Productions Complex Curves
Basic Olicognograph: Effects of Change
Which Trajectories of Development ? All converging ?
Up-to-date debates on models of growth and development have adressed pathways, more or less within an international frame of specialization and world labour distribution. Should this make sense on sort of infrastructures or policies, but away basic social ones: how to finance and whom should define policies. Latelly "Economists are still debating on the strengths and weaknesses of several concepts and measures of convergence. Nevertheless, there is agreement on the observation that productivity growth rates of the World’s countries do not converge to a common rate. The traditional neoclassical model (Solow) predicted such ‘absolute’ or ‘global’ convergence, due to its assumption of a single worldwide production function featuring decreasing marginal returns to capital. In such world, differences in labor productivity growth rates can merely be a temporary phenomenon, caused by initial differences in capital intensities. This view, however, could not stand attempts to verify it empirically".
"Baumol and others rejected the implied hypothesis of global convergence (see, e.g., Sala-i-Martin, ...). 3 avenues of research have been pursued to proceed towards a more satisfactory growth theory, which could account for the emergence of convergence clubs. 1) the assumption of diminishing marginal returns to capital was relaxed in endogenous growth theories, such as Lucas and Romer. Consequently, 2 countries with identical savings rates but different initial capital-labor ratios are likely to experience different productivity growth rates in these models. 2) Mankiw et al. proposed to stick to the basics of the Solowian model, but to include human capital as a production factor, in addition to physical capital and (raw) labor. In this augmented Solow-model, steady state productivity growth rates can differ between countries, because they are dependent on the rates of investment in human capital. Thus, these models can generate divergence between groups of countries". 3) Alternative is the ‘technology gap’ perspective. Proponents of this approach (e.g. Abramovitz, Verspagen, Fagerberg) argue that the Solowian assumption that all countries produce according to a common worldwide production function is wrong. They see technological differences as the prime cause for differences in GDP per capita across countries.
"Fundamental is the assumption that many countries are not able to benefit sufficiently from high productivity production processes operated elsewhere. In this approach the basic 2 variables of interest are the innovation rate of the leader(s) and the rates at which the relatively backward countries can catch-up through assimilating new knowledge. For a given rate of innovation, a ‘bifurcation rate’ can be calculated. Countries with a catch-up rate below this rate will face an ever-increasing gap, whereas countries with a higher rate will ultimately reach growth rates similar to the leader. Basu & Weil proposed a model of international productivity growth dynamics, in which localized innovation is introduced as a force that can drive divergence. The model combines elements of the Solow model and the technology gap approach. Like the Solow model, this model (henceforth, we will use this abbreviation) assumes that new knowledge about production technologies is immediately public.".
Diversity is essential to Pathways
Would be the theoretical and practical issues on microinformations, if you understand that you develop any activity within a universe which is never neutral: because in a physical material universe, you have necessary reactivity, crossed effects and interactions. Also because we are also interested by those interactions, then you have to consider pathways and the economics of your pathways. "Path-ways" (path-aways or ways-in-path) are often analytic views with assumptions of purity of concepts, commonly directed toward policies designed by people with poor political field experience. We may dislike to include complications in ourselves logical systems, because this complicates the belief. But you have to cope with difficulties with a sense of positive critical thinking, where both should be cared. By side of analysis and of formal tools ressources for prevent of treat advserse effects. This seems to help logical system and you have means that make sense if with linear proportionality of effects (or with statistics 'normal effects'). Considering regional scale infrastructure projects there could or should be time's generations and overlaps.
Considering the degree of advancement of societies, modern issues must at the same time preserve necessary cultures and traditions and include innovations. Democracy there would be defined as the minimum proper sets of sustainable constraints to enhance cover of complex issues, hence sustainable development. But it is nevertheless hard, because, as we think, democracy has no given form nor easy frame. So, many cultural and different ways can exist to lead to such sort of respect of universal common social values and care management of governments that could be inspired by that, especially local ones.
With activities and processes of transformations in material fields you have to think about or take into account 1) where you go, 2) the costs implied by having progresses in such environments if with exact goals and/or their impacts, 3) diffusions and/or adverse effects, soon or late to appear. Potential or possibilities are also around in the environment. You can call them geographic local advantages (like of tradable goods). In ecology and with adverse effects you call these sensitive or critical environments. You can catch the ones, care the others when it helps your own projects and social agreement. Think about what you can loose and supplementary costs. Care the environment may not have to pretend that you will consider waste and costs from corruption, obstacles to entry in business and so on. But these can take more importance than substantial effects of your activities.
Facing costs can distort structural calculus. For example, if missing some traditional sort of contributions that in fact are effectively servicing the success of the changes you promote. From your sense of balance and management your ability to support extra-fees virtuous payments instead of calling corruption anything out of plan by tended cash flows. This may make the difference between involvement and failure. Also to observe that more anticipated or speculated the ex-ante sooner come the disqualification. "Roads to Reality" needs to have plenty of questions on potential and essential formulations that could sustend, cover and open opportunities to catch. Not to consider yourself a good manager if you have only succeed to avoid any social dilution of your budget or any good social program of explanations, formal or more often informal activities (when based on cultural shared understanding).
With social projects (all pretend to have this ambition), you may have to catch all small opportunities to make social returns turn positive. Do not miss to care the small ones on the road, if you are not sure that the large ones of big infrastructures will really come. Peoples and cultures hardly adapt or disappear often in these cases (and some haunt memories). At the minimum make honnestly learning processes; they are anyhow useful if with substantial knowledge. There are plenty of projects that have well fulfilled their reports, intermediate and final assessments, gave jobs for a while, succeeded to avoid brutal social waves; but, at end, most people will remember these only as something that did not let much than social fraud; despite plenty of efforts to communicate on the success. Fake amnesia can start as soon as the renewal of professionals of same institutions to pretend things have not been done. Quite often what or whom remain stay with conflicts unsolved. All this affect the reputation of the Agency when negative but are unopposed since more money is pretended to come.
"Pattern of wealth accumulation depends critically on the allocation of power of bargaining . For example of 2 extreme cases: one in which principals, and the other in which agents, have all the bargaining power (i.e., one party makes a take-it-or-leave-it contract offer to the other). Poverty traps arise when principals have all the bargaining power. Owing to their lack of collateral, poor agents are provided a “floor” contract awarding them rents (i.e., a payoff in excess of their outside opportunities), simply in order to provide adequate effort incentives. “Support system” is progressively withdrawn by principals as the agents become wealthier. This effectively creates a 100% marginal tax on limited degrees of wealth accumulation by the poor. At sufficiently high levels of wealth, however, the contractual rents disappear, as agents can post sufficient collateral and have high outside options. Hence wealthy agents do recover some of the benefits of their saving".
Change's basic 3 fibers (not just curve of Production's Factors)
A project is a collection of determined transformations. It could well differenciate at least 3 registers. One would be the material transformations (commonly accumulation). In economics it is a curve of production formulated according factors of production. But at our ground level (matter, energy, information-entropy), may be the sort of profile should see 3 related curves (along time or in a black or white box of time of transformations). Curves profile should be more realistic (like biochemical ?). Any may receive a material definition (by the relation between energy and matter). Be the one of information like a map of differenciated distribution of the previous, a real physical area map (but probabilistic because it is to hard, in complexity to make it perfect) and an intented one which is the one of the project or a map of transformations between the original one and project's one.
A project is not just whatever wanted by the leader, the people or the technocrats. Original map can be a landscape or a piece of ecosystem. Project can for example pretend to put water there, power plant there, buildings and settlement(s) there, and so on. Energy differenciated maps makes one original (supporting ecosystem) one the present transformed ecosystem and the one pretending to energetic transformations or the matrix of transformations; like of renewable or non renewable matters producing energy which can be catch by diverse energetic devices: motors, engines, electricity, or schematic symbols, and so on. These energetic devices allows humans' engineering transformations, design a project that can be implemented to produce expected transformations. Humans themselves are energetic engines and special care can be given to their destructive potential (as well as to their elimination) like when using fire "for cleaning the space of greed" or uncare the commons concerning sustainability.
Now, the meaning of information here is of physics. The sorts of concepts we should manage is as in science of transformations: thermodynamics. There are the concepts of entropy (spontaneous trend to desorganize) which, together with openness and possibility to differenciate at least 2 subsystems (dualist separation, or a particle in its' field) allow entropy's counter trend of construction: neguentropy. As a result a local (sub)system can gain more entropy potential, as accumulating structured matter and potential energetic matter giving together more information of structure. Thermodynamics and thermochemistry have many complementary concepts as: reactivity (characteristic properties of types of materiality), orders of reactions managed), metastability.
So be it or not a
pictured analogy of what occur biologically when the strands of basic
biological information operate we can see a project or plan as a piece of
intented trajectory of information (manipulation of the spontaneous one) put
int a box of transformations, occuring or possible, with at least 2 options and
probably more (the last one and the next one). 
Our box of transformations is composed of 3 strands as in above graph. These strands readjust together, by equivalence out of the box of transformation. And ground perspective of project reviews what explain (or should be manipulated) to observe or cause: matters - energies - information discrepant strands. Of course of the box of interest, but not without the environment, inputs and outputs of the transformations. Be this properly made and shared or intented, and we can let behind plenty of unecessary speculations. Our purpose is not to prevent any speculation or expectation but to care that they could have good effects and not to turn inhumane.
This redefinition of relations made by a project of transformations, is generally expected at a higher level of incorporated organization and energy. However, you should not miss out of that box the disorganizing entropy empowered and the waste produced. In our opinion each of these strands could be modelized, somehow like curves of production (CES function being the most common), but in a more complicated also with more interesting way for care.
Suggested correspondance would be, during the project of change:
- Matter's curve of transformations: like of CES or (we prefer) Verhulst's function (starting more slowly, accelerating then exhausting.
- Energetic curve of thermodynamic biological transformations, with a quantity of energy of activation, necessary for inducing the change and a decaying to a generally higher energetic level metastable state.
- A curve of expression of switche(s) of information that could be a S bifurcation: you push a system's information at its limits, meet these, mind how (or remember) to change the configuration of information, thus regress on time (virtual of black box) and switch to another one, generally higher if developing new system.
Project assessment has traditionnally been heterogenous, reduce to 2 main perspectives of triumphant economics paradigmas but and exposed to many non democratic illegitimate manipulations. Meanwhile there is also a looking like diversity of methods forced by clientelist aid agencies to biase and make incompatible different agencies methods; misunderstanding or tiring projects' democratic transparency.
Quite often also, because of the difficulties of comprehensive view provided by money value (distorted and distorting), pieces of information have been use just for comparisons between very similar projects. Few fragments ignore comprehensive process, transparency and local values. See that for example in projects of rural electricity, dams economics assessment, water networks, and so on. Reducing their philosophy to some important critical points, but poorly serving the learning of people where implemented..
