Paul Romer on the Unrivaled Joy of Scholarship (Ep. 55)

It also may be that it’s giving us benefits that we’re not measuring very well.

也可能是它给我们带来了我们无法很好衡量的好处。

But of course, other technologies in the past could’ve given us benefits that we’re not measuring very well.

当然，过去的其他技术可能给我们带来了我们无法很好衡量的好处。

Chad Jones has really been leading the push, saying that to understand the broad sweep of history, you’ve got to have something which is offsetting the substantial increase in the number of people who are going into the R&D-type business or the discovery business.

查德·琼斯确实一直在带头推动这一进程，他说要了解整个历史，就必须有一些东西能够抵消进入研发型业务或发现业务的人数大幅增加的影响。

And that could take the form either of a short-run kind of adjustment cost effect, so that it’s hard to increase the rate of growth of ideas.

这可能会采取短期调整成本效应的形式，因此很难提高创意的增长速度。

Or it could be, the more things you’ve discovered, the harder it is to find other ones, the fishing-out effect.

或者可能是，你发现的东西越多，找到其他东西就越困难，这就是钓鱼效应。

To fit the long-run growth and the big increase in people engaged in science and in research and development, I think Chad is right that you have to have some kind of diminishing returns, or some kind of a constraint in that rate process.

为了适应长期增长和从事科学和研发人员的大幅增加，我认为乍得是对的，你必须有某种回报递减，或者在该比率过程中存在某种限制。

There’s a variety of recent papers that have tried to look at that.

最近有很多论文试图对此进行研究。

If your question is, can we sustain a particular growth rate x or can we keep increasing growth rates at higher and higher rates?

如果您的问题是，我们能否维持特定的增长率 x 或者我们能否以越来越高的速度继续提高增长率？

That may give you a less optimistic answer than, say, the initial take I had.

这可能会给你一个比我最初的想法更不乐观的答案。

But it may still be the case that we can have growth, that we can sustain it partly by having more and more people go into something like research because there’s 10 or 11 billion people we’ll end up with, and we can increase the fraction of people who go into that.

但情况可能仍然是这样，我们可以实现增长，我们可以通过让越来越多的人参与研究之类的事情来部分维持增长，因为我们最终将有 10 或 110 亿人，我们可以增加参与研究的人的比例。

We can offset some of these fishing-out problems just by having more people working on it.

我们可以通过让更多的人参与其中来解决一些捕捞问题。

And it also doesn’t mean that we’re already at the efficient or optimal level of R&D.

这也不意味着我们已经处于高效或最佳的研发水平。

The general message is about a bigger global integrated economy is going to lead to faster growth, that policy could improve efficiency by getting more research going.

总体信息是，更大的全球一体化经济将带来更快的增长，政策可以通过开展更多研究来提高效率。

I think those messages will still carry through, even with a slightly less optimistic perspective on how fast we could really grow.

我认为这些信息仍然会延续下去，即使我们对真正增长的速度不太乐观。

Isn’t that a kind of innovation, like a technological innovation?

这难道不是一种创新，就像技术创新一样吗？

And their growth, in a way, is at some other frontier rather than just being catch-up?

从某种程度上来说，他们的增长是在其他领域，而不仅仅是追赶？

There may also be, in addition to this catch-up versus the leading-edge distinction, which is based on essentially the level of technology in a country, there’d also be a separate dimension, which is something like the institutional evolution of the economy.

除了追赶与领先的区别（本质上是基于一个国家的技术水平）之外，还可能存在一个单独的维度，比如经济的制度演变。

So you could have a very institutionally well-developed economy that’s still very low in terms of its technological success.

因此，你可能拥有一个制度非常发达的经济体，但其技术成功率仍然很低。

That would be unexpected.

这将是意想不到的。

You could also have some significant technological success but still very, very weak institutions.

你也可能取得一些重大的技术成功，但机构仍然非常非常薄弱。

We’ll need more than one dimension to really characterize different economies.

我们需要不止一个维度来真正描述不同经济体的特征。

But all of that said, I found, at least when I started to think about problems — which is really the best test of a theory — that I needed a different theoretical apparatus to think about, say, the challenge in Tanzania than the challenge in Germany.

但综上所述，我发现，至少当我开始思考问题时——“这确实是对理论的最好检验”——我需要一种不同的理论工具来思考坦桑尼亚的挑战而不是德国的挑战。

On promoting innovation

关于推动创新

The way I constrain people with is, “Okay, what’s your first priority?” Or, “If you go into the office on Monday, what are you going to work on, on Monday?” I’m really opposed to these long-list policy exercises because it tends to become this political thing.

我约束人们的方式是：“好吧，你的首要任务是什么？”或者，“如果你周一去办公室，周一你要做什么工作？”我真的反对这些一长串的政策练习，因为它往往会成为政治问题。

It’s like, “Oh yeah, this is why the World Bank used ‘and’ so much.” It’s like, “Well, we’re in favor of technological change.

就像，“哦，是的，这就是世界银行如此频繁地使用‘和’的原因。”就像，“好吧，我们赞成技术变革。

Oh, but and we’re in favor of this and this.” And every interest group gets on the list.

哦，但是我们赞成这个和这个。”每个兴趣团体都在名单上。

My number-one recommendation is to invest in people.

我的第一条建议是投资于人。

Humans that are well trained are the inputs into this discovery process.

训练有素的人类是这一发现过程的输入。

And there’s big opportunities still, I think, to do a better job of investing in people.

我认为，在更好地投资于人才方面仍然存在很大的机会。

The policy I actually worked on — we got to the point where we had a bill that was ready to be introduced in Congress on this — was one that was designed to make it much more attractive to go into graduate school, and to give students who go into, say, STEM careers in graduate school, to give them much more freedom and control over what they study and where they work.

我实际上致力于的政策是——我们已经制定了一项法案，准备就此向国会提出——旨在让进入研究生院更具吸引力，并为那些在研究生院从事 STEM 职业的学生提供更多的自由和控制权，让他们对自己的学习内容和工作地点有更多的自由和控制权。

Basically, moving the money that now goes through professors as the principal investigators who hire research assistants, move that to money that goes directly to promising students who could go into graduate school.

基本上，将现在通过教授作为主要研究人员雇用研究助理的资金转移到直接流向有前途的可以进入研究生院的学生的资金。

We always have to be careful not to treat this as a perfect information competitive market.

我们始终要小心，不要把这当作一个完全信息竞争的市场。

I think that the problem in higher ed is that the institutional incentives don’t provide the kind of training that would maximize the opportunities for the students or, for that matter, maximize outcomes for the nation.

我认为高等教育的问题在于，制度激励措施没有提供能够最大限度地为学生提供机会的培训，或者就这一点而言，不能最大限度地为国家带来成果。

There’s, for example, much too much persistence in disciplinary lines and modes of inquiry.

例如，在学科界限和探究模式上有太多的坚持。

If you go back to the first half of the 20th century in the United States, universities invented whole new schools and training programs, like chemical engineering, electrical engineering.

如果你回到20世纪上半叶的美国，大学发明了全新的学校和培训项目，比如化学工程、电气工程。

Universities have not been as innovative or responsive in the post–World War II period.

二战后时期，大学的创新能力和反应能力都没有那么出色。

The only big change has been computer science, and that was really driven by the defense department in the US government rather than the universities responding to demand.

唯一的重大变化是计算机科学，这实际上是由美国政府国防部推动的，而不是大学对需求的响应。

I think it’d be very helpful if there were a lot more students looking at the far future, saying, “Where are the big opportunities?

我认为，如果有更多的学生着眼于遥远的未来，说：“大的机会在哪里？

What do I really want to learn about to have an exciting career?” If those students controlled tuition resources that universities were competing for, the universities would be more responsive to the changing landscape.

我真正想学什么才能拥有令人兴奋的职业生涯？”如果这些学生控制了大学争夺的学费资源，大学就会对不断变化的形势做出更积极的反应。

If you really want to push the analogy, it’s kind of like vouchers for graduate school.

如果你真的想推动这个类比，它有点像研究生院的优惠券。

But it would have the same benefits that people anticipate when they talk about it in other contexts, which is, it would force more competition between the different educational institutions.

但它会带来人们在其他情况下谈论它时所预期的同样的好处，那就是，它将迫使不同教育机构之间进行更多竞争。

An example of this would be to pay a lot more attention to students who have trouble learning to read.

一个例子是对学习阅读有困难的学生给予更多的关注。

There’s a set of conditions — seem to have some genetic component — that we call dyslexia.

有一系列条件 ——“似乎有某种遗传因素”——我们称之为阅读障碍。

Too many of those students don’t become effective readers and then miss the whole feedback loop of learning to read, learning to master concepts, learning to enjoy learning.

太多的学生没有成为有效的阅读者，然后错过了学习阅读、学习掌握概念、学习享受学习的整个反馈循环。

A little more attention to the kind of instruction that would make sure that they get caught up with their peers who find it easier to start to read — that could substantially reduce the inequality in educational outcomes, and then eventually reduce inequality in the labor force.

多一点关注能够确保他们赶上那些更容易开始阅读的同龄人的指导——这可以大大减少教育成果的不平等，然后最终减少劳动力的不平等。

But that kind of deficit, I don’t see a big advantage in.

但这种赤字，我不认为有什么大的优势。

They’re different styles.

他们是不同的风格。

I’ve always been a little bit more inclined to take risks or maybe to sample a lot more ideas.

我一直更倾向于冒险或者尝试更多的想法。

I sometimes make fun of myself by saying, “I’m just a random idea generator.” And then what’s neat is, others who can filter out the bad ones — then on average I could be helpful.

我有时会取笑自己说：“我只是一个随机的想法产生者。”然后最棒的是，其他人可以过滤掉不好的人 ——那么平均而言我可以提供帮助。

I don’t know if having a little trouble with spelling — which is the way it shows up for me — I don’t know if that makes me a little bit more willing to sample widely on ideas.

我不知道拼写是否有点困难 ——这就是它对我的影响 —— 我不知道这是否会让我更愿意广泛地尝试想法。

But in any case, even if it is true, if we put a little bit more effort into teaching kids who really struggle with reading — and by the way, the phonics-like instruction is clearly the thing that works for those kids, not a whole word or these other broken approaches — a little bit more instruction there could really change their educational outcomes.

但无论如何，即使这是真的，如果我们花更多的精力来教导那些确实在阅读方面遇到困难的孩子 ——顺便说一句，类似自然拼读的教学显然对这些孩子有效，而不是整个单词或其他蹩脚的方法—— 多一点指导确实可以改变他们的教育成果。

And there are school systems that focus on this as well.

有些学校系统也关注这一点。

In Singapore, they’re very careful to make sure that everybody in the class keeps up, up through about fourth or fifth grade.

在新加坡，他们非常小心地确保班上的每个人都能跟上，直到四年级或五年级。

They test you frequently in math and reading.

他们经常测试你的数学和阅读能力。

And if you’re falling behind, you get the best teachers.

如果你落后了，你也会得到最好的老师。

You get more classroom instruction.

你会得到更多的课堂指导。

They really invest extensively in the ones who might otherwise fall behind, and then can achieve much more equality in their educational outcomes.

他们确实对那些可能落后的人进行了大量投资，然后可以在教育成果上实现更加平等。

There’s no reason we couldn’t do that in our school systems if we made it a priority.

如果我们把它作为优先事项，我们就没有理由不能在我们的学校系统中做到这一点。

There’s a separate issue, which is that amongst the modern languages, English has the worst orthography, the worst mapping between spelling and sounds of any of the existing languages.

还有一个单独的问题，那就是在现代语言中，英语的拼写是最差的，拼写和声音之间的映射是现有语言中最差的。

And it’s a tragedy because English is becoming the universal second language.

这是一场悲剧，因为英语正在成为通用的第二语言。

The incidence of people who don’t learn to read is substantially higher in English than in other languages.

不学习阅读英语的人的发生率比其他语言的人要高得多。

People have known for a long time, it takes longer to learn to read in English because of the bad orthography.

人们很早就知道，由于拼写错误，学习英语阅读需要更长的时间。

But what hasn’t gotten enough attention is that there’s an effect on the variance as well.

但尚未引起足够重视的是，这对方差也有影响。

There are more people who never get over this hurdle to actually learning to read.

还有更多的人从未克服过真正学习阅读的障碍。

If there were a way to do in English what they’ve done in other languages, which is to clean up the orthography, that could make a huge difference in the variation associated with whether or not people can learn to read English.

如果有一种方法可以用英语做他们在其他语言中所做的事情，那就是清理拼写，这可能会对人们能否学习阅读英语相关的变化产生巨大的影响。

The country that has the most is China.

拥有最多的国家是中国。

If somebody had a big incentive to actually create a rationalized spelling that could operate in parallel with the traditional one, it would be something like China.

如果有人有很大的动力去创造一种可以与传统拼写并行的合理化拼写，那么它就会像 China 一样。

They could easily introduce — just as they have the Latin letter equivalents for some of the Chinese words — they could introduce rationalized spelling, and then use that for everybody who wants to learn English as a second language.

他们可以很容易地引入“就像他们有一些中文单词的拉丁字母对应物一样”，他们可以引入合理化的拼写，然后将其用于每个想要学习英语作为第二语言的人。

It would be a trivial translation problem to let some people write in one spelling form, others in the other because it would be word-for-word translation.

让一些人用一种拼写形式书写，另一些人用另一种拼写形式书写，这将是一个微不足道的翻译问题，因为这将是逐字翻译。

I could write you an email in rationalized spelling, and I could put it through the plug-in so you get it in traditional spelling.

我可以用合理的拼写给你写一封电子邮件，我可以通过插件将其放入，这样你就可以用传统的拼写得到它。

This idea that it’s impossible to change spelling I think is wrong.

我认为不可能改变拼写的想法是错误的。

It’s just, it’s hard, and we should — if we want to consider this — we should think carefully about the mechanisms.

只是，这很难，我们应该————如果我们想考虑这个————我们应该仔细思考其中的机制。

But, in this case, having two different orthographies has no necessary connection with different pronunciations.

但是，在这种情况下，具有两种不同的拼字法与不同的发音没有必然联系。

In principle, you can have a shared dialect and pronunciation even though the parties had different spelling systems.

原则上，即使双方有不同的拼写系统，您也可以拥有共同的方言和发音。

And there is some value in facilitating easy face-to-face communication through spoken language.

通过口语促进轻松的面对面交流具有一定的价值。

There’s also a dialect that some people refer to as Globish.

还有一种方言，有些人称之为全球语。

It’s the global version of English, which is slightly simplified, has slightly different uses of the definite articles and indefinite articles.

这是英语的全球版本，稍微简化了，定冠词和不定冠词的用法略有不同。

There might emerge a default dialect for spoken English that dominates amongst people who learn it as a second language.

英语口语中可能会出现一种默认方言，这种方言在学习英语作为第二语言的人们中占主导地位。

They understand each other much better than when they talk to somebody like you or me because we have all these distractions in how we speak.

他们比与你或我这样的人交谈时更能理解对方，因为我们说话的方式有很多干扰。

On general-purpose technologies

关于通用技术

The abstraction takes a continuum or very high-dimensional set of possible innovations and then defines a category as a discrete entity and says these have a particular character; they’re worth studying.

抽象采用连续体或非常高维度的可能创新集，然后将类别定义为离散实体，并表示它们具有特定的特征；他们值得研究。

I think this has been a helpful abstraction for thinking about things like electrification.

我认为这对于思考电气化等问题来说是一个有用的抽象。

I imagine that it will be helpful as we contemplate things going forward, although the question there is, if it is a general-purpose technology, will we know it as it’s unfolding?

我想，当我们思考未来的事情时，这将会有所帮助，尽管存在的问题是，如果它是一种通用技术，我们会在它展开时知道它吗？

Or will we only see that when we look back?

还是只有当我们回头看时才会看到这一点？

And if you then drill down into the specifics, I think economists — maybe all social scientists — don’t have a very rich or accurate picture yet of what really drives people, what really motivates us.

如果你深入研究具体细节，我认为经济学家 ——也许所有社会科学家 —— 对于真正驱动人们、真正激励我们的因素还没有非常丰富或准确的了解。

Our notion in economics — well, just more is better, more stuff — that gets you some distance, but there are these subtle forces that we just put labels on, like norms about right and wrong, identity, shame, anger, guilt.

我们的经济学观念——“嗯，越多越好，东西越多”——这会让你保持一定的距离，但我们只是给这些微妙的力量贴上标签，比如关于对与错、身份、羞耻、愤怒、内疚的规范。

There are these very powerful emotions that don’t average out necessarily when people interact, and that are important for understanding group outcomes.

当人们互动时，这些非常强烈的情绪不一定会平均，这对于理解群体结果很重要。

Let me give you one that I like.

让我给你一件我喜欢的。

There’s a book called Fairness and Freedom, and I don’t remember the author’s name, but he’s a well-known historian.

有本书叫《公平与自由》，我不记得作者的名字了，但他是一位著名的历史学家。

What he traces is the difference in the political language in New Zealand versus the United States.

他追踪的是新西兰与美国政治语言的差异。

He traces that back to founding populations that left England at different times.

他将其追溯到不同时期离开英格兰的建国人口。

In the United States, it was at a time when people were very concerned about religious freedom.

在美国，当时人们非常关心宗教自由。

When they went to New Zealand, it was later, and economic inequality and economic opportunity was the dominant force.

他们去新西兰的时候比较晚，经济不平等和经济机会才是主导力量。

What’s interesting is the persistence of those founding effects.

有趣的是这些创始效应的持续存在。

You start with people who are particularly concerned and talk about an issue, and then, even as huge numbers of migrants move into those places — often the same sources generate migrants who go to both places — the migrants get then socialized into the norms, the beliefs about right and wrong in these two places, and then you end up with persistent differences in the politics, not just the language, even the political decisions in these two countries.

你从特别关心的人开始讨论一个问题，然后，即使大量移民涌入这些地方——“通常相同的来源产生了前往两个地方的移民”——移民随后融入了这两个地方的规范、对是非的信念，然后你最终会在政治上出现持续的差异，不仅仅是语言，甚至是这两个国家的政治决策。

There is actually a growing number of economists who are thinking about culture as the label for describing some of these more subtle effects that operate in our beliefs, in our preferences, our norms about right and wrong, and how those interact when we work together in groups.

实际上，越来越多的经济学家正在将文化视为描述一些更微妙影响的标签，这些影响在我们的信仰、偏好、对错规范以及我们在群体中合作时如何相互作用中发挥作用。

These are the things that we didn’t understand when we were kind of naïve about predicting growth in the developing world, and that we still don’t understand very well.

当我们天真地预测发展中国家的增长时，这些都是我们不理解的事情，而且我们仍然不太理解。

On charter cities

在特许城市

This is actually the story of Maryland: We’re going to create laws, and we’re going to guarantee freedom of religion in Maryland, and it’s in the laws; it’s in the institution somehow.

这实际上是马里兰州的故事：我们将制定法律，我们将保证马里兰州的宗教自由，这是在法律中；它以某种方式存在于机构中。

That didn’t turn out very well.

结果不太好。

Maryland had a Catholic elite but then large numbers of Protestant indentured servants or workers.

马里兰州有天主教精英，但也有大量新教契约仆人或工人。

And this kind of commitment to freedom of religion was not stable in Maryland at all.

这种对宗教自由的承诺在马里兰州根本不稳定。

The case that’s worth trying to copy is Pennsylvania, where William Penn recruited large numbers of people who actually believed in freedom of religion.

值得效仿的例子是宾夕法尼亚州，威廉·佩恩在那里招募了大量真正相信宗教自由的人。

The word charter comes from the charter that Penn wrote for Pennsylvania, but it wasn’t the document that mattered.

宪章这个词来自佩恩为宾夕法尼亚州撰写的宪章，但重要的不是文件。

What mattered was that there were a bunch of people in the founding population who were committed to this idea of a separation of church and state and religious freedom.

重要的是，建国之初的人们中有很多人致力于政教分离和宗教自由的想法。

And that’s what made it durable in Pennsylvania in a way it wasn’t in Maryland.

这就是它在宾夕法尼亚州经久不衰的原因，而在马里兰州则不同。

Inside the head we have these very complicated motivations.

我们的头脑里有这些非常复杂的动机。

The usual economic model of inside the head is complex conscious reasoning but very simple preferences or emotions or motivations.

头脑内部通常的经济模型是复杂的有意识的推理，但非常简单的偏好、情感或动机。

In fact, the motivations are at least as complex as our ability to reason in a conscious sense.

事实上，动机至少与我们有意识地推理的能力一样复杂。

Actually, at one point, I wrote a paper called “Thinking and Feeling” that was really my first venture into trying to say, “We have some sense of why growth is possible and what could determine the long sweep of history.

事实上，我曾经写过一篇名为《思考与感受》的论文，这实际上是我第一次尝试说：“我们对为什么增长是可能的以及什么可以决定历史的长河有一定的认识。

Let’s now look more carefully inside of the head at what motivates people, these feelings.

现在让我们更仔细地看看大脑内部是什么激励着人们，这些感觉。

Because it’s there that a lot of the action is.”

因为很多行动都在那里进行。”

So to answer your question, to have a rich enough theory of development to explain the variety of outcomes we see in different countries, and to offer useful advice in different contexts, we need to understand a lot more about culture.

因此，为了回答你的问题，为了拥有足够丰富的发展理论来解释我们在不同国家看到的各种结果，并在不同背景下提供有用的建议，我们需要更多地了解文化。

As you were saying, culture doesn’t spread as quickly, and it doesn’t change as quickly.

正如你所说，文化传播得没有那么快，变化也没有那么快。

That can be a plus and a minus.

这可能是一个优点，也可能是一个缺点。

If you think about cultures that support institutions, you might want your institutions to be relatively durable and not just collapse and change as they did in Maryland when there was trouble in England.

如果你考虑支持制度的文化，你可能希望你的制度相对持久，而不是像英国遇到麻烦时马里兰州那样崩溃和改变。

Persistent norms are not necessarily a bad thing, but you do need to think about what if you get stuck in a situation where the norms in a population are inefficient and really holding you back?

持续存在的规范不一定是坏事，但你确实需要考虑一下，如果你陷入了人群中的规范效率低下并真正阻碍你的情况该怎么办？

Then you have to ask, what are the mechanisms where a group can change its norms?

那么你要问，一个群体可以通过什么机制来改变它的规范？

And this idea of letting a nonrepresentative subgroup go off and be the founding population in a new place.

这个想法是让一个不具代表性的亚群体离开并成为新地方的创始人口。

Then as people go in at a moderate rate from the old population to the new one, they can get socialized into the predominant culture in the new place.

然后，当人们以适度的速度从旧人口进入新人口时，他们就可以融入新地方的主导文化。

With that mechanism, you can actually change the whole distribution of norms in a population in a way that might be more feasible than if you’re trying to change those norms in place in the population.

通过这种机制，您实际上可以改变人群中规范的整体分布，这种方式可能比尝试改变人群中现有的规范更可行。

These are the questions we should be asking about how to resolve some of the deepest challenges we face in development.

这些是我们应该问的问题，如何解决我们在发展中面临的一些最深刻的挑战。

ROMER To drive this point home, let me just give you an illustration of what’s at stake.

罗默：为了让大家明白这一点，让我给你举个例子来说明其中的利害关系。

Imagine you wanted to try and get New Yorkers to have the same norms about pedestrian behavior that people in Zurich have.

想象一下，您想要尝试让纽约人对行人行为有与苏黎世人相同的规范。

But you take Zurich, which is a little more familiar example, where the proverbial old lady will scold you when there’s no cars in sight and you cross against the sign.

但你以苏黎世为例，这是一个更熟悉的例子，当你没有看到任何汽车而你违背了交通标志时，众所周知的老太太会责骂你。

If you passed a law or took the existing laws and tried to have police enforce them in New York, you’d get a backlash.

如果你通过一项法律或采用现有法律并试图让警察在纽约执行它们，你会遭到强烈反对。

I don’t think anybody thinks you could change this in New York.

我认为没有人认为你可以改变纽约的现状。

Yet, if you do move a few people to Zurich, they’ll start behaving like people in Zurich, and then over time, you could move everybody from New York to a place like Zurich.

然而，如果你确实将一些人搬到苏黎世，他们就会开始像苏黎世人一样行事，然后随着时间的推移，你可以将每个人从纽约搬到像苏黎世这样的地方。

The pedestrian norms is a useful one because it isn’t too charged politically or emotionally, but this is the process that’s in play.

行人规范是一种有用的规范，因为它在政治或情感上并没有太多的色彩，但这就是正在发挥作用的过程。

Go back to charter cities, which I thought of as a mechanism for addressing some of these issues.

回到特许城市，我认为这是解决其中一些问题的机制。

The response when I proposed this about 10 years ago was that this was the worst idea that anybody had heard.

大约十年前，当我提出这个想法时，得到的回应是，这是任何人听过的最糟糕的想法。

Now, if you go fast-forward about 10 years, I think the response now is, “Well, that’s the worst idea for dealing with migration except for all the others.”

现在，如果你快进大约 10 年，我认为现在的反应是，“好吧，除了所有其他想法之外，这是处理移民问题的最糟糕的想法。”

There’s now some real interest from governments and a variety of actors in this space who’d like to explore something different because nobody’s got a good answer to the question, what would we do if 20 million people needed to leave a country in a hurry because of something like a descent into civil war?

现在，政府和这个领域的各种参与者真正感兴趣，他们想要探索一些不同的东西，因为没有人能很好地回答这个问题：如果 2000 万人因为陷入内战等原因需要匆忙离开一个国家，我们该怎么办？

Or 10 million — 10, 20.

或者一千万 — 10、20。

I think nobody has any delusion anymore that an outside force can invade a country like that and quickly resolve a problem like that.

我想，没有人再幻想有外部势力可以入侵这样的国家，并迅速解决这样的问题。

So it’ll be with great hesitancy that you do that.

所以你会非常犹豫是否要这样做。

This idea that we’re going to deal with migration by just not letting it happen, in this case, would mean, “Oh, we’re just going to build the wall or hold them in, and if they end up killing each other, that’s their problem.”

在这种情况下，我们要通过不让移民发生来应对移民的想法意味着，“哦，我们只是要建造隔离墙或将他们困住，如果他们最终互相残杀，那就是他们的问题。”

As a humanitarian crisis, I don’t think it’ll be acceptable to just do nothing, but yet, there are no existing political systems that could absorb 20 million new arrivals without real risk to whatever their current political equilibrium is.

作为一场人道主义危机，我认为不采取任何行动是不可接受的，但是，目前还没有任何政治体系能够吸收 2000 万新移民，而不会对其当前的政治平衡造成真正的风险。

And then you could scale this up, and there’s hundreds of millions of people who say they want to leave, not because of an immediate crisis, but just because of the lack of opportunity and the high levels of violence in many parts of the world.

然后你可以扩大规模，有数亿人说他们想离开，不是因为迫在眉睫的危机，而只是因为世界许多地区缺乏机会和暴力活动频繁。

I think we should talk about a trilemma for migration, which is three things, and we can only have two out of the three.

我认为我们应该谈谈移民的三难困境，即三件事，而我们只能在三件事中做两件事。

You think of the liberal democracies — what would we like as a response for large numbers of people who need to go someplace?

你认为自由民主国家 ——我们希望对大量需要去某个地方的人做出什么反应？

If it was some political jurisdictions, one of the things we want is local democratic accountability for the officials in the government.

如果是某些政治管辖区，我们想要的事情之一就是对政府官员进行地方民主问责。

The second would be equal treatment under the law.

第二是法律面前人人平等。

And the third is, in this jurisdiction, the ability to absorb large numbers of migrants, potentially numbers that are bigger than the existing population.

第三是，在这个管辖范围内，有能力吸收大量移民，其数量可能比现有人口还要多。

Picture one of these places when there’s a million people there, but you’d like it to be able to accept another 9 million.

想象一下其中一个地方有 100 万人，但您希望它能够容纳另外 900 万人。

All three of those things are things that most people would support, and you can’t have all three.

所有这三件事都是大多数人都会支持的，但你不可能同时拥有这三件事。

So, the two we pick in most existing jurisdictions — we just don’t allow large-scale migration, and you can see some logic to that.

所以，我们在大多数现有司法管辖区中选择的两个 ——我们只是不允许大规模移民，你可以看到其中的一些逻辑。

If you’re one of a million people, and you like the equilibrium, and you’re contemplating bringing in another nine million, and you’re committed to equal treatment under the law, the system’s going to basically be the one that all the new arrivals are going to vote for, not the ones that you like.

如果你是一百万人中的一员，你喜欢均衡，并且你正在考虑再引进九百万人，并且你致力于法律下的平等待遇，那么这个制度基本上将是所有新来者都会投票支持的制度，而不是你喜欢的制度。

And the new arrivals might be coming for the thing that you like, but still, collectively, they might vote for or put in place something that isn’t the one they’re seeking out.

新来的人可能会为了你喜欢的东西而来，但总的来说，他们可能会投票支持或实施一些不是他们正在寻找的东西。

There’s a reason why democratic systems can’t absorb huge numbers of migrants.

民主制度无法吸收大量移民是有原因的。

You could violate equal treatment and say, “Okay, we’re going to let large numbers of people come in, but they’re not going to become citizens, have a different legal status.” Because of the norms that evolve in these conditions of inequality, I think that is going to prove to be a very damaging approach for both the migrants who arrive and the people in the existing society.

你可以违反平等待遇并说：“好吧，我们会让大量的人进来，但他们不会成为公民，不会拥有不同的法律地位。”由于在这些不平等条件下形成的规范，我认为这对于到达的移民和现有社会的人们来说将是一种非常有害的做法。

I don’t think violating equal treatment is a very useful option.

我认为违反平等待遇并不是一个非常有用的选择。

And the Hong Kong–like solution we should consider is to say, “We’re committed to large-scale migration for a period of time.

我们应该考虑的类似香港的解决方案是：“我们致力于在一段时间内进行大规模移民。

We’re going to give everybody equal treatment under the law, but we’ll make the transition to local democratic accountability when we’ve basically reached our maximum population and the migration process is over.”

我们将根据法律给予每个人平等待遇，但当我们基本上达到最大人口并且移民过程结束时，我们将过渡到地方民主问责制。”

This is, I think, the way to describe Hong Kong under the British.

我认为，这就是描述英国统治下的香港的方式。

The governor there was still accountable to a democracy; it wasn’t like an autocrat.

那里的州长仍然对民主负责；这不像一个独裁者。

They changed periodically.

他们定期改变。

Some were better than others.

有些比其他更好。

But it was an offshore democracy in England.

但它是英国的离岸民主国家。

People in Hong Kong were really quite happy with that system under British rule.

香港人对英国统治下的制度非常满意。

The pressure for democracy only came when it became apparent that the British would leave, and there was a concern about, who is going to guarantee our system?

只有当英国人明显要离开时，民主的压力才会出现，人们担心谁来保证我们的制度？

We could consider Hong Kong–like arrangements, where an existing system of government helps create the frame for a new jurisdiction.

我们可以考虑类似香港的安排，现有的政府体系有助于为新的司法管辖区建立框架。

Then large numbers of people can move in.

然后大量的人就可以搬进去。

Once you get full, it basically makes the transition to local democratic control.

一旦吃饱了，基本上就过渡到地方民主控制了。

It’s a very unfamiliar approach, and it has features that are unattractive.

这是一种非常陌生的方法，而且它的功能也没有吸引力。

But the thing to realize is, we just don’t have an answer at all if we’re facing this kind of very large-scale crisis of migration.

但要认识到的是，如果我们面临这种大规模的移民危机，我们根本没有答案。

We don’t have an answer either to the chronic problem of people who really want to leave places — and hundreds of millions want to leave places they’re currently in — nor do we have an answer to the immediate crisis.

对于那些真正想要离开地方的人这一长期问题——以及数以亿计的人想要离开他们目前所在的地方——我们也没有办法解决眼前的危机。

What would we do within the space of a year when tens of millions of people needed to get out of an environment that was going to descend into violence?

当数以千万计的人需要摆脱即将陷入暴力的环境时，我们会在一年内做什么？

Moses was of this generation that was too enamored of the car, and this is where I think Jacobs had a better intuition.

摩西属于太迷恋汽车的这一代人，这就是我认为雅各布斯有更好直觉的地方。

But the challenge, the dichotomy I would pose would be Jane Jacobs versus Gouverneur Morris.

但我要提出的挑战和二分法是简·雅各布斯（Jane Jacobs）与古弗尼尔·莫里斯（Gouverneur Morris）。

Morris was the guy who drew the grid that laid out the rectangular street map for Manhattan.

莫里斯是绘制曼哈顿矩形街道地图网格的人。

And it’s important to understand how incredibly valuable it was for someone like Morris to establish that foundation, which really, all it was was an assertion that here’s this two-dimensional grid of public space so that the public authorities will be able to make decisions in the future about how you use it for vehicles, for pipes and wires, and it was the foundation for connecting everybody in New York.

重要的是要了解像莫里斯这样的人建立这个基金会是多么有价值，实际上，这只是一个断言，这是一个公共空间的二维网格，以便公共当局将来能够就如何将其用于车辆、管道和电线做出决定，它是连接纽约每个人的基础。

If you don’t have that foundation that a public entity can use later for bike lanes or buses or whatever you want, it’s almost impossible to get it if you don’t start out with it.

如果你没有公共实体以后可以将其用于自行车道或公共汽车或任何你想要的东西的基础，那么如果你不开始使用它，几乎不可能获得它。

We’re never going to see, I don’t think, another Haussmann who can bulldoze new streets in Paris.

我认为，我们永远不会看到另一个能够推平巴黎新街道的奥斯曼。

So if I had to pick between Morris and Jacobs, I’d go with Gouverneur Morris.

因此，如果我必须在莫里斯和雅各布斯之间做出选择，我会选择古弗尼尔·莫里斯。

But I wouldn’t go with Moses because he was too big on this superhighway thing.

但我不会选择摩西，因为他在高速公路这件事上太大了。

That’s just not a good design of a grid to connect everybody up.

这并不是一个将每个人连接起来的良好网格设计。

Sometimes I play this game with myself, which is like, “Okay, if I’m going to be reincarnated, what would I do as a new young person?” For a long time, I actually wanted to be a software developer.

有时我会和自己玩这个游戏，就像“好吧，如果我有来生，作为一个新的年轻人我会做什么？”很长一段时间以来，我其实想成为一名软件开发人员。

There’s still an itch there I want to scratch.

那里还是很痒，我想抓挠。

The most interesting practical thing I learned .

我学到的最有趣的实用知识。

.

。

.

。

and in demand like this, how would you make progress?

在这样的需求下，你将如何取得进展？

I wouldn’t sit down and make some assumptions, like, “Here are the axioms of management.” What I’d do is go out and look at the evidence.

我不会坐下来做出一些假设，比如“这是管理公理”。我要做的就是出去查看证据。

Some of the most interesting evidence about management actually came out of Toyota, who applied principles from Edward Deming.

有关管理的一些最有趣的证据实际上来自丰田，该公司应用了爱德华·戴明的原则。

But there’s this one mechanism called Kanban at Toyota that was used to manage things on the production line, which has now been taken up by people in software development.

但丰田有一种称为看板的机制，用于管理生产线上的事物，现在已被软件开发人员采用。

And it has some really interesting principles.

它有一些非常有趣的原则。

One is that transparency is very helpful in teamwork because when people don’t know what others are doing, they tend to have a bias towards the negative.

一是透明度对团队合作非常有帮助，因为当人们不知道其他人在做什么时，他们往往会产生消极的偏见。

They think something bad is happening.

他们认为有不好的事情正在发生。

Transparency is actually a good way to build trust.

透明度实际上是建立信任的好方法。

So part of what Kanban does is try and make it clear, what’s everybody doing?

因此，看板所做的一部分就是尝试弄清楚每个人都在做什么？

The other, more subtle observation is that too much work in progress can really impede the flow-through of a system so that you limit .

另一个更微妙的观察是，过多的正在进行的工作确实会阻碍系统的流程，从而限制您的工作。

.

。

.

。

It’s kind of like congestion on a street.

这有点像街道上的拥堵。

You limit the amount of work in progress to avoid the effects of task switching and distractions.

您可以限制正在进行的工作量，以避免任务切换和干扰的影响。

And again, Kanban is a way — with visual cards — that you can limit work in progress and coordinate people.

再说一次，看板是一种方法——通过视觉卡——你可以限制正在进行的工作并协调人员。

The most interesting thing I read about reform of a somewhat dysfunctional team was, basically, if an IT service team in a large company, where they were able to use these two principles of limiting work in progress, watching for things like rework that was inefficient, but building trust .

我读到的关于对功能失调的团队进行改革的最有趣的事情基本上是，如果一家大公司的 IT 服务团队能够使用这两个原则来限制正在进行的工作，监视诸如效率低下的返工之类的事情，但建立信任。

.

。

.

。

It wasn’t just trust within the team, but the typical situation of an IT team or a research unit in a place like the bank is that there’s this almost unlimited set of requests you get, of which you can process only a subset.

这不仅仅是团队内部的信任，IT 团队或银行等地方的研究单位的典型情况是，您收到的请求几乎是无限的，而您只能处理其中的一个子集。

So you need some transparency about how is it you’re selecting the things you actually work on, given the many things people want.

因此，考虑到人们想要的很多东西，你需要一些透明度来说明你是如何选择你实际从事的事情的。

If that’s transparent enough to other people and there’s some rational process for making those decisions, you get much better outcomes than if it’s covert and influenced — you do things because one of your friends asks you to do them.

如果这对其他人来说足够透明，并且有一些合理的决策过程，那么你会得到比秘密和影响更好的结果——你因为你的一个朋友要求你做而做一些事情。

So the first thing to do on management is just proceed empirically and see where reforms have worked in organizations like this.

因此，管理方面要做的第一件事就是凭经验进行，看看改革在这样的组织中发挥了哪些作用。

Then, I think, you would start to build a theory about why is it that trust is so important when you have a team of people?

然后，我想，你会开始建立一个理论，解释为什么当你有一个团队时信任如此重要？

“Mann’s Fate” — you know what I like there?

《曼的命运》 — 你知道我喜欢那里什么吗？

Is the parallel or symmetry between the acoustic and the bass.

声学和低音之间是否平行或对称。

They take turns, and that role reversal is like what Clarence White did, turning the guitar into a lead instrument analogous to the fiddle.

他们轮流进行，这种角色转换就像克拉伦斯·怀特所做的那样，将吉他变成了类似于小提琴的主奏乐器。

That kind of innovation in music, in the structure or interplay, is wonderful.

这种音乐上、结构上或相互作用上的创新是美妙的。

And I must add, I just love the bass guitar of Jack Casady.

我必须补充一点，我就是喜欢 Jack Casady 的贝斯吉他。

My partner and I have this longstanding debate about who’s better, Gram Parsons or Clarence White.

我和我的搭档一直在争论格拉姆·帕森斯和克拉伦斯·怀特谁更好。

And it’s this ongoing battle at home: “No, Clarence White’s really the one who was responsible for country rock.” “No, no, no, Gram Parsons.” It’s one of those few places where you’re not trying to achieve consensus.

这是一场在国内持续不断的战斗：“不，克拉伦斯·怀特才是乡村摇滚的真正负责人。” “不，不，不，格兰姆·帕森斯。”这是少数几个你不试图达成共识的地方之一。

This is not like science.

这不像科学。

This is just, we like going back and forth on that one.

只是，我们喜欢在这个问题上来来回回。

My kids actually liked the Muppet Movie, partly because it’s Kermit is going to Hollywood.

我的孩子们实际上很喜欢布偶电影，部分原因是克米特要去好莱坞。

But it’s really the story of Jim Henson, and that was the part, I think, that made that a more touching story.

但这确实是吉姆·汉森的故事，我认为这就是让这个故事变得更感人的部分。

But one of the joys of reading — that’s not a novel — but one of the joys of reading, and to me slightly frightening thing, is that there’s so much out there, and that a hundred years later, you can discover somebody who has so many things to say that can be helpful for somebody like me trying to understand, how do we use abstraction?

但是阅读的乐趣之一——这不是一本小说——但阅读的乐趣之一，对我来说有点可怕的事情是，外面有那么多东西，一百年后，你会发现有人有很多东西要说，这对像我这样试图理解的人有帮助，我们如何使用抽象？

How do we communicate clearly?

我们如何清晰地沟通？

He started this field of semiotics, of this connection between the sign and the concept and the distinction between those two.

他开创了符号学这一领域，即符号与概念之间的联系以及两者之间的区别。

I used to think things like that were academics worrying about angels on the head of a pin, but this is actually a really profoundly important distinction to pay attention to.

我曾经认为这样的事情是学者们担心针尖上的天使，但这实际上是一个非常重要的区别，需要注意。

But the joy of scholarship — I think it’s a joy of maybe any life in the modern world — that through reading, we can get access to the thoughts of another person, and then you can sample from the thoughts that are most relevant to you or that are the most powerful in some sense.

但是学术的乐趣 ——我认为这可能是现代世界任何生活的乐趣 ——通过阅读，我们可以了解另一个人的思想，然后你可以从与你最相关的思想中取样，或者在某种意义上最有力的思想。

That’s really the foundation for the transmission of knowledge and growth and this whole process.

这确实是知识传播和成长以及整个过程的基础。

I should read probably a little bit more widely in fiction, but I find somebody like Peirce — my reaction is, I’m going to quit everything else and just go read the nonfiction stuff because there’s so much out there that I didn’t even know about.

我可能应该更广泛地阅读小说，但我发现像皮尔士这样的人——我的反应是，我要放弃其他一切，只去阅读非小说类的东西，因为那里有太多我什至不知道的东西。

He was working 10 or more years before I did, but I’ve wondered if there was something about the mountain West, then moving to the East Coast that made us both willing to take on things that weren’t the accepted consensus about what were the most important things to work on.

他比我早工作了 10 年或更长时间，但我想知道西部山区，然后搬到东海岸，是否有什么东西让我们都愿意承担一些在最重要的工作方面尚未达成共识的事情。

When I get a chance to talk with Bill, I want to ask him about that.

当我有机会和比尔交谈时，我想问他这个问题。

But the problem is, from introspection, I don’t know if I can ever figure out what effect those things have.

但问题是，从内省来看，我不知道我是否能弄清楚这些东西会产生什么影响。

I think there’s a slightly different culture in the Midwest compared to the East Coast, and there’s enough of a difference so that when you go from one to the other, you have maybe a little bit of a sense of being an outsider.

我认为中西部地区的文化与东海岸略有不同，而且差异足够大，因此当你从一个地方转到另一个地方时，你可能会有一点作为局外人的感觉。

Maybe those things have filtered into my work.

也许这些东西已经渗透到我的工作中了。

My mother — she raised seven kids.

我的母亲——她抚养了七个孩子。

I told her just recently that this prize is for her because there’s this formative period, when you’re a very young child, where the care and affection and warmth, the emotional warmth, with the mother is a big influence on the rest of your life.

我最近告诉她，这个奖项是给她的，因为在你还是个很小的孩子的成长时期，母亲的关怀、感情和温暖、情感上的温暖会对你的余生产生很大的影响。

She started in the ’60s, I guess, a preschool in Colorado.

我猜她是在 60 年代在科罗拉多州的一所幼儿园开始的。

She was not only raising kids, but she started a preschool because she was so convinced at how important this early childhood nurturing environment was.

她不仅要抚养孩子，还创办了一所幼儿园，因为她坚信这种早期儿童培育环境的重要性。

What I got from her were the emotional capacities that you get if you can grow up in a supportive environment.

我从她那里得到的是，如果你能在一个支持性的环境中成长，你就会获得情感能力。

She’s going to come.

她会来的。

She’s 89; she’s going to come to Stockholm, and I’ll bring the rest of my whole family.

她89岁了；她要来斯德哥尔摩，我会带上我全家的其他人。

We’ll max out my whole allotment of people I can take, but it’ll be a family event in Stockholm.

我们将最大限度地容纳我可以容纳的所有人员，但这将是斯德哥尔摩的家庭活动。