ABSTRACT
Can we speak seriously of a knowledge-based economy in this historical moment that suggests something qualitatively more than a politically useful catch-phrase to encourage a popular conformity to the imperatives and demands of contemporary, liberally regulated, highly marketized economic activity? Knowledge has always been important to societies and economies throughout history. Is there a special, indeed crucial, significance to its role now? Is the “new economy”, with which this knowledge-intensive production is invariably linked, a generalized phenomenon with a singular and sweeping path? Moreover, as Fordist capitalism only a generation ago demanded grossly under-skilled workers for highly routinized, command and control production systems, can workers take seriously the new demands for highly skilled work and the promises of education for all? These questions invite much caution in their consideration. A close look at the factors that have led the advanced economies to pursue a mode of production and exchange that privileges the role and impact of knowledge to an unprecedented extent can enable a sharper assessment of this policy pursuit and its effects. A critical inquiry seeks to probe both the possibilities and the limits of this economic policy model, and place under scrutiny the claims of singularity and inevitability so often made in its name. Notwithstanding the patterns of unevenness in the labour market and
varying features of skill utility, it is evident that the developed societies have embraced the idea of the knowledge economy with remarkable uniformity. The reception of the knowledge imperative appears also to have been extended to an accompanying acceptance – even more than of previous economic regimes in the West – of the emergence of a “new” economy and its politically attached neo-liberalism, reaching comprehensively over many other domains of life. This acceptance, although attracting much criticism from commentators across a spectrum of civil society groups including traditionally conservative and radical groups, religious and community interests, environmental and trade union interests, indicates the influence of a wider acceptance, or toleration, of a cultural liberalization accompanying the neo-liberal economy.
