Nonetheless, it was impossible not to be aware that there was controversy and interest in development theory, especially with the work on turnpike theorems. But having come from the East and having spent a junior year at the LSE, I was always curious about the naming of these parts. Lionel McKenzie points to Samuelson, who of course was from the East, in fact, Cambridge, Mass. Anyone who had grown up with the Ivy League, of course, would have turned to the Mass Pike and the Connecticut Turnpike for an analogy for the faster routes. But if Samuelson had spent more of his academic life in New York, would he have proposed a highway theorem? Would a meandering path to development have posed a parkway problem? And if he had headed out to the West Coast to Berkeley or Stanford maybe he would have developed a series of freeway theorems. Could we all get to the steady state via an interstate? Actually, had he been at that other Cambridge would the topic be known for its dual carriageway theorems?

DW: As happy as I was with Paul Krugman’s review (and that of The Economist), neither had much to say about the argument of the book.  So yes, at some point, I will address his doubts on this page. I’ll mull it over for a bit. I am not much of a blogger at heart!  

 
I’m not aware of a gloss on the nonconvex analysis of romer’s thesis, which is one reason I didn’t attempt anything myself in the book.  Martin Weitzman has a book just out called Income, Wealth and the Maximum Principle in which he develops a “standard” version of dynamic optimization techniques for economic problems, using mainly calculus at the level of an advanced undergraduate undergraduate.  But the background of convex analysisis from which the departure too place probably is not what your interested in.  I’ll call around and see if I can elicit a proper answer.            DW

I recently led a research project on the increased use of associations of highly skilled expatriate nationals in knowledge exchange and capacity development, and on the policies and level of awareness among Asian countries to capture the benefits of such practices. The emphasis is on knowledge exchange rather than knowledge transfer, since the former suggests the two-way knowledge flows increasingly evident: from host to home countries (e.g. advanced technology) and from home to host countries (e.g. reputational advice on potential business partners). Detailed reviews of such knowledge exchanges were carried out in the Philippines, People’s Republic of China (PRC), and Afghanistan to explore innovative means of improving policies and using networks for knowledge exchange that might otherwise be carried out by non-diaspora, expatriate professionals. Such knowledge exchanges can increase the development impact of remittances, and are valuable in their own right. The studies were carried out in consultation with the respective diaspora organizations, and were completed in 2005.

Other researchers have attempted to conceptualize these practices with respect to diasporas under the rubric of “transnationalism”, “scientific diaspora”, and “brain circulation” (Saxenian). Another line of research suggests that the strong family ties linking traditional overseas Chinese business networks are morphing into much larger and more dispersed networks with weak ties. These weak tie networks, which include many of the emerging networks among overseas professional diasporas, are less costly to maintain than strong-tie networks, and are good for casting a broad net for unique and novel information. However, weak tie networks are less effective for transferring complex, non-codified knowledge, i.e. tacit knowledge that isn’t written down, and derives from personal, practical know-how, nor for transferring knowledge that is dependent on other hard-to-access knowledge.

For a summary of the research, see “Promoting Knowledge Exchange through Diasporas”, in Government of Australia, Proceedings of G-20 workshop on Demographic Challenges and Migration : 265-308. http://www.g20.org/Public/Publications/Pdf/2005_workshop_proceedings.pdf

–
Clay G. Wescott
Asia Pacific Governance Institute
Manila, Philippines
632-810-7931
skype cwescott
email cwescott@post.harvard.edu