Economic potential of a system in Traveller

[Enoki]

The following system rates worlds on their economic potential. This is different from their actual economic output or input. It is an indication of the world’s ability to import and export goods, and some indication of the strength of the local economy.
What it does not do is measure the world’s actual economic progress. This is dependent on not just the world itself, but the economic potential of its neighbors.
The system:
This is based on five factors off the UWP. As there is no single economic factor, these five substitute for it. They are:
Population. As population rises, the potential market rises with it. As this value is an exponential, it is represented in the formula below as an exponential too. Too few people, there is no market for goods. Lots of people equals a big potential market for goods.
Tech level. Until tech level rises to a minimum level where what is being produced locally has some potential export value, there is little economic value in the local economy. This rises substantially as it approaches the highest technology levels available.
Starport: A great starport provides more access. A poor or non-existent one adds little or no value to the economy.
Government and Law. These go hand in hand. No government or law is almost as bad as an oppressive government and heavy handed legal system.

The formula:

(Pop^2 + TL + SP + (( Gov + Law)/2)^2) / 30

This is rounded to one decimal place.

Determining the values:

Pop (Population) is determined by taking the square of the UWP pop value.
Tech level uses the following table:
TL Value
0 1
1 1
2 1
3 1
4 1
5 1
6 3
7 6
8 9
9 12
A 24
B 36
C 48
D 60
E 72
F+ 84

The starport value is taken from the following table:
Port Value
A 64
B 24
C 8
D 2
E 0
X 0

Government values are on the following table:
Code Value
0 3
1 5
2 8
3 4
4 8
5 7
6 1
7 5
8 4
9 2
A 3
B 0
C 3
D 0
E 0
F 0

Law level values are on the following table.
Code Value
0 1
1 2
2 3
3 3
4 4
5 5
6 6
7 7
8 7
9 7
A 7
B 3
C 1
D 1
E+ 0

When these are run through the formula given, the result will be between 0 and 10. A 0 or 1 is pretty much an economic basket case, while an 8 to 10 is an economic powerhouse. Worlds close to 5 have healthy economies.
You might wonder why the world’s physical conditions like atmosphere, size, or hydrographics were not considered. This is because they don’t impact the economic ability of that world in a significant way. The local population, government, law, technology, and starport determine the access to the resources in the system and their exploitation.
Give it a try on your favorite systems. I tested it on a bunch and it worked really well.

Three worlds from the Spinward Marches:

Regina = 6.5
Rhylanor = 8.2
Deneb = 5.8

 

[kilemall]

I dunno, not liking the assumptions built into gov and LL, and pop X TL is not a big enough part of the formula. I'm taking particular exception with LL 7+ being desirable (I call 50% chance of LE harassment and bribery a definite brake on economic dev or at least on interstellar relations), captured governments in the basket case category, and the possibility of a whole lot of dystopian in some of your higher rated govs.

This reads more like 'trade potential' then 'economic potential'. World conditions certainly due impose a cost and ceiling on population support, even as technology abates a lot of it or unique materials/conditions exist to exploit. Which is fine, players playing a mercantile campaign would be very interested and refs could consider that as a factor in trades or cultural milieu, but it's not necessarily a good measure as is for economics itself. Pop x TL is MUCH bigger IMO.

Another bit of interest to the would-be entrepreneur is 'growth potential', which is a different thing. An established starport A TL F world may be a powerhouse, but it may also be an expensive place to start up and do business. Many business types would be looking at invested dollar vs. return, and that could be much higher on worlds that are underperforming but have resources or unlimited multipliers of wealth if they could be brought up to interstellar standard tech- or possibly afford to import 'the good life' if the mineral strike or new product is salable enough.

Which gets into my whole 'there is a reason some worlds are TL 5' when any barnstormer in a free trader could be shoveling free tech out the cargo door- just might be the economic conditions CAUSE low tech levels rather then TL suppressing potential. Or yes government or cultural limitations.

 

[Enoki]

I dunno, not liking the assumptions built into gov and LL, and pop X TL is not a big enough part of the formula. I'm taking particular exception with LL 7+ being desirable (I call 50% chance of LE harassment and bribery a definite brake on economic dev or at least on interstellar relations), captured governments in the basket case category, and the possibility of a whole lot of dystopian in some of your higher rated govs.

The reason is LL is based on weapons permissions as a primary indicator. Plenty of real world governments are in the 7 to 9 category and do reasonably well with trade and economics. It isn't until you get to a severe police state that things go down hill.
Low law levels with few restrictions on weapons are more likely to coincide with worlds that are also low pop and government. Sort of the Wild West...

Government is based on the likelihood that they won't overly interfere with trade or the economy. Dictatorships and oligarchies will do just that. They will hand out permission to trade only to the select few on any sort of large basis.

This reads more like 'trade potential' then 'economic potential'. World conditions certainly due impose a cost and ceiling on population support, even as technology abates a lot of it or unique materials/conditions exist to exploit. Which is fine, players playing a mercantile campaign would be very interested and refs could consider that as a factor in trades or cultural milieu, but it's not necessarily a good measure as is for economics itself. Pop x TL is MUCH bigger IMO.

Trade potential is economic potential. Trade whether it is two people exchanging goods or a large corporation selling to millions, is the basis for an economy. How much government gets in the way, the type of government and amount of interference (law), there is is a big determinant in how much trade will occur.

Another bit of interest to the would-be entrepreneur is 'growth potential', which is a different thing. An established starport A TL F world may be a powerhouse, but it may also be an expensive place to start up and do business. Many business types would be looking at invested dollar vs. return, and that could be much higher on worlds that are underperforming but have resources or unlimited multipliers of wealth if they could be brought up to interstellar standard tech- or possibly afford to import 'the good life' if the mineral strike or new product is salable enough.

I was looking at the status quo, not potential growth. The big growth potential is on worlds with low, but not miniscule, populations. These have room for more people. And that is in the end, what your market is.

Which gets into my whole 'there is a reason some worlds are TL 5' when any barnstormer in a free trader could be shoveling free tech out the cargo door- just might be the economic conditions CAUSE low tech levels rather then TL suppressing potential. Or yes government or cultural limitations.

This system usually turns out a very low rating for low tech worlds with smaller populations. That is, right now there is no market there for goods. There are few buyers and little to be had for export.
In situations like this (low pop, low tech) handing out "free" upgrades well beyond the tech level are very temporary at best. There is no local means to keep that tech operating. There are few or no technicians or operators to put the tech in use. There may not even be a need for higher tech. On a tech level 5 world with a few thousand people do they really need some TL A communications system? Do they need high tech buildings or machinery? Probably not. Bringing in TL 6 hand tools and small machinery would do them much better. It would eventually raise the TL to 6 and maybe increase the population. That would allow more growth.
The reverse would be true with a system where say mining was the staple but the mines are now "played out." That would be a declining market. TL would be falling and people leaving. There's little work, no wealth, and no means to produce jobs or money. The system is turning into a ghost town.

 

[Timerover51]

These go hand in hand. No government or law is almost as bad as an oppressive government and heavy handed legal system.

I would say that no government or law level is considerably worse than any other possibility.

 

[kilemall]

The reason is LL is based on weapons permissions as a primary indicator. Plenty of real world governments are in the 7 to 9 category and do reasonably well with trade and economics. It isn't until you get to a severe police state that things go down hill.
Low law levels with few restrictions on weapons are more likely to coincide with worlds that are also low pop and government. Sort of the Wild West...

True re: world gen assumptions, but I'm looking more at the LL7 being 50% chance of LE hassle per day and corresponding 50% bribery. That's not an environment conducive to contractual lawfulness as we know it.

Government is based on the likelihood that they won't overly interfere with trade or the economy. Dictatorships and oligarchies will do just that. They will hand out permission to trade only to the select few on any sort of large basis.

Arguable on some points along with the valuation.

Trade potential is economic potential. Trade whether it is two people exchanging goods or a large corporation selling to millions, is the basis for an economy. How much government gets in the way, the type of government and amount of interference (law), there is is a big determinant in how much trade will occur.

I think that's a BIG assumption and not true as a direct consistent ratio.

Example, Imperial China produced many goods Britain wanted but China did not want British goods, yet China had plenty of economic activity. Britain had to generate an item that could restore trade balance, hence Opium Wars.

I was looking at the status quo, not potential growth. The big growth potential is on worlds with low, but not miniscule, populations. These have room for more people. And that is in the end, what your market is.

Well, again, your perspective is as a trader, not economic growth or building market share in an expanding population. Much bigger money to be made investing $1 and getting $1000 return rather then having to invest $500 to get $20000.

I was suggesting it as an alternative measure I would be most interested in, where I a Traveller looking to get a fresh start or do business. Or, a ref looking to characterize the social/economic nature of a planet.

This system usually turns out a very low rating for low tech worlds with smaller populations. That is, right now there is no market there for goods. There are few buyers and little to be had for export.
In situations like this (low pop, low tech) handing out "free" upgrades well beyond the tech level are very temporary at best. There is no local means to keep that tech operating. There are few or no technicians or operators to put the tech in use. There may not even be a need for higher tech. On a tech level 5 world with a few thousand people do they really need some TL A communications system? Do they need high tech buildings or machinery? Probably not. Bringing in TL 6 hand tools and small machinery would do them much better. It would eventually raise the TL to 6 and maybe increase the population. That would allow more growth.
The reverse would be true with a system where say mining was the staple but the mines are now "played out." That would be a declining market. TL would be falling and people leaving. There's little work, no wealth, and no means to produce jobs or money. The system is turning into a ghost town.

My point is that the wealth of the mine example causes the TL to be higher, and the mines played out as lower, rather then developing base tech one grueling level at a time. The expertise can be imported and learned quickly, and assuming the money continues education and a market base for X level of product means that rated TL is the technology most commonly encountered. It doesn't necessarily mean a full supportive industrial base, at least until you get to the tens of millions.

And with the non-industrial trade classification, you can be pretty SURE those planets aren't making their own tech.

So, probably a run through the trade classifications as a modifier to your final economic value would not be amiss.

 

[Enoki]

You do have to remember that the system is a snap shot, a photograph, of economic potential. The system wasn't meant to produce a detailed economic system on its own.

So, the true state of trade and economics may vary some from the photograph, particularly when local conditions are odd or unique. That would have to be left up to the referee or scenario developer.

What this is intended to do is give you a number similar to the ones in the UWP that you can estimate the economic and trade potential off of. Systems with low values are likely to be poor trade places and have iffy economies. Ones with high values are likely to be good trade locations and have robust economies.

It was intended to be a starting point, not the be-all-end-all on economics.

 

[kilemall]

You do have to remember that the system is a snap shot, a photograph, of economic potential. The system wasn't meant to produce a detailed economic system on its own.

So, the true state of trade and economics may vary some from the photograph, particularly when local conditions are odd or unique. That would have to be left up to the referee or scenario developer.

What this is intended to do is give you a number similar to the ones in the UWP that you can estimate the economic and trade potential off of. Systems with low values are likely to be poor trade places and have iffy economies. Ones with high values are likely to be good trade locations and have robust economies.

It was intended to be a starting point, not the be-all-end-all on economics.

Okay, I still think your formula is too trade oriented, but to boil it down to your stated goal I'd still say pop x TL should be a larger component and planetary trade classifications should have as much impact as the gov/LL.

Especially Rich, Poor, Industrial, Non-Industrial, Non-Agricultural, and Vacuum.

 

[Enoki]

Okay, I still think your formula is too trade oriented, but to boil it down to your stated goal I'd still say pop x TL should be a larger component and planetary trade classifications should have as much impact as the gov/LL.

Especially Rich, Poor, Industrial, Non-Industrial, Non-Agricultural, and Vacuum.

These, like amber and red zones, are things to consider on top of the base potential. Because these are not just world dependent but inter-system dependent they have more impact on what systems nearby will do interacting with a system than on the system itself.

As for the system itself, any trade classification will only impact what is locally produced, and what is imported or exported. They don't heavily impact the overall base economic condition of the system.

 

[maksimsmelchak]

You should really solicit Thomas Jones-Low's opinion. He has experimented with all kinds of economic data and systems. I bet he would have some keen insights.

Shalom,
Maksim-Smelchak.