---
entity_slug: colony_economic_system_design
evaluator: null
evaluated_at: '2026-02-23T04:53:26.998428'
overall_score: 4.0
scores:
- name: definition_precision
  value: 3.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: The definition captures a distinct concept about metropolitan authorities
    structuring colonial economies, but uses somewhat vague terms like "intentional
    structuring" and "economic arrangements" that could be more precise. It does avoid
    circularity and distinguishes this from general colonial policy.
- name: source_grounding
  value: 4.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: This entity is well-grounded in Smith's actual critique of British colonial
    economic policy in Book V, Chapter 3, where he extensively discusses how mercantilist
    principles shaped colonial trade regulations. The characterization of Smith's
    criticism as focusing on outdated mercantilist principles versus sound economic
    reasoning accurately reflects the source text.
- name: domain_placement
  value: 5.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: The "Regulation" domain assignment is highly appropriate, as this entity
    specifically concerns how metropolitan authorities regulate and structure colonial
    economic systems through policy design. This is fundamentally about regulatory
    frameworks rather than trade, production, or other economic domains.
- name: vsm_relevance
  value: 4.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: This entity maps well to VSM System 3 (internal regulation) and System
    5 (identity/policy), as it involves both the regulatory mechanisms imposed on
    colonies and the policy decisions that reflect the metropolitan power's economic
    identity and principles. The design aspect also touches on System 4 (intelligence/adaptation),
    though Smith argues this adaptation is flawed.
- name: explanatory_value
  value: 4.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: This entity provides strong explanatory value by illuminating the structural
    mechanism through which mercantilist principles become embedded in colonial economic
    systems through deliberate design choices. It helps explain why colonial economies
    often functioned suboptimally according to Smith's analysis, rather than merely
    describing surface-level policies.
---

# Evaluation: Colony Economic System Design

## definition_precision — 3.0 / 5.0

The definition captures a distinct concept about metropolitan authorities structuring colonial economies, but uses somewhat vague terms like "intentional structuring" and "economic arrangements" that could be more precise. It does avoid circularity and distinguishes this from general colonial policy.

## source_grounding — 4.0 / 5.0

This entity is well-grounded in Smith's actual critique of British colonial economic policy in Book V, Chapter 3, where he extensively discusses how mercantilist principles shaped colonial trade regulations. The characterization of Smith's criticism as focusing on outdated mercantilist principles versus sound economic reasoning accurately reflects the source text.

## domain_placement — 5.0 / 5.0

The "Regulation" domain assignment is highly appropriate, as this entity specifically concerns how metropolitan authorities regulate and structure colonial economic systems through policy design. This is fundamentally about regulatory frameworks rather than trade, production, or other economic domains.

## vsm_relevance — 4.0 / 5.0

This entity maps well to VSM System 3 (internal regulation) and System 5 (identity/policy), as it involves both the regulatory mechanisms imposed on colonies and the policy decisions that reflect the metropolitan power's economic identity and principles. The design aspect also touches on System 4 (intelligence/adaptation), though Smith argues this adaptation is flawed.

## explanatory_value — 4.0 / 5.0

This entity provides strong explanatory value by illuminating the structural mechanism through which mercantilist principles become embedded in colonial economic systems through deliberate design choices. It helps explain why colonial economies often functioned suboptimally according to Smith's analysis, rather than merely describing surface-level policies.
