---
entity_slug: colony_economic_freedom
evaluator: null
evaluated_at: '2026-02-23T04:52:43.572510'
overall_score: 4.2
scores:
- name: definition_precision
  value: 4.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: The definition clearly distinguishes colony economic freedom from metropolitan
    control, specifying key elements like trade, investment, and development according
    to comparative advantage. It avoids circularity and captures a distinct concept,
    though it could be slightly more precise about what constitutes "constraints by
    metropolitan economic interests."
- name: source_grounding
  value: 5.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: This entity is strongly grounded in Smith's actual arguments in Book
    V, Chapter 3, where he explicitly discusses colonial economic policy and advocates
    for greater freedom for colonies to pursue their economic interests. Smith directly
    argues that such freedom would benefit both colonies and mother countries through
    more efficient resource allocation.
- name: domain_placement
  value: 5.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: The "Regulation" domain assignment is highly appropriate, as colonial
    economic freedom fundamentally concerns the regulatory framework governing colonial
    trade, investment, and economic development. This is clearly a matter of economic
    regulation and policy rather than production, exchange, or distribution per se.
- name: vsm_relevance
  value: 3.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: This entity has moderate VSM relevance, primarily mapping to S4 (intelligence/environmental
    adaptation) as it concerns how economic systems adapt to local conditions and
    comparative advantages. However, it also touches on S5 (identity/policy) regarding
    the fundamental policy framework governing colonial economies, making it somewhat
    distributed across systems.
- name: explanatory_value
  value: 4.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: The entity provides strong explanatory value by illuminating the structural
    relationship between metropolitan control and colonial economic efficiency. It
    helps explain Smith's mechanism whereby reducing regulatory constraints allows
    better resource allocation and mutual benefit, rather than merely naming a policy
    preference.
---

# Evaluation: Colony Economic Freedom

## definition_precision — 4.0 / 5.0

The definition clearly distinguishes colony economic freedom from metropolitan control, specifying key elements like trade, investment, and development according to comparative advantage. It avoids circularity and captures a distinct concept, though it could be slightly more precise about what constitutes "constraints by metropolitan economic interests."

## source_grounding — 5.0 / 5.0

This entity is strongly grounded in Smith's actual arguments in Book V, Chapter 3, where he explicitly discusses colonial economic policy and advocates for greater freedom for colonies to pursue their economic interests. Smith directly argues that such freedom would benefit both colonies and mother countries through more efficient resource allocation.

## domain_placement — 5.0 / 5.0

The "Regulation" domain assignment is highly appropriate, as colonial economic freedom fundamentally concerns the regulatory framework governing colonial trade, investment, and economic development. This is clearly a matter of economic regulation and policy rather than production, exchange, or distribution per se.

## vsm_relevance — 3.0 / 5.0

This entity has moderate VSM relevance, primarily mapping to S4 (intelligence/environmental adaptation) as it concerns how economic systems adapt to local conditions and comparative advantages. However, it also touches on S5 (identity/policy) regarding the fundamental policy framework governing colonial economies, making it somewhat distributed across systems.

## explanatory_value — 4.0 / 5.0

The entity provides strong explanatory value by illuminating the structural relationship between metropolitan control and colonial economic efficiency. It helps explain Smith's mechanism whereby reducing regulatory constraints allows better resource allocation and mutual benefit, rather than merely naming a policy preference.
