Canadian Multinationals by Jorge Niosi (review)

REVIEWS 107 Canadian Multinationals. JORGE NIOSI. TranslatedbyROBWRY' cvIOr•OS. Toronto: Between theLines•985.Pp.•oo.$•o.95cloth, $9.95paper The notionthatsomeCanadiancompanies maypossess a 'globalreach'holds littlecurrency inthisnation's publicconsciousness. Fewrealizethat'NorthStar' runningshoes arewornoneverycontinentof theglobeor thatin itsheyday BrazilianTractionwasnonetoofondlydubbed'theCanadianoctopus' by its Brazilian customers. Academics havesimilarlypaidscant attentionto companieswhichhaveexpanded beyondourborders.Indeed,mostCanadians tend to picture their country only as a host for other nations'foreign direct investment. The spreadof Canadianmultinationals hasusually onlyattracted theattentionof a criticalminorityandtheoccasional journalist.JorgeNiosi's Canadian Multinationals takes along-overdue stepinthedirection ofsetting ina theoretical frameworktheevolutionof Canadianenterprise abroad. Economics andpolitical science abound withtheories purporting toexplain the emergenceof multinationalenterprise.Niosi remarks that Canada presents 'aparadoxthatthemajortheories of multinational corporations do notsatisfactorily explain.'In acondensation oftheories asdisparate asLenin's capitalist imperialism andRayVernon's 'obsolescing bargain,'Niosiargues thatCanada possesses fewoftheattributes ofindustrialized nations whichhave traditionally spawned multinationalcorporations. How, then,hasa country lacking indigenous technology and historically dependenton capitalinflows cometo betheworld'sseventhlargestinvestingnation? Niosi answersthis questionby measuringthe emergenceof various Canadianmultinationals in the utilities,mining,and manufacturing sectors againstthe tenetsof prevailingmultinationaltheory. He concludes that Canadian multinationals haveemergedin spiteof thiscountry's lowlevelof technological innovation.We have prosperedabroadbecause we are the 'world'sfastestfollowers'with a unique 'capacityfor quickly absorbing innovations originating intheUnitedStates andBritain,Canada's twoleading tradepartners.'Noranda,Alcan,and Massey-Ferguson haveall succeeded abroad byadeptlyborrowing foreigntechnology. OnlyNorthernTelecomis creditedwith the creationof 'somesignificant innovations.' In short,Niosi concludes, 'theCanadian modelappears tobeonewithnoimitators.' Historianswill find much that is tantalizingin Niosi'swork. He writes without theideological cantwhichoncecharacterized discussion of Canadian multinationals. Moreimportantly, hisattempttoconstruct andtestatheoreticalframework vividlyillustrates thelackof solidhistorical research inthearea ofCanadian multinational enterprise. Niosiis,forinstance, obliged tobuildhis portraits ofthirteenleadingCanadian multinationals largelyoutofsecondary material, oftencitingnothingmorethana Financial Post article.Hiscompany biographies doprovide abroadframework ofinformation; much,however, is leftunaddressed: management practices, foreigncurrency fluctuations, profit 108 THE CANADIAN HISTORICAL REVIEW remittance laws, and tariff structures are left unexamined ascausalfactors in international business. Niosihaswrittena worthwhileprimer on the subject. His combination of internationaltheory and sketches of prominent Canadianmultinationals opensup an arealargelyterraincognita for historians. He admitsthathis analysis ignores a 'largequantity of material' on'theeffects of multinational corporations onemployment, income andgrowth' inbothhost andoriginating countries. What,onewonders, wastheroleof Canadian utilitycompanies in promoting, or perhaps impeding,urbanandeconomic growthin Mexicoor Brazil? Onlyexhaustive historical research on a company-by-company basis willfurnishanswers tothecrucial questions Niosi,perhaps justifiably, ignores at this time. DUNCAN MCDOWALL TheConference Board ofCanada Thomas Adams andthe Modem Planning Movement: Britain,Canada andtheUnited States. MICHAEL SIMPSON. London:Mansell1985.Pp.viii, •,62,illus. Thomas Adams(187•-194o) was,argues MichaelSimpson, themostimportantplannerin the English-speaking worldfrom about1914to 193o.The claim isreasonable. Beginning in 19o1,Adamsmorethananyone popularized the garden-cityconceptin Englandand guided the early development (x9o4-6) ofLetchworth GardenCity.Asthefirsttownplanningassistant tothe LocalGovernmentBoard,he tactfullyguidedlocalauthorities throughthe mazeof theTownPlanningActof 19o 9. Next, from 1914to 1921,astown planning adviser toCanada's Commission ofConservation, helectured widely andwrotemuchtopopularize planninghere,inducedfourprovinces toenact or improveplanninglaws,plannedthe rebuildingof the devastated port of Halifax,wroteamajorworkonruralplanning forCanada, andsupervised the federalpostwarhousing scheme. And in hissparetime,heplannedTi•miscaming !In 1923theRussell Sage Foundation appointed himgeneral director of plansand surveysfor its regionalplan project for New York. Having supervised muchresearch,he summarized the findingsin eightvolumes (1927-31),andlargely wrotetheactual, two-volume Regional PlanofNewYork anditsEnvirons (1929, 1931). Simpsondeals,in turn, with Adams'sBritish, Canadian,and American achievements, andoffers,foreachcountry, abriefsketch ofthestate ofurban development andpubliccontroloverit. He tracesthefundamentalcontradiction in Adams'thought- the desirethat all be decentlyhousedand the garden-city solution to urbancongestion be generally implemented versus a hard-headed possibilism andstrong distrust ofstate intervention - tohisyouth spentin and around Edinburgh.Again and againhe snortsat Adams's 'meliorist' approachwhichbowedbefore current development trendsand rejectedsubsidies to help houseworkers.Yet he concedes, rightly,that in ...