Naming Major Econonomes

Assuming we can continue the metaphor of biology and economics, the next stage is to identify major economes (parallel to biomes). The three major variables describing the typical conditions in which major economic systems are located and which by observation seem to determine the richness of the system are the latitude, the amount of biological cover from forest to desert, and the amount of infrastructure that has been built into the system. The infrastructure must in part be physical, but can also be connectivity in various ways from simple communication to secure banking operations.

Within each of the major economes, the productivity of the area and its sustainability as a series or constellation of economic systems within the econome is largely dependent on the amount of terraforming that has been done, the degree to which built infrastructure (physical or intangible) has been developed, and the degree to which the local economic system adds value to the resource locally.

In our modern economic world, just as with the modern well-developed biological systems, the worlds are all interconnected. Economes communicate with each other — some more than others. Economes with potential richness that are “scammed” into being “suckers” are often very productive, but because the “scammer” econome is removing the resource without actually being a part of the “sucker” econome, the scammer benefits greatly, and sucker either not at all or very little.

Here are some examples:

Tropical desert/mountain not terraformed Poor or non-utilized resource base Yemen
Tropical desert/mountain terraformed Single or limited resource base such as oil or mineral United Arab Emirates
Tropical forest not terraformed Generally rich resource base either not used or few value-added exports Belgian Congo
Tropical forest terraformed Rich resource base used internally with value-added local infra-structure Brazil
Temperate forest not terraformed Generally rich resource base either not used or few value-added exports Parts of Siberia
Temperate forest terraformed Rich resource base used internally with value-added local infra-structure United States of America
Temperate desert/mountain not terraformed Poor or non-utilized resource base Lesotho
Temperate desert/mountain terraformed Single or limited resource base such as oil or mineral Switzerland

The match to World Bank classification of income groups is fairly close. So as a beginning stage of the hypothetical model, this is a good start in defining economes. Or to be more direct, we see this distribution of income groups explained in a model that if refined would be predictive, not just descriptive. The World Bank income groups are descriptive, but not predictive.


via chartsbin.com

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *