Abstract
The following chapters refer to elements referenced in the conclusion of Chap. 4, with the aim of further characterising Frisch’s concept of planning. From this point onward these will be prioritised—for even greater clarity of direction and sense—in order to illustrate how Frisch progressively perfects the question of the programming approach (PA).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
This paper was first published in the Scandinavian journal Statsokonomisk Tidsskrift (1961) and later republished in the collection of Frank Long (1976), which we reference by means of citation. From this paper it has been drawn in the Chap. 3 a long introductive citation. Incidentally, this essay was well circulated in Italy very early on after it was translated in 1962 in an Italian journal, L’Industria (1962-No.2), by initiative of its editor, Prof. Ferdinando Di Fenizio, to whom we owe some diffusion of Frisch’s work in Italy.
- 2.
One should note that what Frisch states here (1961) was before the diffusion of personal computers with substantial memory capacity and computational ability.
- 3.
This method was described in many Memoranda of the DE-UO (Many of these have been republished in the cited collections of works, edited by Olav Bjerkholt, two vols, 1985, Elgar, dedicated to programming techniques.
- 4.
This point was referred to abundantly in Chap. 3.
- 5.
L. Johansen, A multi-sectoral Study of Economic Growth, Amsterdam, 1960.
- 6.
In fact, in the preparatory works for the second Italian five year plan (1971–1975), a ‘plan’ materialised, and was evident until people abandoned any foolish ambition regarding economic programming. Taking into account Frisch’s criticism, we were prepared to build the same ‘reference framework’ of an accounting macroeconomic reconstruction on the basis of strategic objectives, choices and evaluations formulated at a disaggregated level in different sectors of resource allocation (consumption and investments), and especially in the sector of public and social allocation. But this trial was destroyed by the hostility and the ignorance (factors often associated) of the so-called planning experts (that is, people involved in planning but without a corresponding basis of knowledge).
- 7.
The Symposium was published in 1962, edited by R.C. Geary, Europe’s Future in Figures (Amsterdam: North-Holland 1962). The paper by Frisch, already cited (titled: Preface to the Oslo Channel Model: A Survey of Types of Economic Forecasting and Programming), was also republished in the posthumous selection by Frank Long, which is cited as well; and is the edition that we will refer to in our quotations.
- 8.
As we will see more clearly in Chap. 1, Vol. III, Frisch always prefers to distinguish the approaches of forecasting and programming. Nevertheless, despite his repeated use in his programming work of the forecasting method, Frisch intended to express all his criticism regarding the fallaciousness of forecasting methods when they were utilised by programmers as programming support.
- 9.
Within a footnote, Frisch takes into account one possible variation of the on looker analyst—that he took:
a decisional model of the kind discussed under the third stage below (see below) and use it not for a policy oriented comparison of alternative choices of values for the instruments variables, nor for a fully-fledged programming, but simply for his on-looker purpose. He would then insert, as the instrument variables, his guess about the probable actions of Government. This procedure, however, − Frisch states – will not change his on-looker attitude. (Frisch, ibidem, p. 89)
- 10.
Frisch names these modalities as ‘stages’, in order to make forecasts and/or to take decisions. He presents them as steps or stairs subsequent to a progressive logical refinement. He points out one of these stages, which he called the ‘onlooker’. He does not acknowledge this in relation to any case in which a decisional approach might be useful, regarding it with such strong disdain that it does not deserve any consideration. In effect, in his presentation of the various types of forecasting and prediction, the optimisation approach remains the only valid one for Frisch , and it is the basis of the Oslo Model.
- 11.
His final years were spent at the DE-UO, which he led continually from 1932 (the year in which he created it) to 1965 (the year in which he retired from the university). For a discussion of the life of this Institute and Frisch’s relations with the University, see the essay by Jens C. Andvig and Tore Thonsad (1998).
Bibliographical References to Chapter 5 (Vol. I)
Frisch, R. (1961). ‘Economic Planning and the Growth Problem in Developing Countries’, in: Stasoekonomisk Tidsskrift, 2/3, 1961. Repub. in: Frisch, R. (1976) F. Lang ed.
Frisch, R. (1962). ‘Preface to the Oslo Channel Model: A Survey of Types of Economic Forecasting and Programming’. In: R. C. Geary, ed., Europe’s Future in Figures. Amsterdam, North-Holland. [republished. in: F. Long ed., Economic Planning Studies, Reidel, Dordrecht (see), 1976, (pp. 87–127)].
Long, Frank. (1976), ed., Ragnar Frisch Economic Planning Studies Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2019 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Archibugi, F. (2019). The ‘Programming Approach’. In: The Programming Approach and the Demise of Economics. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78057-3_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78057-3_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-78056-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-78057-3
eBook Packages: Economics and FinanceEconomics and Finance (R0)