Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T16:38:15.684Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Innovation in the American Era of Industrial Preeminence: The Interaction of Policy, Finance, and Human Capital

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 August 2018

Beth-Anne Schuelke-Leech  and
Timothy C. Leech
Beth-Anne Schuelke-Leech
Affiliation:
University of Windsor
Timothy C. Leech
Affiliation:
The Ohio State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract:

It is commonly accepted that innovation and economic prosperity after World War II were really spurred by the tremendous benefits of public investments. While public funding was crucial, a missing component of the historical analysis is a synthesis of the effects of these investments with changes in financial regulations enacted during the Great Depression, specific economic and employment policies, and the infusion of intellectual capital from scientists and engineers fleeing Nazi Germany and the turmoil of the war. The purpose of this article is to synthesize and analyze the effect of these three components—public polices, changes in private financial structures, and highly skilled immigration. This analysis will allow us to explore the broader impact and interdependence of knowledge creation, human and financial capital, and innovation.

Keywords

Economic Policy InnovationIndustrial PolicyWorld War II German Intellectual Migration
Type
Critical Perspective
Information
Journal of Policy History , Volume 30 , Issue 4 , October 2018 , pp. 727 - 753
Copyright
Copyright © Donald Critchlow and Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The authors thank Dr. Kathryn C. Lavelle and the anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions.

References

NOTES

1. OECD, The Nature of Innovation and the Evolution of the Productive System, Technology, and Productivity: Challenge for Economic Policy (Paris, 1991).Google Scholar

2. This is not to say that solving any problem is innovation. Rather, the process of innovation involves recognizing some challenge, problem, misunderstanding, or question and then applying knowledge, creativity, and tools to resolve the issue.

3. Switzer, Lorne, The Financing of Technological Change (Ann Arbor, 1985).Google Scholar

4. Mazzucato, Mariana, The Entrepreneurial State (London, 2011).Google Scholar

5. Orhangazi, Özgür, Financialization and the U.S. Economy (Northampton, Mass., 2008).CrossRefGoogle Scholar The standard history of the New Deal era is Katznelson, Ira, Fear Itself: The New Deal and the Origins of Our Time (New York, 2013).Google Scholar Also useful, though dated, is Leuchtenburg, William E., Franklin D. Roosevelt and the New Deal, 1932–1940 (New York, 1963).Google Scholar

6. Calomiris, Charles W., U.S. Bank Deregulation in Historical Perspective (New York, 2000).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

7. Ibid.

8. Upham, Cyril B. and Lamke, Edwin, Closed and Distressed Banks: A Study in Public Administration (Washington, D.C., 1934).Google Scholar

9. Friedman, Milton and Schwartz, Anna J., A Monetary History of the United States, 1867–1960 (Princeton, 1963).Google Scholar

10. Calomiris, U.S. Bank Deregulation in Historical Perspective.

11. Levy, Jonathan, Freaks of Fortune: The Emerging World of Capitalism and Risk in America (Cambridge, Mass., 2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

12. Ibid.

13. Morrison, Alan D. and Wilhelm, William J. Jr., Investment Banking: Institutions, Politics, and Law (New York, 2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

14. Congress had rejected the idea of a bailout for depositors but accepted a deposit insurance proposal paid for by the banks themselves. See Calomiris, U.S. Bank Deregulation in Historical Perspective.

15. Crouhy, Michel, Galai, Dan, and Mark, Robert, Risk Management (New York, 2001).Google Scholar

16. Carey, J. L., The Rise of the Accounting Profession: From Technician to Professional, 1896–1936 (New York, 1970).Google Scholar

17. Zeff, Stephen A., “How the U.S. Accounting Profession Got Where It Is Today: Part I,” Accounting Horizons 17, no. 3 (September 2003): 189–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

18. Ibid.

19. Previts, Gary John and Merino, Barbara Dubis, A History of Accountancy in the United States: The Cultural Significance of Accounting (Columbus, 1998);Google Scholar see also Nasaw, David, The Patriarch: The Remarkable Life and Turbulent Times of Joseph P. Kennedy (New York, 2012).Google Scholar

20. Herman, Arthur, Freedom’s Forge: How American Business Produced Victory in World War II (New York, 2012).Google Scholar

21. Richardson, Alan J. and Kilfoyle, Eksa, “Regulation,” in The Routledge Companion to Accounting History, ed. Edwards, John Richard and Walker, Stephen P. (New York, 2009).Google Scholar

22. Bruner, Jerome, Mandate from the People (New York, 1944).Google Scholar

23. Sparrow, James T., Warfare State: World War II Americans and the Age of Big Government (New York, 2011).Google Scholar

24. Previts and Merino, A History of Accountancy in the United States.

25. 77th Congress, “Employment Act of 1946,” Congress of the United States, https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/files/docs/historical/trumanlibrary/srf_014_002_0002.pdf (accessed 11 June 2018).

26. Truman, Harry S., “Statement by the President Upon Signing the Employment Act, February 20, 1946,” http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=12584 (accessed 17 August 2017).Google Scholar

27. Kindleberger, Charles P., Manias, Panics, and Crashes: A History of Financial Crises, 4th ed. (New York, 2000).Google Scholar

28. Helleiner, Eric, States and the Reemergence of Global Finance: From Bretton Woods to the 1990s (Ithaca, 1994).Google Scholar

29. Previts and Merino, A History of Accountancy in the United States: The Cultural Significance of Accounting; Wilson, Mark R., Destructive Creation: American Business and the Winning of World War II (Philadelphia, 2016).Google Scholar

30. Including agricultural industries, 18.47 percent of the population in 1948 was self-employed. In 2010, this had dropped to 6.96 percent. Whether agricultural self-employment should be counted differently is debatable because farmers are still dependent on their own labor and management skills for their income. New farming techniques and products such as chemical fertilizers greatly improved agricultural production in the postwar period. However, our article is focused on technological innovation. Therefore, agricultural industries are excluded from further discussion.

31. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, The Economics Daily, “Self-employment rates, 1948–2003,” https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2004/aug/wk4/art02.htm (accessed 23 August 2017).Google Scholar

32. Hart, David M., Forged Consensus: Science, Technology, and Economic Policy in the United States, 1921–1953 (Princeton, 1998).Google Scholar

33. Appel, Toby A., Shaping Biology: The National Science Foundation and American Biological Research, 1945–1975 (Baltimore, 2000).Google Scholar

34. Hart, Forged Consensus.

35. Appel, Shaping Biology.

36. Kleinman, Daniel Lee, Politics on the Endless Frontier: Postwar Research Policy in the United States (Durham, 1995).Google Scholar

37. Hart, Forged Consensus.

38. Collins, Robert M., More: The Politics of Economic Growth in Postwar America (New York, 2000).Google Scholar

39. Medawar, Jean and Pyke, David, Hitler’s Gift: The True Story of the Scientists Expelled by the Nazi Regime (New York, 2000).Google Scholar

40. Kevles, Daniel J., The Physicists: The History of a Scientific Community in Modern America (Cambridge, Mass., 1995).Google Scholar

41. In total, more than 100,000 German refugees immigrated to the United States during this period. Watson, Peter, The German Genius: Europe’s Third Renaissance, the Second Scientific Revolution, and the Twentieth Century (New York, 2010).Google Scholar

42. Hunt, Linda, Secret Agenda: The United States Government, Nazi Scientists, and Project Paperclip, 1945 to 1990 (New York, 1991).Google Scholar See also Jacobsen, Annie, Operation Paperclip: The Secret Intelligence Program That Brought Nazi Scientists to America (New York, 2014).Google Scholar

43. Hunt, Secret Agenda.

44. For a discussion of the contribution of German scholars to the United States, see Bentwich, Norman, The Rescue and Achievement of Refugee Scholars: The Story of Displaced Scholars and Scientists, 1933–1952 (The Hague, 1953);CrossRefGoogle Scholar Coser, Lewis A., Refugee Scholars in America: Their Impact and Their Experience (New Haven, 1984);Google Scholar Kevles, The Physicists; Ash, Mitchell G. and Söllner, Alfons, “Forced Migration and Scientific Change after 1933,” in Forced Migration and Scientific Change: Emigre German-Speaking Scientists and Scholars after 1933, ed. Ash, Mitchell G. and Söllner, Alfons (Washington, D.C., 1996);CrossRefGoogle Scholar Klaus Fischer, “Identification of Emigration-Induced Scientific Change,” in Mitchell and Söllner, eds., Forced Migration and Scientific Change, 23–47.

45. Koistinen, Paul A. C., State of War: The Political Economy of American Warfare, 1945–2011 (Lawrence, Kans., 2012).Google Scholar

46. Klebaner, Benjamin J., American Commercial Banking: A History (Boston, 1990).Google Scholar

47. O’Sullivan, Mary A., “Funding New Industries: A Historical Perspective on the Financing Role of the U.S. Stock Market in the Twentieth Century,” in Financing Innovation in the United States, 1870 to the Present, ed. Lamoreaux, Naomi R. and Sokoloff, Kenneth L. (Cambridge, Mass., 2007).Google Scholar

48. Sobel, Robert, The Curbstone Brokers: The Origins of the American Stock Exchange (New York, 1970).Google Scholar

49. O’Sullivan, “Funding New Industries.”

50. See, for example, Chandler, Alfred D. Jr., The Visible Hand: The Managerial Revolution in American Business (Cambridge, Mass., 1977);Google Scholar Drucker, Peter F., Management: Tasks, Responsibilities, Practices (New York, 1993 [1973]).Google Scholar

51. Phillips-Fine, Kim, Invisible Hands: The Making of the Conservative Movement from the New Deal to Reagan (New York, 2009).Google Scholar

52. Drucker, Peter F., Innovation and Entrepreneurship: Practice and Principles (New York, 2014).Google Scholar

53. Juran, J. M., “The History of Managing for Quality in the United States,” in A History of Managing for Quality: The Evolution, Trends, and Future Directions of Managing for Quality, ed. Juran, J. M. (Milwaukee, 1995), andGoogle Scholar Dumas, Lloyd J., The Overburdened Economy: Uncovering the Causes of Chronic Unemployment, Inflation, and National Decline (Berkeley, 1986).Google Scholar

54. Koistinen, State of War: The Political Economy of American Warfare, 1945–2011.

55. Melman, Seymour, Profits without Production (New York, 1983);Google Scholar Dumas, The Overburdened Economy: Uncovering the Causes of Chronic Unemployment, Inflation, and National Decline.

56. Koistinen, State of War.

57. Bernstein, Peter L., Against the Gods: The Remarkable Story of Risk (New York, 1996).Google Scholar

58. Ibid.

59. Bernstein, Peter L., Capital Ideas (New York, 1992).Google Scholar

60. Bernstein, Peter L., Capital Ideas Evolving (Hoboken, N.J., 2007).Google Scholar

61. Ibid.

62. Klebaner, American Commercial Banking.

63. Eichengreen, Barry, Global Imbalances and the Lessons of Bretton Woods (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2007).Google Scholar

64. Ceruzzi, Paul E., A History of Modern Computing (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2007).Google Scholar

65. Burgin, Angus, The Great Persuasion: Reinventing Free Markets Since the Great Depression (Cambridge, Mass., 2012);CrossRefGoogle Scholar Stedman-Jones, Daniel, Masters of the Universe: Hayek, Friedman, and the Birth of Neoliberal Politics (Princeton, 2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

66. Allen, Franklin and Gale, Douglas, Financial Innovation and Risk Sharing (Cambridge, Mass., 1994);Google Scholar Molyneux, Philip and Shamroukh, Nidal, Financial Innovation (New York, 1999);Google Scholar White, Lawrence J., “Technological Change, Financial Innovation, and Financial Regulation in the United States: The Challenge for Public Policy,” in Performance of Financial Institutions: Efficiency, Innovation, Regulation, ed. Harker, Patrick T. and Zenios, Stavros Andrea (Cambridge, 2000).Google Scholar

67. Froud, Julie S., Leaver, Johal A., and Williams, K., Financialization and Strategy: Narrative and Number (London, 2006);Google Scholar Lazonick, William, “The Quest for Shareholder Value: Stock Repurchases in the U.S. Economy,” Louvain Economic Review 74, no. 4 (2008): 479–540;Google Scholar Lazonick, , “The New Economy Business Model and the Crisis of U.S. Capitalism,” Capitalism and Society 4, no. 2 (2009): 1–67;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Lazonick, , “From Innovation to Financialization: How Shareholder Value Ideology Is Destroying the U.S. Economy,” in The Political Economy of Financial Crises, ed. Epstein, Gerald and Wolfson, Martin H. (New York, 2011).Google Scholar

68. Lazonick, William and O’Sullivan, Mary A., “Maximizing Shareholder Value: A New Ideology for Corporate Governance,” Economy and Society 29, no. 1 (2000): 13–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

69. Murphy, Kevin J., “Explaining Executive Compensation: Managerial Power versus the Perceived Cost of Stock Options,” University of Chicago Law Review 69, no. 3 (Summer2002): 847–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

70. Froud, Leaver, and Williams, Financialization and Strategy.

71. Mowery, David C., “The United States National Innovation System after the Cold War,” in Research and Innovation Policies in the New Global Economy: An International Comparative Analysis, ed. Larédo, Philippe and Mustar, Philippe (Northampton, Mass., 2001).Google Scholar

72. Davis, Gerald F., Managed by the Markets: How Finance Re-Shaped America (New York, 2009).Google Scholar

73. Fontela, Emilio, “The Era of Finance: Proposals for the Future,” Futures 30, no. 8 (1998): 749–68;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Schaberg, Marc, Globalization and the Erosion of National Financial Systems: Is Declining Autonomy Inevitable (Northampton, Mass., 1999);Google Scholar Pawley, M., Winstone, D., and Bentley, P., U.K. Financial Institutions and Markets (London, 1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

74. Gompers, Paul A., “Optimal Investment, Monitoring, and the Staging of Venture Capital,” Journal of Finance 50, no. 5 (1995): 1461–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

75. Minsky, Hyman P., Stabilizing an Unstable Economy (New Haven, 1986).Google Scholar

76. Perez, Carlota, Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital: The Dynamics of Bubbles and Golden Ages (Northampton, Mass., 2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

77. White, “Technological Change.”

78. Schick, Allen, “Budgetary Adaptations to Resource Scarcity,” in Fiscal Stress and Public Policy, ed. Levine, Charles H. and Rubin, Irene (Beverly Hills, 1980).Google Scholar

79. Schick, Allen, “Performance Budgeting and Accrual Budgeting: Decision Rules or Analytic Tools?,” OECD Journal on Budgeting 7, no. 2 (2007): 109–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

80. National Science Foundation, “National Patterns of R&D Resources: 2014–15 Data Update,” https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/2017/nsf17311/#chp2 (accessed 25 August 2017).

81. Slaughter, Sheila and Leslie, Larry L., Academic Capitalism: Politics, Policies, and the Entrepreneurial University (Baltimore, 1997).Google Scholar

82. Mowery, David C., Nelson, Richard R., Sampat, Bhaven N., and Ziedonis, Arvids A., “The Growth of Patenting and Licensing by U.S. Universities: An Assessment of the Effects of the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980,” Research Policy 30, no. 1 (2001): 99–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

83. Hearn, James C., Griswold, C. P., and Marine, G. M., “Region, Resources, and Reason: A Contextual Analysis of State Tuition and Student-Aid Policies,” Research in Higher Education 37, no. 3 (1996): 241–78;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Hearn, James C., “Enhancing Institutional Revenues: Constraints, Possibilities, and the Question of Values,” in The New Balancing Act in the Business of Higher Education, ed. Clark, Robert (Northampton, Mass., 2006);Google Scholar Hearn, James C., Lewis, D. R., Kallsen, L., Holdsworth, J. M., and Jones, L. M., “Incentives for Managed Growth: A Case Study of Incentives-Based Planning and Budgeting in a Large Public Research University,” Journal of Higher Education 77, no. 2 (2006): 286–313.Google Scholar

84. Shane, Scott A., Academic Entrepreneurship: University Spinoffs and Wealth Creation (New York, 2004).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

85. Branscomb, Lewis M. and Auerswald, Philip E., Taking Technical Risks: How Innovators, Executives, and Investors Manage High-Tech Risks (Cambridge, Mass., 2001).Google Scholar

86. Goldfarb, Brent, Kirsch, David, and Shen, April, “Finance of New Industries,” in The Oxford Handbook of Entrepreneurial Finance, ed. Cumming, Douglas (New York, 2012);Google Scholar Leland, Hayne E. and Pyle, David H., “Informational Asymmetries, Financial Structure, and Financial Intermediation,” Journal of Finance 46, no. 3 (1977): 371–87;CrossRefGoogle Scholar De Meza, David and Southey, Clive, “The Borrower’s Curse: Optimism, Finance, and Entrepreneurship,” Economic Journal 106, no. 435 (1996): 375–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

87. Wolfe, Audra J., Competing with the Soviets: Science, Technology, and the State in Cold War America (Baltimore, 2013).Google Scholar

88. O’Sullivan, “Funding New Industries.”

89. Ibid.

90. Fox, M. B., Finance and Industrial Performance in a Dynamic Economy (New York, 1987).Google Scholar

91. Moss, David A., When All Else Fails: Government as the Ultimate Risk Manager (Cambridge, Mass., 2002).Google Scholar

92. Ibid.

93. Jankowski, John E., “A Brief Data-Informed History of Science and Technology Policy,” in Innovation Policy in the Knowledge-Based Economy, ed. Feldman, Maryann P. and Link, Albert (Boston, 2001).Google Scholar

94. Teich, Albert H. and Koizumi, Kei, An Introduction to R&D in the FY 2005 Budget, AAAS Report XXVIII: R&D FY 2004 (Washington, D.C., 2004).Google Scholar

95. Hart, Forged Consensus.

96. Porter, Michael E., “Capital Choices: Changing the Way America Invests in Industry” in Studies in International Corporate Finance and Governance Systems, ed. Chew, David H. (New York, 1997).Google Scholar

97. Whitford, Josh, The New Old Economy: Networks, Institutions, and the Organizational Transformation of American Manufacturing (New York, 2005).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

98. The Great Depression provided the impetus for this consensus. However, it would be wrong to assume that it was total unity. Businesses initially supported government programs, such as Social Security, which shifted costs from the private sector to the public sector. However, as the 1930s progressed and the New Deal became more costly, business leaders began to protest. These views were uncommon, but ultimately gave rise to fiscal conservatism. See, for example, Gordon, Colin, New Deals: Business, Labor, and Politics in America, 1920–1935 (New York, 1994);Google Scholar Angus Burgin, The Great Persuasion: Reinventing Free Markets Since the Great Depression; Stedman-Jones, , Masters of the Universe; Jennifer Burns, Goddess of the Market: Ayn Rand and the American Right (New York, 2009);Google Scholar Fraser, Steve and Gerstle, Gary, eds., The Rise and Fall of the New Deal Order, 1930–1980 (Princeton, 1989);Google Scholar Phillips-Fine, Invisible Hands.

99. Tax Policy Center, “Historical Highest Marginal Income Tax Rates” (Washington, D.C.), http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/historical-highest-marginal-income-tax-rates (accessed 11 June 2018).Google Scholar

100. Tax Policy Center, “Corporate Top Tax Rate and Bracket” (Washington, D.C.), https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/statistics/corporate-top-tax-rate-and-bracket (accessed 24 August 2017).Google Scholar

101. Bureau of Economic Analysis, “GDP by Industry Accounts, Survey of Current Business, 2006–9,” January 2011, http://www.bea.gov/scb/pdf/2011/01January/0111_indy_acct_tables.pdf and http://www.bea.gov/industry/gpotables/gpo_action.cfm (accessed 15 March 2017).Google Scholar

102. Bureau of Labor Statistics, (2010), Current Employment Statistics (National), 2010, ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.ceseeb1.txt (accessed 2 April 2015).Google Scholar

103. Cohen, Stephen S. and Zysman, John, “Why Manufacturing Matters: The Myth of the Post-Industrial Economy,” California Management Review 29, no. 3 (1987): 9–26;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Cohen, and Zysman, , “Manufacturing Innovation and American Industrial Competitiveness,” Science (1988): 1110–15;CrossRefGoogle Scholar Audretsch, David B. and Lehmann, Erik E., The Seven Secrets of Germany: Economic Resilience in an Era of Global Turbulence (New York, 2015);Google Scholar Worstall, Tim, “Manufacturing Employment Is Falling Off a Cliff and It Doesn’t Matter a Darn, Forbes,” http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2015/03/06/manufacturing-employment-is-falling-off-a-cliff-and-it-doesnt-matter-a-darn/ (accessed 6 March 2017).Google Scholar

104. Kletzer, L., “Trade and Job Losses in U.S. Manufacturing, 1979–1994,” in The Impact of International Trade on Wages, ed. Feenstra, R. (Chicago, 2000).Google Scholar

105. Wolman, Harold, Stokan, Eric, and Wial, Howard, “Manufacturing Job Loss in U.S. Deindustrialized Regions—Its Consequences and Implications for the Future: Examining the Conventional Wisdom,” Economic Development Quarterly 29, no. 2 (2015): 102–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar