“ To thrive and compete, as an organization, city or nation, we need to 
continue to nurture our collective brains by celebrating diversity, embracing 
novelty and opening our doors to outsiders.”



Why Immigration Drives Innovation - Evonomics
https://evonomics.com/why-immigration-drives-innovation/
(via Instapaper)

When President Coolidge signed the Johnson-Reed Act into law in 1924, he 
drained the well-spring of American ingenuity. The new policy sought to restore 
the ethnic homogeneity of 1890 America by tightening the 1921 immigration 
quotas. As a result, immigration from eastern Europe and Italy plummeted, and 
Asian immigrants were banned. Assessing the law’s impact, the economists Petra 
Moser and Shmuel San show how this steep and selective cut in immigration 
stymied U.S. innovation across a swath of scientific fields, including radio 
waves, radiation and polymers—all fields in which Eastern European immigrants 
had made contributions prior to 1924. Not only did patenting drop by two-thirds 
across 36 scientific domains, but U.S-born researchers became less creative as 
well, experiencing a 62% decline in their own patenting. American scientists 
lost the insights, ideas and fresh perspectives that inevitably flow in with 
immigrants.

Before this, from 1850 to 1920, American innovation and economic growth had 
been fueled by immigration. The 1899 inflow included a large fraction of groups 
that were later deemed “undesirable”: e.g., 26% Italians, 12% “Hebrews,” and 9% 
“Poles.” Taking advantage of the randomness provided by expanding railroad 
networks and changing circumstances in Europe, a trio of economists—Sandra 
Sequeira, Nathan Nunn and Nancy Qian–demonstrate that counties that ended up 
with more immigrants subsequently innovated more rapidly and earned higher 
incomes, both in the short-term and today. The telephone, hot blast furnace, 
screw propeller, flashlight and ironclad ship were all pioneered by immigrants. 
The analysis also suggests that immigrants made native-born Americans more 
creative. Nikola Tesla, a Serbian who grew up in the Austrian Empire, provided 
George Westinghouse, a New Yorker whose parents had migrated from Westphalia, 
with a key missing component for his system of electrification based on AC 
current (Tesla also patented 100s of other inventions).

In ending the quotas imposed under the Harding-Coolidge administration, 
President Johnson remarked in 1964 that “Today, with my signature, this system 
is abolished…Men of needed skill and talent were denied entrance because they 
came from southern or eastern Europe or from one of the developing continents…” 
By the mid-1970s, U.S innovation was again powerfully fueled by immigrants, now 
coming from places like Mexico, China, India, Philippines and Vietnam. From 
1975 to 2010, an additional 10,000 immigrants generated 22% more patents every 
five years. Again, not only did immigrants innovate, they also stoked the 
creative energies of the locals.

U.S. immigration is but one example of how the interactions of many diverse 
minds—our collective brains—drive innovation and ultimately economic growth. 
Contrary to the myth of the lone heroic genius, nearly all 
innovations—including U.S. patents—arise through the recombination of existing 
ideas, practices, techniques and ways of thinking, often with a large dose of 
serendipity. For example: as a new graduate student at Stanford, Larry Page 
took a guided tour of San Francisco lead by a second-year graduate student, 
Sergey Brin, a Russian Jewish immigrant. Working together, Page and Brin 
delivered Google to us by combining existing web-crawlers with page-ranking by 
popularity, an idea inspired by academic citation counts (both inventors had 
professors as parents). Collective brains fire up when a network of individuals 
with different skills, training, customs and ways of thinking interact and 
freely share what they know, believe and can do.

The collective brain explains why larger and denser cities produce so many more 
innovations per person and why geographic proximity, communication technologies 
(e.g., writing), social ties and professional associations spur both innovation 
and scientific progress. Similarly, focusing on societies without cities or 
industrial technologies, the collective brain helps explain why more populous 
and better-connected Pacific Island societies, at the time of European contact, 
tended to have larger and more sophisticated fishing technologies.

Over the last millennium, the expansion of the collective brain can be seen in 
the acceleration of innovation in Europe and then around the world. Beginning 
in the High Middle Ages, European cities began growing and proliferating as 
rising rivers of commerce wove them into networks. Mobile artisans, merchants, 
monks and scholars flowed into urban centers, bringing their know-how to 
different workshops, banks, guilds and universities. After 1450, printing 
presses began to pour out books and pamphlets, and with the Protestant 
reformation, a growing number of people learned to read—connecting even more 
minds across space and time. Public libraries, postal services and the 
Encyclopédie connected together the minds of scientists, engineers and 
tinkerers. On the eve of the Industrial Revolution in 18th century Britain, 
counties with more ‘philosophical societies’—social clubs interested in new 
ideas—generated more patents each decade and more award winners in the 1851 
World’s Fair.

Get Evonomics in your inbox

Underlying large and densely interconnected collective brains lie an unusual 
cultural psychology, a set of motivations, beliefs, attitudes and dispositions. 
These include an openness to outsiders, a willingness to trust strangers, a 
readiness to embrace novelty and a deep individualism—a commitment to judge 
oneself and others based on personal attributes, intentions and achievements 
over ethnic affiliations, family relationships, religions or castes. In 
medieval Europe, forces favoring greater tolerance can be discerned by the fact 
that urban centers that maintained their Jewish communities—e.g., avoiding 
pogroms—tended to expand and prosper: intolerance was costly. Later, in 
colonial America, William Penn’s experiment with religious freedom attracted 
Quakers, Jews, Huguenots and Amish into Pennsylvania, which led Philadelphia to 
flourish relative to its less tolerant rivals like Boston. In late 20th century 
America, cities more willing to celebrate diversity, captured by the Bohemian 
(artists) or Melting Pot Indices, were more innovative relative to their 
similar, but less open-minded, competitors.

Where did this cultural psychology come from and why does it change over time?

Surprisingly, the medieval Roman Catholic Church appears to have 
unintentionally played a substantial role in altering people’s social worlds in 
ways that opened the door to new psychological patterns. The Church, throughout 
the Middle Ages, promulgated a package of prohibitions and prescriptions 
surrounding marriage and the family—including broad incest taboos on marrying 
even distant cousins—that slowly dissolved the kindreds, clans and family 
networks of Europe, eventually leaving mostly monogamous nuclear households. 
Expelled from the security and constraints of tight kin networks, individuals 
were compelled to form new voluntary associations, including guilds, charter 
towns, free cities and universities, that provided personal security, mutual 
insurance and a more individualistic sense of identity.

To attract members over their competitors, these associations increasingly 
adopted impersonal norms and impartial principles that endowed people with 
individual rights, obligations and privileges. In a dynamic process, through 
centuries of intergroup competition, cultural practices, beliefs and worldviews 
were pushed toward expanding the social circle in ways that nourished the 
collective brain. While setbacks were (and remain) numerous, inclinations 
toward intolerance, mistrust and parochialism declined because they tended to 
lose in competition to those who were more broad-minded and thus more 
innovative.

To thrive and compete, as an organization, city or nation, we need to continue 
to nurture our collective brains by celebrating diversity, embracing novelty 
and opening our doors to outsiders.

Joseph Henrich is a Professor and Chair of the Department of Human Evolutionary 
Biology at Harvard University. This piece builds on Professor Henrich’s notion 
of the collective brain, which he developed in his 2016 book, The Secret of Our 
Success: How culture is driving human evolution, domesticating our species and 
making us smarter, and again in his 2020 book, The WEIRDest People in the 
World: How the West became psychologically peculiar and particularly prosperous.

9 Jan 2021

Donating = Changing Economics. And Changing the World.

Evonomics is free, it’s a labor of love, and it's an expense. We spend hundreds 
of hours and lots of dollars each month creating, curating, and promoting 
content that drives the next evolution of economics. If you're like us — if you 
think there’s a key leverage point here for making the world a better place — 
please consider donating. We’ll use your donation to deliver even more 
game-changing content, and to spread the word about that content to influential 
thinkers far and wide.

MONTHLY DONATION 
$3 / month
$7 / month
$10 / month
$25 / month

ONE-TIME DONATION 
You can also become a one-time patron with a single donation in any amount. 
If you liked this article, you'll also like these other Evonomics articles...


How Your Savings Plan Fuels an Arms Race on Wall Street
Do Immigrants Import Their Economic Destiny?
Is Big Government Bad for Freedom, Civil Society, and Happiness?
How to Suffocate Your Economy: Drown it in Massive Private Debt.

BE INVOLVED

We welcome you to take part in the next evolution of economics. Sign up now to 
be kept in the loop!



Sent from my iPhone

-- 
-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/RadicalCentrism/9CF2A987-811C-4FE9-BD1B-40E8F1EC4C62%40radicalcentrism.org.

Reply via email to