The 2023 Nobel Prize in Economics was given to three scholars who explored technological advancement and economic development: Joel Mokyr, P...
The 2023 Nobel Prize in Economics was given to three scholars who explored technological advancement and economic development: Joel Mokyr, Philippe Aghion, and Peter Howitt. Professor Mokyr examined how continuous economic growth emerged in the West by studying history and why the Industrial Revolution started in Britain. He argued that a special culture blending *prescriptive knowledge* with *propositional knowledge* led to the Industrial Revolution, marking the beginning with the invention of the steam engine. This moment carries an important lesson for contemporary Korean society.
In 1757, instructors at the University of Glasgow in Britain extended an invitation to the talented engineer James Watt to manage a workshop at the university. Included among them was Adam Smith, a professor of moral philosophy who would later become renowned as an economist, and Joseph Black, a professor from the medical school. After forming a friendship with the professors, James Watt first came across the Newcomen steam engine owned by the University of Glasgow. This steam engine was not developed by James Watt. The Newcomen steam engine functioned by utilizing steam generated from boiling water to lift a piston and then lowering it by introducing cold water into the cylinder. Watt identified the shortcomings in this approach.
When water is warmed, its temperature increases until it reaches the boiling point, after which it remains at 100 degrees Celsius no matter how much more heat is applied. At this stage, the extra heat is utilized to transform water into steam instead of raising its temperature further. This idea was known as *latent heat*, or *hidden heat*, identified by his friend Professor Joseph Black. The transformation of water into steam requires a substantial amount of energy, which makes the following process of turning it back into water inside the cylinder inefficient. Watt obtained a patent for a design that relocated the condenser outside the cylinder.
The problem was that steam inside the cylinder would escape through gaps in the piston. The answer came from an unexpected place. Erasmus Darwin, a doctor and member of the Royal Society in London, headed the Enlightenment-era Lunar Society, located in Birmingham. One day, the scientist Priestley, who had fallen off a horse, came to Darwin for treatment and became part of the society. In 1774, Watt joined the group and met John Wilkinson, who was Priestley's brother-in-law. Wilkinson's *boring* machine quickly solved the issue of steam leakage. As a result, Watt's steam engine started functioning in 1776.
In the Lunar Society, which Professor Mokyr highlighted as a setting for Britain's Industrial Revolution, scholars from various disciplines and origins came together. Entrepreneurs such as the pottery maker Wedgewood were part of this group. Later, Erasmus Darwin, who became friends with Wedgewood, married his son to Wedgewood's daughter, and their offspring was Charles Darwin. At the same time, Adam Smith, a companion of Watt, released a revolutionary book in the same year that Watt's steam engine started functioning. This publication was *The Wealth of Nations*, marking the beginning of the West's rise over the East from 1776 onward.
The Nobel Committee outlined this year's Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences achievement by stating: "For innovation to persist, it is not enough for something to function; there must also be a scientific explanation for why it works. Prior to the Industrial Revolution, this absence impeded the progress of discoveries and inventions." *Prescriptive knowledge* refers to the practical skills essential for craftsmen and technicians. From the ancient Egyptian pyramids to Chinese advancements such as gunpowder, compasses, and paper, there were numerous technological developments. However, these did not result in *propositional knowledge* that explains the underlying principles. Although know-how can be lost, *propositional knowledge*, documented in books, is preserved and transmitted.
More significantly, the integration of these two kinds of knowledge was essential. Thomas Savery and Denis Papin, who developed steam engines prior to Newcomen, were more aligned with academic scholars, whereas Newcomen was a practical craftsman. Had it not been for professors who welcomed the mechanic Watt as a companion, and without the Lunar Society where scientists and businesspeople openly exchanged thoughts, the Industrial Revolution may not have taken place in Britain. Although Newcomen’s steam engine was groundbreaking, it was not efficient, pumping water only twelve times each minute. On the other hand, Watt’s steam engine, which incorporated *propositional knowledge*, cut coal usage by half.
Why, then, did China fail to develop such opportunities? In his book *A Culture of Growth*, Professor Mokyr highlights the civil service examination system that became deeply rooted as Neo-Confucianism emerged as the leading ideology. Although it generated officials based on merit, the emphasis on rote memorization contributed to China's slow decline. Mokyr argues that during the Western Enlightenment, the majority of Chinese publications were focused on exam preparation or practical manuals. A more significant problem was the separation between scholars and engineers. Scholars were present, but technological advancements were looked down upon. There was no integration between *prescriptive knowledge* and *propositional knowledge*. This situation was likely similar in Joseon.
Is this kind of exchange taking place in our society today? A culture that attempts to distinguish science from technology obstructs the merging of *propositional* and *prescriptive knowledge*. It appears that addressing practical issues is not seen as the responsibility of academic institutions. With career opportunities largely dependent on exam results, even in universities that combine various disciplines, interdisciplinary interaction is uncommon. People often claim that the future for Korean manufacturing and industry is challenging. However, to deal with the challenges we face, shouldn't we, as they did, go beyond disciplines and borders? This is why this year's Nobel Prize in Economic Sciences is worth noting.
