SEMAINE D'ÉTUDE SUR LE ROLE DE L’ANALYSE ECONOMETRIQUE ETC.

103

that is, what is likely to happen as long as the same historical regime
continues. On the other hand, we can use the word « target » in
the sense of purposive selection of something which is desired to be
achieved. The two words « target » and « projection », before a
clear distinction was made, led to much confusion in India. This
is the type of terminology I had in mind; I do not know whether
Professor KooPMANS will have any objection to that.

KOOPMANS

[ think, as Prof. MAHALANOBIS notes, that « macro » and « micro
 » economics, is a fine example of the natural selection of terms
that I have referred to. This terminology, originally coined, |
believe, by Prof. FriscH in the ’30s, caught on and is now part
of the language. I think the example of « East » and « West » as
a terminology in model construction of the world economy is an
example of the thing I am afraid of; the content of « East » is changing
 before our eyes; the content of « West » will as well be changing
sooner or later. If we set up standard terms for parts of the world
which we wish to distinguish, terms which in some way get a stamp
of approval from a terminology creating committee, we may actually
inhibit thought and analvsis.

PASINETTI

I should like to make simply a short remark. There is a distinction
 which I thought emerged quite clearly both from Prof. FriscH’s
paper and from Prof. STONE’s paper, but which has been left into
the shadow in the discussion so far. The distinction is between those
relations which in an economic system are so fundamental as to be
independent of the institutional set-up that society has chosen to
adopt and those relations which are specific to a particular institutional
 set-up. For example Prof. LEONTIEF’s input-output inter
industry system is independent of institutions: it is a kind of ana

‘11 Stone - pag. 101