In researching Part IV of my series on the history of 17thC patents, this week I’ve been reading through the various proclamations issued by James I. I was of course supposed to focus on only the proclamations that had something to do with patent monopolies. But the table of contents was far too interesting to ignore.
I don't quite understand the restriction on alternate uses of grain (starch, beer) as a measure to improve food security. Wouldn't it be better for there to be such alternate uses to stimulate demand and therefore to maintain supply at higher levels than are needed for bare subsistence? Then in times of shortage, there's some buffer/excess capacity.
That’s an interesting point. I suppose it all depends on assumptions about supply elasticities. My understanding is that they thought the land would be used for growing grain anyway. I expect the mental model here is that they hoped it be reflected in lower grain prices. (And worth bearing in mind that such proclamations usually came during the times of relative dearth.)
I don't quite understand the restriction on alternate uses of grain (starch, beer) as a measure to improve food security. Wouldn't it be better for there to be such alternate uses to stimulate demand and therefore to maintain supply at higher levels than are needed for bare subsistence? Then in times of shortage, there's some buffer/excess capacity.
That’s an interesting point. I suppose it all depends on assumptions about supply elasticities. My understanding is that they thought the land would be used for growing grain anyway. I expect the mental model here is that they hoped it be reflected in lower grain prices. (And worth bearing in mind that such proclamations usually came during the times of relative dearth.)
The word "counterblaste" needs to come back into use. It's so evocative.
I agree!