IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/scippl/v38y2011i9p681-690.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Moon and the Ghetto revisited

Author

Listed:
  • Richard R Nelson

Abstract

While over the past two centuries technological advance has enabled remarkable increases in worker productivity and the general standard of living of much of the world's population, progress has been much greater in certain industries and areas of human need than in others. For example, while great advances have been made in preventing or curing a wide range of diseases that used to be killing or crippling, there has been little progress made in how we go about educating children. And today there are many challenges for humankind where new technology is much needed, but thus far has been hard to achieve; dealing with global warming is a prime example. This essay is concerned with identifying the reasons for the very uneven technological progress that has been made thus far, and exploring how progress might be increased in areas of great need where progress to date has been very slight. The concept of an innovation system, which Lundvall has been prominent in developing, plays a central role in the analysis. Copyright , Beech Tree Publishing.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard R Nelson, 2011. "The Moon and the Ghetto revisited," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 38(9), pages 681-690, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:38:y:2011:i:9:p:681-690
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/scipol/38.9.681
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:scippl:v:38:y:2011:i:9:p:681-690. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/spp .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.