The paper "The Explicit Economics of Knowledge Codification and Tacitness" by Robin Cowan, Paul A. David, and Dominique Foray explores the economic implications of the distinction between codified and tacit knowledge. The authors critique the current usage of the term "tacit knowledge," which has become increasingly amorphous and often misused in economic policy debates. They argue that the concept of tacit knowledge, originally introduced by Michael Polanyi, has been distorted to mean "not codified" knowledge, leading to semantic and taxonomic confusion. The paper reviews how the concept of tacitness has been applied in economic policy, particularly in the context of R&D subsidies and innovation strategies. It highlights the paradoxical nature of using the inherently tacit and "craft" nature of research activities to justify public support, as this suggests that intellectual property protection is unjustified. The authors also discuss the challenges in defining and quantifying the world stocks of codified and tacit knowledge, emphasizing the importance of context in understanding knowledge codification. To address these issues, the authors propose a new taxonomic framework for knowledge activities, distinguishing between the generation and use of intellectual (abstract) knowledge and practical knowledge (about technologies and organizations). They introduce a tree structure that categorizes knowledge into articulated (codified), unarticulated, and uncodified (tacit) categories, with a focus on the costs and benefits of codification. The paper concludes by emphasizing the need for a more precise and analytically sound approach to understanding the economics of knowledge codification and tacitness.The paper "The Explicit Economics of Knowledge Codification and Tacitness" by Robin Cowan, Paul A. David, and Dominique Foray explores the economic implications of the distinction between codified and tacit knowledge. The authors critique the current usage of the term "tacit knowledge," which has become increasingly amorphous and often misused in economic policy debates. They argue that the concept of tacit knowledge, originally introduced by Michael Polanyi, has been distorted to mean "not codified" knowledge, leading to semantic and taxonomic confusion. The paper reviews how the concept of tacitness has been applied in economic policy, particularly in the context of R&D subsidies and innovation strategies. It highlights the paradoxical nature of using the inherently tacit and "craft" nature of research activities to justify public support, as this suggests that intellectual property protection is unjustified. The authors also discuss the challenges in defining and quantifying the world stocks of codified and tacit knowledge, emphasizing the importance of context in understanding knowledge codification. To address these issues, the authors propose a new taxonomic framework for knowledge activities, distinguishing between the generation and use of intellectual (abstract) knowledge and practical knowledge (about technologies and organizations). They introduce a tree structure that categorizes knowledge into articulated (codified), unarticulated, and uncodified (tacit) categories, with a focus on the costs and benefits of codification. The paper concludes by emphasizing the need for a more precise and analytically sound approach to understanding the economics of knowledge codification and tacitness.