|
Haber, Samuel Efficiency and Uplift:
Scientific Management in the Progressive Era 1890-1920, University of
Chicago, 1964,
From the introduction and Page 74
We are often told that Americans love
efficiency. In fact, we are told this so often that some serious students
of American character have come to see such statements as commonplaces
deadening our understanding of America and Americans rather than enlivening
it. Yet if we give these commonplaces specificity, if we look closely at
Americans professing the love of efficiency (and to a lesser extent acting
upon it), we may come away from such study with a better understanding of
our country and our ways.
The progressive era is almost made to order for
the study of Americans in love with efficiency. For the progressive era
gave rise to an efficiency craze—a secular Great Awakening, an outpouring of
ideas and emotions in which a gospel of efficiency was preached without
embarrassment to businessmen, workers, doctors, housewives, and teachers,
and yes, preached even to preachers. Men as disparate as William Jennings
Bryan and Walter Lippmann discoursed enthusiastically on efficiency.
Efficient and good came closer to meaning the same thing in these years than
in any other period of American history.
If we sift through the vast literature of
efficiency that the progressive era produced, we can discover at least four
principal ways in which the word efficiency was used. First of all, it
described a personal attribute. An efficient person was an effective
person, and that characterization brought with it a long shadow of latent
associations and predispositions; a turning toward hard work and away from
feeling, toward discipline and away from sympathy, toward masculinity and
away from femininity. Second, the word signified the energy output-input
ratio of a machine. This was a more recent use than that describing a trait
of character. (However, mechanical efficiency may have added coloring to
personal efficiency; the machine does, but does not feel.) The concept of
mechanical efficiency developed out of the application of the laws of
thermodynamics to the technology of the steam engine in the last quarter of
the nineteenth century, and soon it became a central concept of engineering.
The machine whose efficiency the engineer
calculated, however, was often owned by a business enterprise interested in
profit. Commercial efficiency, the output-input ratio of dollars, was a
third meaning common to the progressive era, and a meaning which engineers
who were concerned with the delicate adjustment of material means to ends
could not ignore. Finally, efficiency not only signified a personal
quality, a relationship between materials, and a relationship between
investment and revenue, but, most important, it signified a relationship
between men. Efficiency meant social harmony and the leadership of the
“competent.” Progressives often called this social efficiency. And it is
this meaning that has particular importance for the understanding of the
progressive era.... The efficiency craze, which began with the Easter Rate
Case in 1910, receded by 1915 and disappeared with America’s entry into the
war. Efficiency as morality, the most widespread and easily acceptable
form, was quickest to evaporate. Efficiency as a series of profit-making
stunts was soon discredited. Efficiency as a technique of industrial
management and as a form of social control found a small but steadfast
following and had more lasting effects.
Pruger, Robert. Efficiency and the
Social Services. New York: 1991 ISBN 1560241136,
Page 176
Scratch below the surface of the term,
“efficiency,” and it turns out to be a very murky, ambiguous idea that is
thrown about with such reckless abandon that it can mean virtually anything
anyone wants it to mean; getting more work done; cost-cutting; rooting out
waste; cost-effectiveness; a favorable ratio of benefits to costs; output
productivity; distribution and even rationing; and perhaps more. This not
what science and rationality are made of.
Rizzo, Mario J. Time, Uncertainty, and
Disequilibrium. New York: 1979. ISBN 0699026980, Page 72
Efficiency is a concept that has no meaning
apart from the model that happens to be in use. Efficiency is always
relative to the objectives and subject to the constraints specified in a
theoretical framework.
Safe Energy Communication Council’s, Myth
#6, Busters Fall 1990 Page 1
Energy efficiency is the fastest-growing, most
abundant, least polluting and lowest-cost energy resource available in the
United States today. In fact, the Department of Energy calculates that
energy efficiency and conservation now supply more of our energy services
than any other single source, at a lower cost than building new power plants
or extracting more fossil fuels. Improving energy efficiency means
instituting methods or technologies that use less energy to achieve the same
results. For instance, an efficient light bulb; a house designed for
efficiency is warmer in the winter and cooler in the summer than a drafty,
inefficient one; an efficient automobile can travel the same distance using
less gasoline; and an efficient motor can run equipment with less energy and
do the same job. While energy efficiency has saved us enormously on energy
and money over the past two decades, further improvements can do much more.
According to independent analyses, America can reduce its total energy
consumption by 20 to more than 50 percent.
President Bill Clinton, October 6, 1997
White House Conference on Climate Change, Georgetown University
We’ve worked far too hard to revitalize the
American Dream to jeopardize our progress now. Therefore, we must emphasize
flexible market-based approaches. We must work with business and industry
to find the right ways to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. We must promote
technologies that make energy production and consumption more efficient.
Emerson, Harrington. The Twelve
Principles Of Efficiency The Engineering Magazine Co., New York, 1919,
Page 82
It is not either the right or the privilege of
the Efficiency Engineer to set up ideals of morality, goodness, or beauty,
or to assume that his ideal of purpose is superior; but he as a right to
expect that some definite and tangible ideal will be set up so that at the
start its possible incompatibility with one or more of the efficiency
principles may be pointed out.
Schmidt, A. Allan, and James D. Shaffer.
“Marketing in Social Perspective” Agricultural Marketing Analysis,
edited by Vernon L. Sorenon. East Lansing, Michigan State University, 1964,
Page 29
In fact, the industrial economy’s most marketed
commodity is satisfaction, and this commodity, which is repeatedly promised,
bought, and paid for, is never delivered.
Veblen, Thorstein. The Theory of Business
Enterprise. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Books, 1978. ISBN
087855690, Pages 8 and 18 cited in Knoedler, Janet T., “Veblen and
technical efficiency.” Journal of Economic Issues, Dec97, Vol. 31
Issue 4, p1011, 16p
Veblen’s definition of technical efficiency was
itself an engineering definition. It derived from his view of modern
industry as a “[comprehensive] machine process” [Veblen 1988, 5] that was
organized by means of pecuniary transactions to allow for careful management
of the many interstitial adjustments that coordinated the various related
branches of industry…. For Veblen, technical efficiency existed when
interdependent mechanized production processes throughout the economy worked
together “in an efficient manner, without idleness, waste, and hardship” to
produce the maximum possible amount of output, using the most
technologically sophisticated industrial techniques available.
Patten, Simon N. The New Basis of
Civilization New York: 1968. Page 207
The men in whom energy is sapped, or who have
been the victims of misfortune, are a class in which the normal race stimuli
are failing to act. The loaf of bread, the cigar, the theatre ticket held
before men as regards to work remain inducements only until they have been
consumed. Zeal wanes as they are used up, and will not steadily flow again
except from a fund of surplus energy that in its exit sharpens imagination
and revives the drooping faculties. Give rain and crops grow; give surplus
energy and men become spontaneously efficient.
Vaclav Smil, Energy at the Crossroads:
Global Perspectives and Uncertainties. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2003.
ISBN 0262194929. Chapter 6,
Page 336
Given the fact that efficiency has become a
mantra of modern, globally competitive business whose goal is to make and
sell more, the quest for better performance can be then seen, in Rudin’s
(1999, “How Improved Efficiency Harms the Environment” at http://home.earthlink.net/~andrewrudin/article.html,
p.1) disdainful view, as a justification “to consume our resources
efficiently without limit.” And he points out the distinction between
relative and absolute savings noting that “our environment does not respond
to miles per gallon; it responds to gallons” (Rudin 1999, p. 2). So if we
are to see any actual reductions in overall energy use we need to go beyond
increased efficiency of energy conversions….
Page 337
Given the complexity of modern societies
regulation would always have a role in energy conservation but the bulk of
such savings should be preferably delivered by an enlightened public that
chooses to change its behavior and modify its lifestyle. Appeals for this
shift have been made by many devoted conservationists. The fact that
“improved efficiency coincides with increased use of resources should be
enough to make us think in non-business terms…. Using less energy is a
matter of discipline, not fundable political correctness” (Rudin 1999, p 4).
Seen from this perspective calls for energy
conservation are just a part of much broader appeals for moderation (if
sacrifice may seem to strong a term), frugality, and cooperation for the
sake of the common good that form moral foundations of every high
civilization. Being content with less or not requiring more in the first
place are two precepts that have been a part of both Western and Eastern
thought for millennia and that were explicitly voiced by teachers of moral
systems as disparate as Christianity and Confucianism. How kindred are
these quotes from the Analects in Arthur Waley’s translation (Waley,
A. The Analects of Confucius (Translation in Lunyu). London: George
Allen & Unwin) and from Luke (X11:22-34 King James version):
The Master said, He who seeks only coarse food
to eat, water to drink and bent arm for pillow will without looking for it
find happiness to boot.
Page 338
And he said unto his disciples, Therefore I say
unto you, Be not anxious for your life, what ye shall eat; nor yet for your
body, what ye shall put on. For the life is more than the food, and the
body more than the raiment… make for yourselves purses which wax not old, a
treasure in the heavens that faileth not… for where your treasure is, there
will your heart be also.
The two tenets have retained a high degree of
moral approbation in affluent countries even as their devotion to religion
has weakened considerably. Of course, a mechanistic translation of some
very effective past practices would not be the best way to proceed. There
is no need to call, for example, for an emulation of what was perhaps the
best energy minimizing arrangement: medieval monastic orders where most of
the food, and most of all clothes and simple wooden and metallic utensils
were produced by artisanal labor, where nothing was packaged, everything was
recycled and where the inmates had no personal possessions beyond their
coarse clothes and a few simple utensils and were content with bleak cells,
hard beds, copying of missals, and occasional a capella singing.
What is called for is a moderation of demand so
that the affluent Western nations would reduce their extraordinarily high
per capita energy consumption not by just 10% or 15% but by at least 25% -
35%. Such reductions would call for nothing more than a return to levels
the prevailed just a decade or no more than a generation ago. How could one
even use the term sacrifice in this connection? Did we live
so unbearably 10 or 30 years ago that the return to those consumption levels
cannot be even publicly contemplated by serious policymakers because they
feel, I fear correctly, that the public would find such a suggestion
unthinkable and utterly unacceptable?
Page 339
After all, even cancerous cells stop growing
once they have destroyed the invaded tissues.
If we are to prevent the unbounded economic
growth doing the same to the Earth’s environment then the preservation of
the biosphere’s integrity must become a high purpose of human behavior.
Inevitably, this must entail some limits on human acquisitiveness in order
to leave room for the perpetuation of other species, to maintain
irreplaceable environmental services without whose provision there could be
no evolution and no civilization, and to keep the atmospheric concentrations
of greenhouse gases from rising so rapidly and to such an extent that the
Earth would experience global tropospheric warming unmatched during the
evolution of our species from ancestral hominids.
|