Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 November 2014
The economic problems of a new country have, of course, a general as well as a particular interest because new countries are a distinct and important class among the countries of the world. But there are two reasons for an even broader scientific interest in such problems. It is here that problems of economic development can be studied; here are the clearest cases. Economic history continues to suffer because economists know too little history and historians too little economics. It can be said in defence of the historians that the scant attention given by economists to the economics of development has left them with but poor equipment. In criticism it might be said that historians have been over-ready to make economic generalizations. Generalizations in economic history are more attractive and more dangerous than in any other field except historical geography. It is, then, in the history of new countries that the economics of development can best be studied.
There is a second reason for our interest. Economists are prone to think in terms of closed systems, i.e., hypothetical economies, isolated and sufficient unto themselves. Studies in international trade and finance have been directed in the main toward the mechanism of adjustment. It is an important problem and a neat, tidy problem, but in most countries policies must rest on an analysis of the operation of open systems—economies functioning in full relation with other countries. I suggest that the fully operating open economic system is best exemplified in new, pioneer countries.
1 See my article, “Economic Factors in Canadian Nationality” (Canadian Historical Review, vol. IV, 03, 1923)Google Scholar; also Innis, Mary Quayle, An Economic History of Canada (Toronto, 1935).Google Scholar