New and Promising Ideas in the Productivity Field: Review Article on Think Like an Enterprise: Why Nations Need Comprehensive Productivity Strategies by Robert Atkinson
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The most interesting part of Robert Atkinson’s (President of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF)) manifesto on productivity is his recommended productivity strategy for strengthening productivity growth. Atkinson concludes that socalled framework policies are necessary but far from sufficient. The more active public policy role he calls for would include measures to lower the price of capital, moral suasion of firms to think more strategically, more direct government involvement in developing and disseminating new technologies and facilitating interactions across firms and sectors. Many will share Atkinson’s view that different approaches to enhancing productivity growth are in order given the modest productivity records of many countries of late. But it is troubling that Atkinson does not suggest more stringent tests for new policy interventions. They must be subject to benefit-cost analysis to determine whether there is a net social benefit. The experiences countries have had with elements of what Atkinson recommends must be studied to see if they have yielded productivity gains.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".