Bachelor of Arts St Olaf College, 1927. Master of Arts (History), Doctor of Philosophy University Wisconsin, 1932, 1941. Honorary Doctor of Laws Michigan State University, 1974.
Instructor, Michigan State College, 193742. Economics, United States War Agencies, 1942-1945. Fiscal Economics, United States Bureau Budget, 1946-1948.
Professor. University Illinois, 1948-1951. Consultant, Government Burma, 1951-1953. Visiting Professor, Professor of Economics, Professor Political Science, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass., USA, 1953-1958, 1958-1972, 1966-1972.
Director, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass., USA Center International Studies, 1970-1972. Consultant, United States ECA, 1948. President's Task Force Foreign Member, Economics Assistance, 1961, Agency International Development, 1965-1972.
United States Council International Chamber Commerce, 1955. Consultant, Government Japan, 1956, El Salvador, 1962-1963, Saudi Arabia, since 1968. Member, United States President's Commission American Indian, 1967-1968.
Economics Consultant Development Countries, PO Box 426, Cataumet, Massachusetts, United States of America, since 1972.
(Philadelphia 1957. Memoirs of the American Philosophical ...)
Apart from my first article, my early work was relevant to wartime economic planning. My work after two years as adviser on economic development to the government of Burma (the advice did not ‘take’) has dealt in one way or another with the theory and practice of the economic development of low-income countries and of economic aid to development. Mid-career work in this area dealt with the relationship of noneconomic factors to the initiation and rate of modern economic growth.
My expositions had some influence on anthro- pologists and sociologists but it was of little interest to general economists, who do not deal with inter-individual differences. In general, I have argued that economic growth in the LDCs has been no faster not because of peculiar characteristics of those countries, or special barriers, but because of the sheer difficulty of technical advance, and that differences in growth rates are due largely to differences in interest and effectiveness in attacking that process. In addition I have made three specific contributions. I have argued the irrelevance of the theory of a lowincome population growth trap.
I have noted that appropriate protection of manufacturing industry increases national output if factor prices in agriculture and manufacturing differ from shadow prices in the usual ways. (Others then noted that subsidies to industry yield still greater gain.) More recently (No. 9 above) I have resurrected the theory of technological unemployment, a sound theory highly relevant to economic growth that was ejected from economic theory during the 1920s and 1930s out of reaction to the excesses of the technocrates.