ECONOMIC PROGRESS AND ADAM SMITH’S DILEMMA

IF 1.2 Q3 ECONOMICS

National Institute Economic Review Pub Date : 2023-11-23 DOI:10.1017/nie.2023.21

Diane Coyle

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Adam Smith saw the division of labour and specialisation as the driver of ‘universal opulence’, a process limited by the scope of the market. He also believed that competition was essential to ensure growth benefited the public. Yet eventually there could be a trade-off between these two mechanisms. In today’s era of global production networks, the markets at certain links in supply chains may support just one specialised supplier; and in winner-take-all digital markets there is a single supplier even at global scale. When the scope of the market is global, there may be a trade-off between specialisation and competition.

查看原文本刊更多论文

经济进步与亚当·斯密的困境

亚当·斯密认为劳动分工和专业化是“普遍富裕”的驱动力，这一过程受到市场范围的限制。他还认为，竞争是确保经济增长惠及公众的必要条件。然而，最终这两种机制之间可能会有一种权衡。在当今全球生产网络的时代，供应链中某些环节的市场可能只支持一家专业供应商;在赢者通吃的数字市场中，即使在全球范围内，供应商也是单一的。当市场的范围是全球性的，在专业化和竞争之间可能存在一种权衡。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

National Institute Economic Review ECONOMICS-

CiteScore

3.70

自引率

9.50%

发文量

期刊介绍： The National Institute Economic Review is the quarterly publication of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research, one of Britain"s oldest and most prestigious independent research organisations. The Institutes objective is to promote, through quantitative research, a deeper understanding of the interaction of economic and social forces that affect peoples" lives so that they may be improved. It has no political affiliation, and receives no core funding from government. Its research programme is organised under the headings of Economic Modelling and Analysis; Productivity; Education and Training and the International Economy.