You are here: UNE Home / UNE Blogs / Klaus Rohde: Science, Politics and Art

Archive for the 'economics' Category

The Future of Our Policy on Iran. Beware a second Iraq!

Thursday, December 8th, 2016

In the American election campaign, Donald Trump repeatedly declared he would tear up the nuclear deal with Iran.

The former Premier of New South Wales and Foreign Minister of Australia, Bob Carr, has this to say about Trump’s policy on Iran, in an article in the Sydney Morning Herald December 8, titled “As Trump casts around for a fight or two, we should quietly ease off military ties” (with America):

 

http://www.smh.com.au/comment/donald-trump-is-striding-forth-to-find-new-enemies-where-he-should-be-seeing-allies-20161206-gt5d1j.html

According to Carr, Peter Jennings of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute believes ‘now is the time or Australia to further integrate its armed forces with America’s’, ‘now we have an opportunity to modernise the alliance in ways that will meet higher US expectations“.

Bob Carr argues against this:

“In this same spirit of going forth to find unnecessary fights the Trump transition team is examining new US sanctions against Iran unrelated to Iran’s now-halted nuclear weapons development. Trump may be accepting he cannot tear up the Iran deal on day one as he promised. The deal is not just between America and Iran. It’s between eight parties – including the European Union and Russia. “He can’t tear it up,” one American has told me. “The deal is laminated.”

Kim Beazley as ambassador in Washington found that Republican senators on record opposing the Iran deal were quietly hoping it would be approved. They did not want to inherit a problem from hell: an Iran unrestrained in reaching a nuclear bomb within three months.

Members of the Obama administration fear Trump, unable to “tear up” the Iran agreement, will apply extra sanctions on other subjects – human rights or the behaviour of its vessels in the Gulf – until Iranian hardliners take command and themselves “tear up” the agreement.

General Michael Flynn is Trump’s national security adviser, very likely to be more powerful than the eventual secretary of state.

This week The New York Times discovered that in the 2012 Benghazi crisis, produced by a jihadist assault on the US consulate, he alone insisted that Iran was behind the attack.

To this day not even the Israel lobby or hardline Republicans in the Senate have been able to produce evidence that Iran was behind Benghazi.

The New York Times said, “For weeks, he pushed analysts for evidence that the attack might have had a state sponsor – sometimes shouting at them when they didn’t come to the conclusions he wanted”.

His behaviour had a distinct resemblance to the Bush administration’s determination to invent a case that Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction.”

———–

At about the same time, the British Prime Minister Theresa May declared in a speech to Gulf State leaders that Britain would support the States against Iran.

“It follows a speech by Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson in which he sought to align British rhetoric more closely with that of the incoming administration of US President-elect Donald Trump.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/theresa-may-iran-aggressive-action-donald-trump-a7460051.html

 

BBC News http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-38227680

Extract:

“Speaking at summit of the Gulf Co-operation Council – comprising Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Oman, Qatar and Bahrain – Mrs May also said the UK wanted to “make a more permanent and more enduring commitment to the long-term security of the Gulf” and would invest more than £3bn in defence spending in the region over the next 10 years.

“Gulf security is our security,” she said.

“Extremists plotting terror attacks here, in this region, are not only targeting the Gulf but, as we have seen, targeting the streets of Europe, too.

“Whether we’re confronting the terrorism of al-Qaeda, or the murderous barbarity of [so-called Islamic State], no country is a more committed partner for you in this fight than the UK.”

Mrs May said she was determined to build further on the trade and investment relationship between the Gulf and the UK.

“Just as Gulf security is our security, so your prosperity is also our prosperity. Already the Gulf is a special market for the UK.”

She said that last year trade between the UK and the Gulf was worth more than £30bn and, at the same time, Gulf investment in the UK was helping to regenerate cities from Aberdeen to Teeside and Manchester to London.”

“She alleged that Iran’s activities include:

  • Sending fighters including the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps ‘Qods Force to Syria to shore up President Bashar al-Assad
  • Providing support to the Houthi rebel movement in Yemen, and so working against the interests of the international community in bringing about peace and stability in the country
  • Undermining stability in Lebanon and Iraq”

————–

Conveniently forgotten is that Iran was invited by the legitimate government of Syria to help it in its fight against what it believes to be terrorists including AlQaida and IS, and it is in Iraq by invitation of the Iraqi government, fighting against IS. It supports Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen, both of which as Shiites feel threatened by the Sunni alliance led by Saudi Arabia, which has bombarded the Houthis resulting in thousands of civilian casualties over many months. Who then are the terrorists in the Middle East, and is Britain’s policy there predominantly, if not entirely, determined by its economic interests? And who is behind the extremists such as Al Qaida and IS? Certainly not Iran!

I believe that Bob Carr deserves our full support. Likewise, Europe should not – like Theresa May does – try to ingratiate itself with the US, but follow a line that guarantees stability and peace. Future generations would certainly not understand support for a belligerent development which may have disastrous consequences (see Iraq).

 

 

 

 

Arguments used by climate change sceptics and rebuttals

Monday, April 18th, 2016

A useful link

 

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Climate_change_skeptics/common_claims_and_rebuttal

Hottest February on record

Tuesday, March 15th, 2016

A few weeks ago I found a 16-page pamphlet in my mailbox titled: The Paris Climate Summit 2015. A waste? Hubris? Poor science? Alarmism gone mad? A gravy train? Take your pick.

A quote from the first page: ” But there is certainty beyond any doubt that CO2 is the building lock for all life on Earth and that without its presence in the global atmosphere at a sufficient concentration this would be a dead planet. Yet today our children and our public are taught that CO2 is a toxic pollutant that will destroy life and bring civilization to its knees”.

Also on page 1, Robert Mugabe, the “murderous tyrant”, is quoted as a speaker in favour of climate regulation: “Unless current trends are reversed, disaster stalks planet Earth”.

And in the Introduction: “Especially when one reads of the call for major changes to our economic and industrial systems …. on the basis of a theory which has been shown to have major flaws and errors. That’s right, let me repeat that “on the basis of a theory which has been shown to have major flaws and errors”.

 

What, then, is the present situation?

“NASA this weekend released new data which shows that February 2016 was not only the hottest in recorded history, but it soared past all previous records, prompting scientists to describe the announcement as “an ominous milestone in our march toward an ever-warmer planet.”

The average global surface temperature for February was 1.35°C warmer than the global average for the month between 1951-1980—a margin that shattered the previous record of 1.14°C, which was set just one month earlier—and exceeded preliminary figures released earlier this month.”

And Professor Stefan Rahmstorf, from the Potsdam Institute of Climate Impact Research, presently  a visiting professorial fellow at the University of New South Wales, speaks of a kind of climate emergency. Full article here:

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2016/03/14/nasa-drops-major-bomb-march-toward-ever-warmer-planet

 

Of course, one observation does not prove a ‘theory’. Therefore, have a look here: https://krohde.wordpress.com/2016/02/27/misleading-information-on-climate-change-and-corrections/

Free book on parasites in aquaculture

Sunday, December 27th, 2015

Entire book, with many colour and black/white figures, “Negative Effects of Parasites on Fish Farms Production”can be downloaded here:

Contents:

INTRODUCTION
I.1.
Fish farms
I.2.
Aquaculture production in Egypt
I.3.
Water quality management
I.4.
Potential adverse effects
I.5.
Dynamics of disease transmission
I.6.
Fish disease and Prevention
PARASITES AND THEIR NEGATIVE EFFECTS ON FISH FARMS PRODUCTION
II.1. Protozoan parasites
II.1.1. Phylum: Mastigophora Diesing, 1866

Trypanosomosis, cryptobiosis, Ichthyobodosis

II.1.2. Phylum: Ciliophora Doflein, 1901
Ichthyophthiriasis
Trichodiniosis,
Chilodonellosis
II.1.3.
Phylum: Apicomplexa Levine, 1970
Coccidiosis
II.1.4. Phylum: Microspora Sprague, 1977
Microsporidiosis
II.1.5. Phylum: Myxozoa Grassé, 1970
Henneguyosis,
Myxozoan disease in aquaculture caused by Kudoa sp.
Whirling disease
II.2. Helminth parasites
II.2.1.
Infections caused by monogenean parasites
II.2.2.
Infections caused by digeneatic trematodes (Flukes)
II.2.3.
Infections caused by cestode parasites (Tapeworms)
II.2.4.
Infections caused by nematode parasites
II.2.5.
Infections caused by acanthocephalan parasites
II.3. Annelid worms (Leeches)
II.4. Crustacean parasites
II.4.1. Infections caused by lernaeid parasites
II.4.2.
Infections caused by Ergasilus species
II.4.3.
Infections caused by caligid copepods
II.4.4.
Infections caused by Argulus
II.4.5.
Infections caused by isopods
II.5.
Damage caused by parasitic larvae of molluscs
III.
CONCLUSIONS
IV.
RECOMMENDATIONS
V.
REFERENCES

Ocean diversity and human impact: 49% decline in marine vertebrate populations between 1970 and 2012

Thursday, September 17th, 2015

According to an emergency edition of the WWF Living Blue Planet Report, there has been a 49% decline in marine vertebrate populations between 1970  and 2012. These estimates are based on tracking 5829 populations of 1234 species. For some fish species, the decline has been almost 75%. Overfishing, habitat destruction and climate change are held to be responsible.

Details here:

http://www.wwf.org.au/news_resources/?uNewsID=14601

Concerning the importance of marine ecosystems more generally, a concise and up-to-date list of important aspects of ocean diversity and how it has been affected by human activities is given in the UNESCO  report:

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/ioc-oceans/priority-areas/rio-20-ocean/blueprint-for-the-future-we-want/marine-biodiversity/facts-and-figures-on-marine-biodiversity/

Some important points from this report:

  • “By the year 2100, without significant changes, more than half of the world’s marine species may stand on the brink of extinction.
  • Today 60% of the world’s major marine ecosystems that underpin livelihoods have been degraded or are being used unsustainably.
  • If the concentration of atmospheric CO2 continues to increase at the current rate, the ocean will become corrosive to the shells of many marine organisms by the end of this century. How or if marine organisms may adapt is not known.
  • Ocean acidification may render most regions of the ocean inhospitable to coral reefs, affecting tourism, food security, shoreline protection, and biodiversity.
  • Commercial overexploitation of the world’s fish stocks is so severe that it has been estimated that up to 13 percent of global fisheries have ‘collapsed.’
  • There are now close to 500 dead zones covering more than 245,000 km² globally, equivalent to the surface of the United Kingdom.
  • Between 1980 and 2005, 35,000 square kilometers of mangroves were removed globally.
  • Between 30 and 35 percent of the global extent of critical marine habitats such as seagrasses, mangroves and coral reefs are estimated to have been destroyed.”

 

Causes of losses in marine biodiversity are discussed here, with some references:

http://www.seaweb.org/resources/briefings/marinebio.php

A new book on the history of climate change politics in Australia

Thursday, August 6th, 2015

A book on the history of climate change politics in Australia, describing the disastrous influence of the right wing media (particularly those controlled by Murdoch) and the big mining corporations has just been published. Author is Maria Taylor (“Global Warming and Climate Change. What Australia knew and buried….then framed a new reality for the public”).  http://press.anu.edu.au/titles/global-warming-and-climate-change/ : A free copy can be downloaded at this address.

The book is based on Taylor’s research for a PhD at the National Centre for the Public Awareness of Science of The Australian National University. From the ANU site on her book: “Her multi-disciplinary investigation of the public record and the input of science, politics, economics, journalism and contemporary mass media has revealed for the first time how and why Australia buried a once good understanding of global warming and climate change — to arrive after 25 years at the confusion and stalemate we are still in today. “

An outline and discussion of he book is available here:

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/planet-oz/2015/aug/06/how-australians-were-ready-to-act-on-climate-science-25-years-ago-and-what-happened-next

Excerpts:

“In 1989 Hawke described a “growing consensus amongst scientists” showing there was a strong chance that major climate change was on its way, that this change was linked to human activity, and this could have “major ramifications for human survival” if nothing was done.”

‘The Howard government …….. cautious climate policy positions ……. to justify it through media articles. That modelling was supported financially by the likes of the Australian Coal Association, the oil giant Exxon Mobil and the mining majors BHP and Rio Tinto.”

 

” ……. by 1997, many political and economic reporters were “dutifully scribing the story established by the business and political elite”.

A point to make is the role of the media in Australia, which is so dominated by the Murdoch press. That played a key role, in a sense that as the 90s rolled on it was so much easier to get out a consistent narrative if you don’t have a really diverse press. From what I saw – and what the documentary evidence showed – the ABC did have a leadership role for a long time in informing the public about climate change, but it really drew back in the late 90s. There was no other story being told.

Free-market neoliberal thinktanks, including the Institute of Public Affairs, promoted climate science denialist views and industry talking points that were picked up by the media.”

Niall Ferguson: Civilization, und Goethes Faust

Friday, July 31st, 2015

Der britische Historiker Niall Ferguson, bekannt unter anderem durch sein Buch The Pity of War, in dem er die Ursachen des Ersten Weltkrieges untersucht, und weitere Bücher, hat in einem brilliant geschriebenen Buch einen Abrisss der geschichtlichen Entwicklung der westlichen Zivilisation gegeben und versucht, die Ursachen ihres Erfolges zu verstehen (Civilization. The Six Killer Apps of Western Power, 2011). Auf Seite 305 (der Penguin Ausgabe von 2012) zählt er diese killler applications auf. Sie sind: Wettbewerb, wissenschaftiche Revolution, Herrschaft des Gesetzes und der representativen Regierung, moderne Medizin, die Verbrauchergesellschaft, und die Arbeitsethik. In einer Fussnote auf Seite 324 (sozusagen als Abschluss des Buches) erwähnt er als ‘foundational texts of Western civilization’ (als grundlegende Texte der westlichen Zivilisation) die folgenden Werke: King James Bible, Isaac Newtons Principia, John Locke’s Two Treatises of Government, Adam Smith’s Moral Sentiments and Wealth of Nations, Edmund Burke’s Reflections on the Revolution in France, und Charles Darwin’s Origin of Species (und als Anhang William Shakespeare’s plays und ausgewählte Reden von Abraham Lincoln und Winston Churchill).

Diese Auswahl scheint mir etwas einseitig anglozentrisch zu sein. Wie wäre es hiermit?:

Luthers Bibel (durch Gutenbergs Erfindung des Massendruckes der direkte Anlass zur schnellen Verbreitung des Wissens und aller späteren wissenschaftlichen Fortschritte), Johannes Kepler Astronomia Nova und Harmonices Mundi, Goethe Faust I und II, Immanuel Kant Über den ewigen Frieden, Johann Sebastian Bach Matthäus Passion, Beethoven Neunte Symphonie, Alexander von Humboldt Cosmos, Gregor Mendel Vererbungsgesetze, Max Weber Die Protestantische Ethik und der Geist des Kapitalismus, Ludwig Boltzmann Entropie, Max Planck Quantum, Albert Einstein Allgemeine Relativität. Und ferner (keine ‘Grundlagen’ der westlichen Zivilisation aber vielleicht mehr zukunftsweisend als zum Beispiel Konsumerismus und Wettbewerb): Die Upaschinaden und Arthur Schopenhauer Die Welt als Wille und Vorstellung.

Auf Seiten 65-66 zählt er die wichtigsten 29 “breakthroughs” zwischen 1530 und 1789 auf. Überraschend, Keplers Gesetze der planetarischen Bewegungen fehlen, ohne Zweifel eines der wichtigsten Entdeckungen der Renaissance und von vielen als von entscheidender Bedeutung für die wissenschaftliche Revolution im 17. Jahrhundert angesehen, eine wesentliche Vorraussetzung von Newtons Gravitationslehre. Die Entwicklung des binären Systems durch Leibniz sollte ebenfalls hier stehen.

Der bekannte schweizer Ökonom H.C. Binswanger hat in einem Buch ausführlich beschrieben, wie Goethe in seinem Faust die Entwicklung der modenen Welt dargestellt hat. Faust, der Repräsentant der modernen Welt, ist ein tatkräftiger Unternehmer, sein Erfolg möglich gemacht durch die Erfindung des Papiergeldes (das die Goldwährung erstetzt), die Äquivalenz zwischen Währung und produzierten Güter, und die Eigentumsgesetze). Historisch genau beschrieben ist im Faust die folgende Sequenz: 1. Papiergeld  (Bank of England), Dampfmaschine (James Watt) und damit Anfang der industriellen Revolution, Römisches Eigentumsgesetz des “Dominion”, d.h. das Recht zu benutzen und zu konsumieren: Code Napoleon). Goethe weist auch auf die potentiellen Gefahren hin: eine wirkliche Gefahr besteht darin, dass bei wirtschaftlicher Entwicklung die Konsequenzen für die Umwelt nicht in Rechnung gestellt werden. In anderen Worten, Faust ist der moderne Mann mit all seinen Stärken und Schwächen. In keinem der von Ferguson angeführten “foundation” – Texten wurde auf die potentiellen Gefahren durch die Zerstörung der Umwelt hingewiesen; Goethes Faust ist also zumindest in diesem Punkt viel zukunftsweisender.

Was die Bibel anbetrifft, nicht die King James Bibel sondern Luthers Bibel ins Deutsche übersetzt stand am Anfang der protestantischen Revolution und dem schnellen Anstieg der westlichen Macht, ihre Wirkung möglich gemacht durch Gutenbergs Erfindung des schnellen Massendruckes, von Ferguson als die wichtigste westliche Entwicklung vor der industriellen Revolution nur kurz früh in seinem Buch erwähnt. Was bei Ferguson ebenfalls fehlt ist die stärkere Betonung der typisch westlichen Musik die durch Bach, Mozart, Beethoven Wagner und viele andere zu einem Höhepunkt geführt wurde, und ein wesentliches Element des modernen westlichen Menschen ist.

Und was die Literatur anbetrifft, die von Ferguson erwähnten ‘plays’ von Shakespeare sind sicherlich schön und gross, doch welche Schlüsse auf die moderne Welt lassen sie zu? Grimmelshausen Der abenteuerliche Simplizissimus und Brecht Der Gute Mensch von Szechuan und Leben des Galilei scheinen mir in der Hinsicht relevanter zu sein.

Insgesamt, die erstaunlichen von Ferguson beschriebenen ‘Fortschritte’ (wenn man sie so nennen soll) der westlichen Welt in den letzten 300 Jahren sind vielleicht nicht mehr als ein Schluckauf in einer Geschichte, die kurz vor der Katastrophe steht, wenn wir die Fehlentwicklungen nicht in den Griff bekommen. Und können wir hoffen, dass die “foundations”, die von Ferguson gefundenen Grundlagen dieser Entwicklungen, ausreichen, eine bessere Zukunft zu sichern? Man muss wie Ferguson schon ein Bewunderer von Präsident Reagan, Margaret Thatcher und Churchill sein, um das zu glauben, und viele sind das nicht.

Ich schliesse mit einem Zitat von Noam Chomsky aus meinem vorhergehenden Post:

“Die menschliche Spezies gibt es schon vielleicht seit 100.000 Jahren und sie steht jetzt vor einem einzigartigen Moment in ihrer Geschichte. Diese Spezies ist jetzt an einem Punkt, an dem sich sehr bald entscheiden wird, in den kommenden Generationen, ob das Experiment des sogenannten intelligenten Lebens weitergehen wird oder wir fest entschlossen sind, es zu zerstören. Überwiegend erkennen Wissenschaftler, dass fossile Energieträger im Boden bleiben müssen, damit unsere Enkel eine Zukunft haben. Aber die institutionellen Strukturen unserer Gesellschaft versuchen, jeden Tropfen aus der Erde zu pressen. Die Folgen, die Auswirkungen der vorhergesagten Effekte des Klimawandels für die Menschheit in nicht sehr ferner Zukunft sind katastrophal und wir rasen auf diesen Abgrund zu.”

 

H. C. Binswanger. The Challenge of Faust. Science 281, 31 July 1998.

H. C. Binswanger. Money and Magic: a Critique of the Modern Economy in Light of Goethe’s Faust, University of Chicago Press 1994 (transl. from German).

http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2015/oct/22/very-great-alexander-von-humboldt/

Niall Ferguson. Civilization. The Six Killer Apps of Western Power. Penguin 2012.

Noam Chomsky über den Klimawandel und die Zukunft des intelligenten Lebens auf der Erde

Thursday, July 23rd, 2015

 

 

Noam Chomsky, der berühmte Wissenschaftler und Politik-Kommentator, in einem Interview mit dem ‘Freitag’ im MIT (Massachusetts Institute of Technology).

Auszüge:

“Noam Chomsky: Die USA sind ein Schurkenstaat, Europa ist extrem rassistisch”

“Hoffentlich gibt es endlich einen Volksaufstand gegen die vernichtende, zerstörerische Wirtschafts- und Sozialpolitik, die von den Bürokraten und den Banken kommt.”

“Die menschliche Spezies gibt es schon vielleicht seit 100.000 Jahren und sie steht jetzt vor einem einzigartigen Moment in ihrer Geschichte. Diese Spezies ist jetzt an einem Punkt, an dem sich sehr bald entscheiden wird, in den kommenden Generationen, ob das Experiment des sogenannten intelligenten Lebens weitergehen wird oder wir fest entschlossen sind, es zu zerstören. Überwiegend erkennen Wissenschaftler, dass fossile Energieträger im Boden bleiben müssen, damit unsere Enkel eine Zukunft haben. Aber die institutionellen Strukturen unserer Gesellschaft versuchen, jeden Tropfen aus der Erde zu pressen. Die Folgen, die Auswirkungen der vorhergesagten Effekte des Klimawandels für die Menschheit in nicht sehr ferner Zukunft sind katastrophal und wir rasen auf diesen Abgrund zu.”

 

Vollständiger Artikel hier:

http://de.euronews.com/2015/04/17/noam-chomsky-die-usa-sind-ein-schurkenstaat-europa-ist-extrem-rassistisch/

Marching into the Past: Cutting down on Renewable Energies and the Freedom of the Press

Sunday, July 12th, 2015

From the Sun Herald ( a Fairfax weekend newspaper) 12.July 2015:

“Tony Abbott has been warned he is putting international investment at risk after ordering the $10 billion Clean Energy Finance Corporation not to finance new wind power projects.”

Both the Prime Minister and the Treasurer have repeatedly claimed that wind farms are noisy and ugly. No such comments about a new open cut coal mine in fertile agricultural lands in NSW, just approved by the Federal government.

According to the ABC on 13.7.15, “small scale solar power” projects are also banned.

 

“Prime Minister Tony Abbott has been accused of unprecedented political interference in the ABC by demanding the broadcaster move panel program Q&A into its news division before he lifts a boycott of the program.

In a letter sent to ABC chairman Jim Spigelman on Friday, Mr Abbott said he would be happy to lift a ban on his frontbenchers appearing on Q&A if the ABC transferred the program from its television department to news and current affairs.”

Abbott had previously banned his ministers from appearing on the TV show, and the Minsiter for Communications Malcolm Turnbull, as well as the Minister for Agriculture Barnaby Joice, who had agreed to appear on the show, complied.

Free Markets and Free Trade, Ecology and Economics

Wednesday, May 13th, 2015

(This article was first published as a Google knol and then transferred to wordpress.com. I re-publish it here as a basis for discussion. © Klaus Rohde).

9 Comments

Comments RSS

  1. Marco Parigi

    December 2, 2008

    One implicit assumption of your knol here is that Ricardo’s principle is not legitimate for cases where the axioms are not reflected in reality. My view regarding these kind of principles is that what is important is that the dynamics predicted by the principle are reflected in reality, and that the mathematics behind the model based on these axioms is tenable and usable at the same time. The test to determine when to stop using Ricardo’s principle is when alternative models show better predictive value. Predictions of Malthusian catastrophes seem to be very unreliable at the least.From what I can tell, countries often behave as if those 7 assumptions were true, even if most of them are false.I am not really clear on the dependence of concepts on whether a system is in or not in equilibrium. When is an economy thought of as being in equilibrium? Are there tests independent of the economic models used?

    • Klaus Rohde

      December 2, 2008

      Concerning your question:”When is an economy thought of as being in equilibrium?”Below are some definitions for economic, genetic and ecological equilibrium. Economists would have to answer the question concerning relevant tests, but it seems to me that only an actual evaluation of data a posteriori could show whether equilibrium has existed or not.From Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equilibrium):“In economics, economic equilibrium is simply a state of the world where economic forces are balanced and in the absence of external influences the (equilibrium) values of economic variables will not change. Market equilibrium, for example, refers to a condition where a market price is established through competition such that the amount of goods or services sought by buyers is equal to the amount of goods or services produced by sellers. This price is often called the equilibrium price or market clearing price and will tend not to change unless demand or supply change.”“A genetic equilibrium occurs when an allele within a gene pool is not changing in frequency (i.e. evolving). For this to be the case, evolutionary forces acting upon the allele must be equal and opposite. The only basic requirement is that the population be large enough that the effects of genetic drift are minimised. One example is Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium.” There is nothing in Wikipedia on ecological equilibrium, which I would define as follows: An equilibrium point in an ecological system is the population (or community) density to which the population (or community), which has temporarily deviated from it, will always return. Or: an ecological system is an equilibrium system when its density fluctuates around a midpoint. – One might be inclined to add that fluctuations around the midpoint should not be excessively large, although this introduces a subjective aspect to the definition: what is excessive?As pointed out above for economic equilibrium, it seems to me that only an evaluation of data a posteriori can distinguish equilibrium from nonequilibrium ecological systems. One might then make projections for the future development of the system on the basis of whether conditions are likely to change.

    • Klaus Rohde

      December 2, 2008

      Concerning the first part of your comment:”The test to determine when to stop using Ricardo’s principle is when alternative models show better predictive value.”I commented on this already in my knol: it is not so much another model that is needed, but”a careful analysis of local conditions permitting a decision on the benefits of free trade may often be useful, in particular when a powerful nation deals with a small developing one.”

  2. Ryan Faulk

    January 23, 2010

    Horrible — 1. “Since this knol was published, Paul Krugman was awarded the Nobel Prize for Economics for work which clearly implies that Ricardo’s principle does not realistically describe what is actually happening.”- And Obama won a Nobel Peace prize, and Hayek also won a Nobel in economics. Do you even know who decides who wins a nobel prize in economics?2. You are treating freedom as some prescriptive model. It is not, it is what happens when you don’t threaten with imprisonment. These are not dueling prescriptions, but the violent imposition of rules vs. resistance to them.There is “free market dogma” in the same way there is “no murder dogma” and “anti violent theft dogma”. I’m also dogmatic in there not being a god.3. Your characterization of competition is hideously ham-fisted. Firms make deals with each other in supply lines, as do animals in nature. You clearly have not explored arguments for freedom in good faith.4. States control the money supply. See fiat currency and central banks, and in the US see the federal reserve system. The financial market is perhaps the most state-controlled market there is, and thus is chaotic because the false certainty of a state decree leads to chaos.5. Hysterical citizens voting for war is only an issue if there is a state. That’s a failure of your ideology, not freedom.6. The Oil lobby is powerful and does things to prevent alternative energy from coming on line. The state enables cartelization by creating a “web of difficulty” that large firms can bypass, or only apply to new firms entering an industry, or are fixed costs (like a license) which disproportionately hurt small firms. Again, this is a problem of the state.

    • Klaus Rohde

      January 22, 2010

      Thanks for the comment, it is always good to hear somebody who does not agree with you.1. I commented on earlier Nobel prizes in economics and Obama’s peace prize in my blog http://blog.une.edu.au/klausrohde/ .Comments welcome;2. When I say free market dogma I mean (and I believe this is perfectly clear) that free markets are often but not always useful; an examination of local conditions may be important;3. Yes, to a degree, but unfortunately weaker economies are often forced into deals unfavourable to them because they have no other choice; and it is not always companies but governments which determine the rules;4. May be but perhaps not controlled enough;5. ????;6. Yes, indeed, this may well be the case, but wrong rules imposed by a state do not mean there should be no rules.

    • Peter Baskerville

      January 23, 2010

      Anonymous, now that you have taken the trouble to register, why not write a Knol that best outlines your view of the topic that Klaus has developed here. It would be great to read your views in an article rather than just responses to this one.

  3. Michael Pathak

    February 7, 2010

    Industrial Symbiosis as a way of meeting Ecological Economics needs — Industrial Symbiosis is a means of achieving continued growth in the economy whilst minimizing the impact on the environment. It is claimed that an industrial ecosystem in industrial symbiosis may behave similar to the natural ecosystem where everything gets recycled. Technological tools such as open source virtual globes like Google Earth can be used to determine that locations for optimizing symbiosis. A good resource is the following.W. Doyle and J. M. Pearce, “Utilization of Virtual Globes for OpenSource Industrial Symbiosis”, Open Environmental Sciences, 3, 88-96.The link to the article is herehttp://www.bentham-open.org/crdsb/?TOENVIRSJ/2009/00000003/00000001

  4. Seema Singh

    September 30, 2011

    nifty tips — Markets dramatically change they their flow and no one exactly produce or expect 100% from their profits . Choosing the right indicator or analyzing software blended with human aspect gives better results.regards:- http://www.trade4target.com/