Levitt Theresa
Technol Cult. 2020;61(1):144-172. doi: 10.1353/tech.2020.0035.
A comparison of the French and English lighthouse systems reveals the benefits of state intervention in technological development. The French system, funded by the state, produced major innovations such as the Fresnel lens, and was the first to achieve comprehensive sea-coast lighting. The English system, dominated by private ownership early on, failed to either develop or invest in these innovations. The comparison also sheds light on the emerging category of the public good. Economist Ronald Coase has questioned the lighthouse's longstanding position as a canonical example of the public good by arguing that in seventeenth- and early eighteenth-century England, lighthouses were successfully provided by a private market. Yet his argument ignored the fact that technological changes in the eighteenth and nineteenth century transformed not only the cost and effectiveness of lighthouses, but also their function, economic role, and potential for excludability.
对法国和英国灯塔系统的比较揭示了国家干预技术发展的益处。由国家资助的法国系统产生了诸如菲涅耳透镜等重大创新，并且是首个实现全面海岸照明的系统。早期由私有制主导的英国系统未能开发或投资于这些创新。这种比较还揭示了公共物品这一新兴类别。经济学家罗纳德·科斯对灯塔作为公共物品的典型例子的长期地位提出了质疑，他认为在17世纪和18世纪早期的英国，灯塔是由私人市场成功提供的。然而，他的论点忽略了这样一个事实，即18世纪和19世纪的技术变革不仅改变了灯塔的成本和效率，还改变了它们的功能、经济作用以及排他性潜力。
