google Scholar
• F. Machlup & Una Mansfield, ‘Cultural Diversity in Studies of Information’, in: F. Machlup & U. Mansfield (Eds.), The Study of Information: Interdisciplinary Messages (New York, Wiley, 1983), p. 9.
   Google Scholar
• Ibid.
   Google Scholar
• K. J. Arrow, Collected Papers of Kenneth J. Arrow: Volume 4, The Economics of Information (Oxford, Blackwell, 1984), p. 138.
   Google Scholar
• R. R. Nelson & S. G. Winter, An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press, 1982); G. Eliasson et al, The Knowledge Based Information Economy (Stockholm, Industrial Institute for Economic and Social Research, 1990); G. Eliason, Firm Objectives, Controls and Organization: The Use of Information and the Transfer of Knowledge within the Firm (Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1996); M. Abramovitz & P. A. David, ‘Technological Change and the Rise of Intangible Investments: The US Economy's Growth-path in the Twentieth Century’, in: OECD Documents, Employment and Growth in the Knowledge-based Economy (Paris, OECD, 1996); P.J. Sheehan et al., Australia and the Knowledge Economy: An Assessment of Enhanced Economic Growth Through Science and Technology (Melbourne, Centre for Strategic Economic Studies, 1995); Michael Polanyi, The Tacit Dimension (London, Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1967).
   Google Scholar
• Eliasson et al., op. cit., Ref. 5; Eliasson, op. cit., Ref. 5; Abramovitz & David, op. cit., Ref. 5; Sheehan et al., op. cit., Ref. 5.
   Google Scholar
• G. L. S. Shackle, Decision, Order and Time in Human Affairs (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1969), 2nd Edn., p. 272.
   Google Scholar
• Nelson & Winter, op. cit, Ref. 5, p. 172.
   Google Scholar
• Eliasson et al., op. cit., Ref. 5.
   Google Scholar
• Ibid., p. 17.
   Google Scholar
• Eliasson, op. cit., Ref. 5, p. 16.
   Google Scholar
• OECD, op. cit, Ref. 5.
   Google Scholar
• Ibid, p. 20.
   Google Scholar
• He adds: “In fact, had anyone sought money from us [the ARGC] on the argument that he or she would do some research in the hope that an accidental discovery would arise, we should have thought them barmy” (‘The Australian Research Grants Committee: An Account of the Way Things Were’, Prometheus, 14, 2, December 1996, p. 189). Note, however, that the medieval Latin invenire meant accidental discovery while ars meant technological knowhow.
   Google Scholar
• OECD, Information Activities, Electronics and Telecommunications Technologies, Volume 1 (Paris, OECD, 1981), Table 1.3, p. 30.
   Google Scholar
• H-J. Engelbrecht, ‘Review of Australia and the Knowledge Economy’, Prometheus, 14, 2, December 1996, p. 266.
   Google Scholar
• See, for example, Masu Uekusa, ‘The Effect of Innovations in Information Technology on Corporate and Industrial Organization in Japan’, in: Takashi Shiraishi & Shigeto Tsuru (Eds), Economic Institutions in a Dynamic Society: Search for a New Frontier (London, Macmillan, 1989), pp. 162–183; Geert Duysters, The Dynamics of Technical Innovation: The Evolution and Development of Information Technology (Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar, 1996).
   Google Scholar
• K. E. Boulding, ‘The Economics of Knowledge and the Knowledge of Economies’, American Economic Review, LVI. 2, pp. 1–13, 1966, reprinted in D. M. Lamberton (Ed.), Economics of Information and Knowledge (Harmondsworth, UK, Penguin Books, 1971), p. 32.
   Google Scholar
• See Foray & Lundvall, OECD Documents, op. cit., Ref. 5.
   Google Scholar
• See, for example, Pavel Pelikan, ‘Language as a Limiting Factor for Centralization’, American Economic Review, 59, 4, 1969, pp. 625–631; Eric Brousseau, ‘EDI and Inter-firm Relationships: Towards a Standardization of Coordination Processes?’, Information Economics and Policy, 6(3–4), 1994, pp. 319–347.
   Google Scholar
• K. J. Arrow, ‘Methodological Individualism and Social Knowledge’, American Economic Review, 84(2), 1994, pp. 1–9.
   Google Scholar
• D. M. Lamberton, ‘Introduction: “Threatened Wreckage”, or New Paradigm?’, in: D. M. Lamberton (Ed.), The Economics of Communication and Information (Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar, 1996), pp. xiii-xxviii; Information Economics: Research Strategies, University of Strathclyde Department of Management Science Working Paper 96/11; ‘A Taxonomy of Information’, in: A. Mayere (Ed.), Economic de l'information (Paris, Hanrattan, forthcoming).
   Google Scholar
• L. D. Taylor, Telecommunications Demand in Theory and Practice (Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1994), p. 262.
   Google Scholar
• S. Weerahandi, R. S. Hisiger & V. Chien, ‘A Framework for Forecasting Demand and New Services and Their Cross Effects on Existing Services’, Information Economics and Policy, 6, 2, 1994, pp. 143–162.
   Google Scholar
• K. J. Arrow, ‘Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention’, in: National Bureau of Economic Research, The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, reprinted in D. M. Lamberton (Ed.), The Economics of Communication and Information (Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar, 1996), pp. 227–243.
   Google Scholar
• F. Machlup, ‘Optimum Utilization of Knowledge’, Knowledge, Information, and Decisions: Society, 20, 1, 1982, pp. 8–10.
   Google Scholar
• D. M. Lamberton, ‘Innovation and Intellectual Property’, in: M. Dodgson & R. Rothwell (Eds.), The Handbook of Industrial Innovation (Cheltenham, UK, Edward Elgar, 1994), pp. 304–306.
   Google Scholar
• A. G. Hart, as quoted in D. M. Lamberton, ‘Information and Profit’, in: C. F. Carter & J. L. Ford (Eds), Uncertainty and Expectations in Economics: Essays in Honour of G. L. S. Shackle (Oxford, Blackwell, 1972), p. 208.
   Google Scholar
• J. E. Stiglitz, ‘Information and Economic Analysis: A Perspective, Economic Journal, Supplement to Vol. 95, 1985, p. 23.
   Google Scholar
• Quoted by Murray Eden, ‘Cybernetics: Closing the Loop’, in: Machlup & Mansfield, op. cit., Ref. 2, pp. 469–470.
   Google Scholar