850

Reviews: T.N.E.C. Monographs

[December

agents and the Antitrust Division, prohibition of price-discrimination between

the government and private buyers, government manufacture of materials
where reasonable prices cannot be obtained by other methods, flexible supply
contracts extending over several years, and attempts to secure discounts during
slack seasons and recession periods. Employment of more Sears, Roebuck purchasing agents by the government might well be added to the list! The legal
and administrative difficulties raised by these proposals are realistically discussed,
with particular emphasis on the extreme decentralization of federal purchasing
and the need for improved planning and coordination if marked economies
are to be realized.
The problems which arise when government purchases constitute a large part
of the national income are not adequately treated. Under war conditions, procurement becomes simply one aspect of central economic control. It involves
regulation of raw materials, labor supply, prices, and money incomes. Analysis of
this complex of problems would have required a separate monograph. The single
chapter on war procurement in the present study is almost entirely historical; it
touches briefly on World War I experience and on changes in Army and Navy
procurement procedures since 1918. It was written, moreover, before the beginning of the present defense program. Were the authors to revise this chapter

at present, they would perhaps be more critical of the procurement planning of

1918-40. As far as the pricing of war materials is concerned, there is no evidence

that there was any effective planning during this twenty-year period, and no
assurance that we will be able to avoid the World War mistakes. This discredited
cost-plus principle is once more in use, with no indication that the government
knows more about industrial costs today than in 1918. As an analysis of peacetime procurement, however, the present volume is interesting and useful.
LLOYD G . REYNOLDS

Johns Hopkins University

No. 7: Measurement of the Social Performance of Business. By THEODORE J.

KREPS, assisted by KATHRYN ROBERTSON WRIGHT. 1940. Pp. ix, 207. 30c.
Dr. Kreps regards an industry's performance over a period as socially desirable if (1) production, (2) employment, and (3) payrolls have risen; (4)
employment has risen more rapidly than production; (5) production, more
rapidly than consumer eflFort commanded (the relative price of the industry's
productits exchange value in terms of other goods and services); (6) payrolls, more rapidly than consumer funds absorbed (measured by "income produced" or by "value added by manufacture") ; (7) payrolls, more rapidly than
dividends and interest; and (8) consumer funds absorbed, more rapidly than
dividends and interest. Some or all of these criteria are used to measure the social
performance of 22 industries, 9 broad groups of industries, 3 individual companies, manufacturing and all corporations, and the economy as a whole. In the
main, the statistical analysis is adequate and the basis for Dr. Kreps's judgments
is clearly presented. Dr. Kreps emphasizes throughout that the criteria used
give an incomplete audit and triat the availability of data played a major role in
their selection.
(1), (2), and (3) would almost certainly be accepted by all as valid criteria
of the social performance of the economy as a whole, and (1) and (5) as valid
criteria for individual industries as well [(5) is of course not directly applicable
to the economy as a whole]. The rest of the criteria, and the application of (2)

1941]

Reviews: T.N.E.C. Monographs

851

and (3) to individual industries, derive from Dr. Kreps's belief in an insufficiency of purchasing power and an inadequacy of employment opportunities.
Tbe two groups of criteria bear little relation to one another and, indeed, at least
(4) and (5) are mutually inconsistent. Criterion (4) implies that an industry
is to be commended if "in increasing production" it tends "to give additional
opportunity for buman beings to get additional wages so tbat tbey may buy and
consume the additional product" (p. 47). Criterion (5) implies "tbat on tbe
whole society tends to be benefited whenever it gets more ana more product for
less and less effort" (p. 4 7 ) ; i.e., an industry's performance is desirable if the
(labor) cost per unit of product has Increased, and also if the (total) cost per
unit of product bas decreased and the decrease has been passed on to consumers
in the form of lower prices. The inconsistency of these criteria is confirmed by
Dr. Kreps's data: the rank difference correlation between tbe rankings of 22
industries by criteria (4) and (5) is .5 and between the rankings of 5 broad
industry groups, .6. The composite ranking of the 22 industries by the "real"
criteria (1) and (5) shows practically no correlation with their composite ranking by the "purchasing power" criteria (5), (6), and (7) (tbe rank difference
correlation is .08 between composite ranks assigned the sum of the ranks by
the individual criteria).
As Dr. Kreps says, ". . . no attempt is made to explain why an industry performed as it did" (p. 7) ; the purpose is rather to weigh that performance in the
scale of social desirability. Whether one accepts the particular scale used in this
book hinges very largely on whether, like Dr. Kreps, one believes in an underconsumption or over-saving theory of cyclical and secular unemployment or, like
the reviewer, believes such a theory, at best, seriously incomplete and, at worst,
completely fallacious. The difference is epitomized by the significance attributed
a decline in labor cost per unit of output: Dr. Kreps thinks such a decline
mischievous because it is likely to reduce "mass purchasing power"; the reviewer
thinks it commendable because it probably reflects increased efficiency and hence
permits a larger real output to be wrung from our meagre and inadequate resources.
MILTON FRIEDMAN

National Bureau of Economic Research

No. 18: Trade Association Survey. By CHARLES ALBERT PEARCE (assisted by
others). 1941. Pp. 501. 50c.
No. 36: Reports of the Federal Trade Commission. By THE FEDERAL TRADE
y

COMMISSION. 1940. Pp. 275.

35c.

Monograph no. 18 presents the results of the first comprehensive study of tbe
development and activities of the trade association in the United States since the
N.R.A. The principal source of the data included in the study was the "Trade
Association Survey," a questionnaire sent by the Department of Commerce in
1938 to about 2500 associations of national or regional scope. This is the best
single monograph on the trade association. It should prove of value to the student
of industrial organizations, the trade association executive, and the public administrator alike.
Considerable statistical evidence is presented concerning the prevalence of
trade associations in various industries and concerning their structure and internal
organization. The stimulus given to the formation of associations by the N.R.A.
is traced, and the reasons for the subsequent disbandment of many of these is
analyzed. One interesting development noted is the growth in recent years of