Hi,  
  
As I see it, the question that concepts like "spontaneous order" aim to   
answer is this: How is it that, under the conditions of a free market   
economy, the separate specialists who do not know each other and who do   
not know anything, or at least very little, about the specialized   
knowledge possessed by the others -- how is it that the actions of these   
people get coordinated so that each can in some measure benefit from the   
actions performed by the other? This does not seem to be the same   
question that was asked by Smith with his baker, butcher, and brewer   
example or with his concept of the invisible hand because it tries to   
dig deeper by not taking coordination for granted. Neither, as I recall,   
is it the question asked by Friedman with his pencil example or by Hayek   
with his tin example (although I believe that Hayek came closer than   
anyone else to the idea I will describe below). There examples are too   
restricted.  
  
It seems to me that the focus ought to be on what we might call   
intermediary entrepreneurship. Such entrepreneurship, which is to some   
extent possessed by practically everyone, aims to identify gains from   
specialization and trade and to take advantage of them by making   
markets. It announces offers to make transactions that are customized to   
fit those who accept them. Because of this entrepreneurship, less   
active, alert and knowledgeable individuals who possess a particular   
specialization ("local knowledge?") can benefit through trade from the   
goods and resources produced by others without having to acquire the   
specialized knowledge that would otherwise be required.  
  
There is some recognition of intermediary entrepreneurship in the   
transactions costs literature. But I have not seen a direct link between   
the idea that reducing transactions costs facilitates exchange and the   
idea that intermediary entrepreneurship enables specialists to gain from   
each others' specialized knowledge without having to acquire it.  
  
If your planned research is approached from the point of view of   
intermediary entrepreneurship, it seems very important. I don't know,   
however, whether you can expect to find historical precedents. It occurs   
to me, though. that one might find some good examples in the   
international trade literature, particularly that which focuses on human   
capital.  
  
The problem, Diana, with using examples of a single good is that they do   
not get at the heart of the issue of reciprocation, as I see it. How, we   
might ask, is the knowledge of the Kuwaiti oil accountant linked to the   
knowledge of the owner-operator of a Taiwan fishing trawler? If one   
tries to conceive of tracing the reciprocal benefits to what I called   
intermediary entrepreneurship, one would be on the right track, I think.  
  
Pat Gunning