{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021189894050529748, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004074979625101874, 'mean_word_length': 5.429319371727749, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Nature as a Marketplace: The Political Economy of Linnaean Botany

Carl Linnaeus is well known to disciplinary historians as the “father of systematics,” and yet it is only recently, in Lisbet Koerner’s Linnaeus: Nature and Nation (1999), that he was considered in the context of his own time and place.1 Koerner argues convincingly for a relation between his economic ideas and his science. Linnaeus saw science as the prime tool in pursuing an economic ideal of national autarky through import substitution, and correspondingly he carried out ambitious research projects aimed at substitution of imports, especially of plants and plant substances, and based on shifting assumptions about the feasibility of cultivating exotic plants in his own home country or substituting them with domestic plants of analogous virtues. Beyond guiding research projects, Linnaeus’s economic contentions also found expression in his engagement for educational and administrative reform. Thus he urged at several occasions that “oeconomia”— which he understood not as a science of human economic action and behavior, but as a science of natural products and their “use” for humans—should be included as a compulsory part of university teaching