What Did Filippo Brunelleschi Invented

what did filippo brunelleschi invented

Renaissance and Recovery | Transparency Revolution

We have written a lot lately about the dismal economy and the prospects for recovery. Where might recovery originate? How can we get there? In his new book, Launching the Innovation Renaissance: a New Path to Bring Smart Ideas to Market Fast, Alex Tabarrok argues that the currently stagnant job market can and will turn around when our economy once again begins to focus on innovation

Tabarrok starts with the story of the Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore, which was constructed in Florence between the years 1296 and 1436. As the cathedral neared completion, Arte della Lana (the guild that sponsored the cathedral) had a brainstorm: they offered a prize of 200 florins and the commission to build the dome of the cathedral for whoever submitted the best proposal for doing so. The prize went to Filippo Brunelleschi, who had to invent a number of new tools and construction techniques in order to complete the dome. (His dome represented a substantial technological leap; Tabarrok points out that it was the world's largest for the next four and a half centuries.) Notable among these inventions was a paddleboat required to carry marble down the river Arno. For this, Brunelleschi was granted what Tabarrok describes as "arguably the world's first patent."

Tabarrok offers renaissance Florence as a model of an innovation-driven economy and builds his book around the five characteristics of Renaissance Florence that the US economy needs to emulate:

• Patents
• Prizes
• Education
• Global Markets
• Cosmopolitanism

The section on patents is particularly eye-opening. Tabarrok argues that our patent system has gone off the rails, and that we need to stop patenting ideas and return to patenting products, pointing out that under current law, Edison would have lost his patent on the light bulb to two earlier patent-holders who only had the idea for a light bulb. William Ed Sawyer and Albon Man would have "owned" the light bulb without ever having done the intense, exhaustive work that Edison went through in discovering the correct filament.

The section on education is good, too, although I have a small quibble. Tabarrok's analysis of what students are majoring in versus what jobs are likely to exist, and which jobs are likely to pay better, has been making the rounds in blogs and elsewhere recently. (We noted some interesting findings here.) However, I take Tabarrok's emphasis on STEM — which he has in common with most of the analysis we see on the web on this subject — with a grain of salt. While I agree that we should be producing more science, technology, engineering, and mathematics majors, and that jobs in these fields tend to be more abundant and pay better than other fields, once again we see the statistics about the "glut" of visual and performing arts majors and psychology majors. Tabarrok suggests that if you want more information on the unemployability of people with these degrees you should "consult with a bellhop."

Clever, but this ignores the fact that there have been structural changes to the job landscape, driven in part by the ascendance of the Web, and in fact there has been massive growth in demand for artists, designers, performers, and even people with a background in psychology. As I noted here (and in line with what Arnold Kling had to say a couple of weeks ago), what we perhaps need is more "artsy" majors who understand STEM, and more STEM majors who have honed their artistic and communication skills. (Plus, everybody needs to be good at selling.)

The section on prizes is very interesting, particularly the information on pharmaceuticals and how some innovative prize models might solve the problem of getting much-needed vaccinations to the developing world.

I believe that prizes, used properly, could be the catalyst for many more positive developments on a number of fronts. Consider the amazing innovations that have occurred in private space travel as fueled by the X Prize. As Tabarrok points out, the X Prize is helping to give birth to a whole new industry. I would like to see prizes driving structural changes to education, health care, and energy. I suspect we will start seeing this before too long.

I won't bother to try to synopsize Tabarrok's thinking on globalism, cosmopolitanism, and the coming boom. His TED talk from a couple of years back does it better than I ever could.

Tabarrok argues that, though we have significant challenges, things are uniquely converging to put us on course for a renaissance of innovation and productivity (and ultimately jobs). His last bit of advice is key: "stay optimistic."