Public Policy in the Learning Society

Introduction Recently, several writers have argued that globalisation erodes national specificity and leads to long term convergence of structure, institutional set up, culture and, as a consequence, economic performance of countries. This does not correspond to observable facts nor has it been the message of this book. One of the most interesting developments of the 1980's is that despite globalisation, the distinctive features of national environments, have attracted much greater analytical attention than previously (Porter, 1990, Butry, 1991) and are seen by many authors as explaining differences among countries in competitiveness, growth and income. While the post war, ‘golden age’ growth period from the early 1950's to the early 1970's was characterised by convergence between the OECD countries (Gomulka, 1971, Cornwall, 1977, Maddison, 1982 and Abramovitz, 1989), as well as by a trend towards an increase in economic and social integration and reduction in inequalities inside nations (cf. the small but real closing of the gab between the Mezzogiornio and Northern Italy and a lowering of income distribution inequality in many OECD countries), the diverging features have been significantly more important in the two following decades. National specificity remains important and appears quite definitely to bear a relation to the capacity to produce, acquire, adopt and use technology. The erosion of the autonomy of national systems through globalisation is not synonymous with convergence and improved integration.