Over the last few decades, economists and psychologists have quietly documented the many ways in which a person's IQ matters. But, research suggests that a nation's IQ matters so much more.As Garett ...Jones argues in Hive Mind, modest differences in national IQ can explain most cross-country inequalities. Whereas IQ scores do a moderately good job of predicting individual wages, information processing power, and brain size, a country's average score is a much stronger bellwether of its overall prosperity. Drawing on an expansive array of research from psychology, economics, management, and political science, Jones argues that intelligence and cognitive skill are significantly more important on a national level than on an individual one because they have "positive spillovers." On average, people who do better on standardized tests are more patient, more cooperative, and have better memories. As a result, these qualities—and others necessary to take on the complexity of a modern economy—become more prevalent in a society as national test scores rise. What's more, when we are surrounded by slightly more patient, informed, and cooperative neighbors we take on these qualities a bit more ourselves. In other words, the worker bees in every nation create a "hive mind" with a power all its own. Once the hive is established, each individual has only a tiny impact on his or her own life. Jones makes the case that, through better nutrition and schooling, we can raise IQ, thereby fostering higher savings rates, more productive teams, and more effective bureaucracies. After demonstrating how test scores that matter little for individuals can mean a world of difference for nations, the book leaves readers with policy- oriented conclusions and hopeful speculation: Whether we lift up the bottom through changing the nature of work, institutional improvements, or freer immigration, it is possible that this period of massive global inequality will be a short season by the standards of human history if we raise our global IQ.
Zusammenfassung Um auch die unbeabsichtigten Folgen ihrer Politik zu ermitteln, unternehmen Regierungen umfassende Gesetzesfolgenabschätzungen. Immer häufiger lassen sie sich dabei von unabhängigen ...Expertengremien kontrollieren. Doch: Wie erzielen diese Gremien Einfluss? Und welche Rolle spielen sie als Politikberater für Bürokratieabbau und bessere Rechtsetzung? Das Buch eröffnet neue Einblicke in die Entwicklungshistorie und Handlungsrealität der drei erfahrensten Normenkontrollräte in Europa. Vor dem Hintergrund unterschiedlicher Verwaltungskulturen werden die Ratstypen „Wachhund“, „Torwächter“ und „Kritischer Freund“ herausgearbeitet. Die Ergebnisse schärfen die politische und wissenschaftliche Debatte um die Leistungsfähigkeit von Normenkontrollräten. Abstract In order to calculate the unintended consequences of their policies, governments conduct comprehensive assessments of the impact of legislation. In doing so, they have independent expert committees monitor them on an increasingly frequent basis. However, in what ways do these committees have an influence in this respect? And what role do they play as policy advisors in terms of dismantling bureaucracy and better legislation? This book provides new insights into the history of the development of the three most experienced supervisory bodies in Europe and the reality of how they conduct themselves. Against the backdrop of various administrative cultures, the book presents the following types of supervisory committees in detail: ‘watchdog’, ‘gatekeeper’ and ‘critical friend’. Its findings intensify the political and academic debate on the performance and efficiency of supervisory bodies.
