Knowledge economy

The term Knowledge Society refers to a social formation in highly developed countries, are increasingly the basis of social and economic coexistence in the individual and collective knowledge and its organization. Basically, however, builds on every social system based on knowledge. The socio- analytical value of the concept of "knowledge society " is controversial, however.

History of the term

The concept of knowledge-based society, among others in 1966 by the American sociologist Robert E. Lane used ( " knowledgeable societies" ). Daniel Bell, also an American sociologist, popularized the concept of the knowledge society in 1973 with his study The Coming of Post- Industrial Society. A Venture in Social Forecasting. He tried to show that theoretical knowledge is the most important resource of the post-industrial society representative, while in industrialized societies labor, raw materials and capital played a central role. According to Daniel Bell can be observed even structural change in the society at the economic level in the development of the service economy and cognitively to the integration of science and knowledge work into production.

As one of the first economists Peter Drucker coined the terms the " Company employees " (1950), the "Knowledge and knowledge workers " (1960 ) and the "knowledge society" ( 1969). Based on the work of Michael Polanyi, " The tacit dimension " of 1966, and its core message that "we know more than we know to say," is the very basis for a substantive discussion on the nature, creation and exploitation of the resource knowledge have been opened. The differentiation of " tacit knowledge " and " explicit knowledge " in this case forms one of the main approaches.

The transition from an industrial to a knowledge society can not be fixed in time exactly. Various thinkers have from the 1950s or 1960s, diagnosed a structural change within the social and economic order, which should be at least as significant as the transition from an agrarian to an industrial society. Production, use and organization of knowledge were seen as central sources of productivity and growth. However, it is pointed out already in the classical social science literature that already industrialization presupposes a knowledge-based society in which a corresponding traditionalisierter, systematic handling of knowledge is practiced.

Karl Marx, for example, sees the systematization and scientific nature of technology in business and social science base primarily as means to an end capitalist rule structures. Max Weber points during a comprehensive analysis of European intellectual history on the predictability and calculability of economic processes as indicators of a rational economy. He moves in the course of the bureaucracy as a special way of dealing with knowledge at the heart, which he analyzes as domination through knowledge. The relationship between knowledge and power and knowledge and its legitimacy was later also studied by Michel Foucault and Jean- Francois Lyotard.

In contrast to the discussions of the 1960s, the debates regarding the knowledge society problematize the end of the 20th century, the global nature of the observed processes of rationalization and the growth of non- knowledge in knowledge production and associated uncertainties, risks and paradoxes.

By 2000, around the slogan of the development of the knowledge society is increasingly occupied by political parties and interest groups, often alternatively, in contrast to the Keyword understood by civil society.

Knowledge economy

At European level, the idea is part of a geared to increasing the competitiveness of economic and social policy reflected in the so-called " Lisbon Strategy ". Here rankings for economies to be made, which can be made between " research-intensive production " and " knowledge-intensive services ."

In the concept of the knowledge society of professional qualification of workers is of great importance. U.S. economist Jeremy Rifkin says, will work in the future " something for the elites to be " (see the end of the work).

As the knowledge-based society instead of recovery of fixed physical capital proceeds of intangible capital, which ( unit product per unit time) can not be measured with classical methods by André Gorz the appropriate economics for a knowledge-based society would be a knowledge communism. What is needed is not formal, accessible knowledge, but forms of living knowledge, experience as knowledge, judgment, self-organization, etc. Not the periods completed work, but the " behavioral component " and the " motivation" regarded as a major value drivers. Such factors are economically referred to as human capital. " Motivation" in this context means a self- self - placement and self- self - produce, while the mentioned behavioral component refers to customers, but also on internal cooperation.

Pierre Veltz (* 1945) points out that it is not the work of individual work, but the quality of understandings in the context of the production system is crucial in this context. Thus, the human capital is not created individually in a vacuum, but unfolds under cultural conditions as general knowledge that is passed in the primary socialization. The dynamic knowledge produced as a source of value creation, as André Gorz, nothing tangible material things. Rather, it is the work of himself. Than producing activity subject

Characteristics of the knowledge society

• Knowledge is strategic in products and services for resource
• The knowledge of the future is networked, decentralized and interdisciplinary
• Effective use of knowledge is a key competitive factor
• Knowledge itself becomes externalized Good

Nonaka and Hirotaka Takeuchi Ikujiro differ, based on Michael Polanyi, between explicit and tacit knowledge. You define the creation of knowledge as a process of converting tacit knowledge into understandable words and numbers.

The present is marked by media-based information, which exert a significant impact on private and public life. People as knowledge carriers are becoming increasingly important and the members of the society must more than ever be able to assess the quality of existing information. Pure factual knowledge will lose its importance. In contrast, basic knowledge and the concomitant assessment of competence and understanding processes are becoming increasingly important.