SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Michael Perelman)
Date:
Mon Jun 19 08:46:29 2006
In-Reply-To:
<6.2.0.14.2.20060617171111.03056ae0@localhost>; from [log in to unmask] on Sat, Jun 17, 2006 at 05:26:14PM -0400
Message-ID:
References:
<[log in to unmask]> <002401c691bb$f24afb70$6601a8c0@Computer1> <6.2.0.14.2.20060617171111.03056ae0@localhost>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (20 lines)
Polly Cleveland wrote:  
> I think any plausible theory of growth must start with Adam Smith's and   
> later Jane Jacob's observation that growth happens in cities. Moreover, as   
> Jacobs further observes, growth happens by import substitution under   
> conditions of active competition and trade. Finally, as any development   
> economist can tell us, growth proceeds faster in more egalitarian societies   
> with relatively low levels of corruption.  
>   
> Has anyone built models that incorporate at least some of these facts?  
  
  
But then, Lewis Mumford, who has something in common with Jane Jacobs,   
insists that this urban growth depends upon an almost parasitic   
relationship with the resources of the surrounding area.  Grey Brechin   
wrote a wonderful book, Imperial San Francisco, to demonstrate how this   
worked in a modern city.  
  
  
Michael Perelman  

ATOM RSS1 RSS2