¹ For a thoughtful economic analysis of the thirties, see Arndt, H. W., The Economic lessons of the Nineteen-Thirties (London, Royal Institute of International Affairs, 1944).Google Scholar

² Toynbee has made some cogent observations on this point in a recent article. He writes: “Great Britain and her West European neighbors are each trying to arrive at a working compromise—suited to their own economic conditions here and now, and subject to modification in either direction as these conditions may change for better or for worse—between unrestricted free enterprise and unlimited socialism…. In real life, every social system that can be observed at first hand or reconstructed from records is a mixed system, lying at some point between the two theoretical poles of undiluted socialism and undiluted free enterprise.” Toynbee, Arnold J., “The International Outlook,” International Affairs, Vol. 23 (Oct., 1947), pp. 475–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³ Best known is the famous British White Paper on Employment Policy, issued by the Churchill Government in May, 1944 (Cmd. 6527). For Canada, see Department of Reconstruction, Employment and Income, with Special Reference to the Initial Period of Reconstruction (Ottawa, Aug., 1945).Google Scholar For Australia, see Common wealth Parliament, Full Employment in Australia (Canberra, May, 1945).Google Scholar For Sweden, see report of a Government Postwar Economic Planning Commission submitted in May, 1944: Finansdepartementet, Utredningar angaende ekonomisk efterkrigsplanering (Stockholm, 1944).Google Scholar

⁴ Even Switzerland has recently found it essential to extend government control over economic affairs. See “The Extension of State Control in Switzerland,” The World Today, Vol. 3 (1947), pp. 501ff.

⁵ An excellent recent study is Walker, E. Ronald, The Australian Economy in War and Reconstruction (New York, 1947).Google Scholar

⁶ Philip, André, “France and the Economic Recovery of Europe,” Foreign Affairs, Vol. 26 (Jan., 1948), pp. 325 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁷ For a thorough statement on Czech nationalization policies, see Sharp, Samuel L., Nationalization of Key Industries in Eastern Europe (Washington, 1946).Google Scholar Our survey considers only conditions before the March coup d'état in Czechoslovakia.

⁸ Three British White Papers are of considerable importance: Economic Survey for 1947 (Cmd. 7046, Feb., 1947); The National Income and Expenditure of the united Kingdom, 1938 to 1946 (Cmd. 7099, Apr., 1947); and Statement on the Economic Considerations Affecting Relations between Employers and Workers (Cmd. 7018, Jan., 1947). For recent analysis of Britain's economic situation, see Hood, Alexander L., “Great Britain's Economic Problem,” Harvard Business Review, Vol. 25 (Autumn, 1947), pp. 625 ff.Google Scholar

⁹ See also Lee, F. G. and Stevens, R., “Coördinating Policies and Operations in the Government of the United Kingdom,” Public Administration Review, Vol. 6 (Autumn, 1946), pp. 354 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁰ See “The Plan and the Public,” Planning, Vol. 14, No. 269 (July 25, 1947).

¹¹ Ibid., p. 48.

¹² See “Report on Britain,” Labor and Industry in Britain, Vol. 5 (1947), p. 158.

¹³ A good summary statement of its details is contained in “Steps to Beat the Crisis,” Labor and Industry in Britain, Vol. 5 (Nov.–Dec., 1947), pp. 214 ff.

¹⁴ For an economic analysis of the relationship between Britain's trade position and her domestic economic program, see Kahn, Alfred E., “The British Balance of Payments and Problems of Domestic Policy,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 61 (May, 1947), pp. 368 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁵ New York Times, Sept. 30, 1947.

¹⁶ Cf. “Whitehall and Parliament,” Labor and Industry in Britain, Vol. 4 (1946), pp. 27 ff. See also SirBunbury, Henry, “Proposed Changes in British Parliamentary Procedure,” in this Review, Vol. 40 (Aug., 1946), pp. 740 ff.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Laski, Harold J., “The Parliamentary and Presidential Systems,” Public Administration Review, Vol. 4 (Autumn, 1944), pp. 347 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁸ Op. cit. supra in note 8.

¹⁹ The British National Union of Manufacturers, for example, which represents medium-sized and small manufacturers, expressed keen disappointment at the Government's failure to include it in nomination of industrial representatives to the Economic Planning Board. It expressed gratification at the Government's promise of periodic consultation, but pointed out quite correctly that “there is a wide disparity between consultation on isolated points and full coöperation in evolving main policy.” Editorial, “The Planners and the Smaller Manufacturer,” N.U.M. Journal (Aug., 1947).

²⁰ See op. cit. supra in note 10, p. 50.

²¹ Franks, Oliver, Central Planning and Control in War and Peace (Cambridge, Mass., 1947), p. 34.Google Scholar

²² On British nationalization, see particularly Robson, William A., “The Administration of Nationalized Industries in Britain,” Public Administration Review, Vol. 7 (Summer, 1947), pp. 161ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “Trade Unions under Nationalization,” Labor and Industry in Britain, Vol. 5 (June, 1947); and “The Coal Board,” The Economist (Sept. 20, 1947).

²³ See Robson, loc. cit. supra in note 22; Angel, Arthur D., “British Use of Public Corporations,” Social Research, Vol. 14 (Sept., 1947), pp. 321 ff.Google Scholar

²⁴ “The Public Corporation,” Labor and Industry in Britain, Vol. 5 (May, 1947), p. 95.

²⁵ For a clear summary contrasting the Beveridge approach to full employment with that of the White Paper on Employment Policy (Cmd. 6527), see Hansen, Alvin H., Economic Policy and Full Employment (New York, 1947), pp. 57–81.Google Scholar In this book Hansen has also provided a summary analysis of postwar plans for full employment in Canada, Australia, Sweden, and the United States.

²⁶ An analysis of British experience in the thirties and postwar plans in relation to public investment as a counter-cyclical factor is given in Benjamin Higgins' study for the International Labour Office, Public Investment and Full Employment (Montreal, 1946), pp. 167 ff., 259 ff.Google Scholar

²⁷ The ensuing account is based largely on Beigel's, Edgar article, “France Moves Toward National Planning,” Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 62 (Sept., 1947), pp. 381 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar See also “French Economic Recovery: The Monnet Plan,” The World Today, Vol. 3 (Mar., 1947), pp. 132 ff.

²⁸ Of course, the Monnet Plan itself has been the subject of legitimate criticism for its own inflationary potentialities, partly because its production goals involve heavy expenditures on capital goods during a period of critical labor and supply shortages.

²⁹ France has undertaken rather extensive nationalization measures. See Pinkey, David H., “Nationalization of Key Industries and Credit in France after the Liberation,” Political Science Quarterly, Vol. 62 (Sept., 1947), pp. 368 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “Nationalization of Banks and Industries in France,” International Labour Review, Vol. 54 (Sept., 1946), pp. 206 ff.

³⁰ Cf. Hansen, op. cit. supra in note 25, p. 98.

³¹ See International Labour Office, op. cit. supra in note 26, p. 203.

³² Cf. Hansen, op. cit. supra in note 25, p. 101.

³³ Cf. “Sweden's Economic Crisis,” The World Today, Vol. 3 (Dec., 1947), pp. 537 ff.

³⁴ “The national budget for 1947 has, as far as possible, been set up as a programme of economic policy.” Official Summary of the budget, prepared by the Norwegian Ministry of Finance, p. 3.

³⁵ See “Denmark Today: Political and Economic Problems,” The World Today, Vol. 3 (Nov., 1947), pp. 477 ff.

³⁶ Cf. “Czechoslovakia at the Crossroads,” ibid., pp. 511 ff.

³⁷ Sharp, op. cit. supra in note 7, p. 13.

³⁸ Cited supra in note 3.

³⁹ See International Labour Office, op. cit. supra in note 26, pp. 211 ff.; Downing, R. I., “The Planning of Public Investment in Australia,” International Labour Review, Vol. 52 (Oct., 1945), pp. 352 ff.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ New York Herald Tribune, Oct. 16, 1947.

⁴¹ Australian White Paper on Full Employment in Australia, cited supra in note 3.

⁴² See Scott, F. R., “Special Nature of Canadian Federalism,” Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science, Vol. 13 (Feb., 1947), pp. 13 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and by the same author, “Constitutional Adaptations to Changing Functions of Government,” ibid., Vol. 11 (Aug., 1945), pp. 329 ff.