The Tableau Économique and the Physiocratic Productive-Unproductive Distinction

Purpose – The Physiocrats contended that only agriculture must be taken as a “productive” activity and relegated manufacturing as “unproductive.” This view was based on François Quesnay’s Tableau Économique, initially appeared in 1758. The Physiocratic distinction of “productive”/“unproductive” activities offended Adam Smith, as well as modern historians of economic thought (e.g., Boss, 1990). As an evaluation of the Physiocratic productive-unproductive distinction, the purpose of this paper is to interpret the structure of the Tableau Économique and to offer an explanation of the intellectual, historical and political contexts of the Physiocratic substance theory of value based on agriculture. Research design, data, and methodology – To better understand the Physiocratic distinction of productive vs. unproductive activities, first, a proper interpretation of the Tableau Économique was sought, and then Quesnay’s purpose of devising the Tableau was examined in the appropriate intellectual, historical, and political contexts. Results – The Tableau can be seen as depicting how value is circulated in the economy, just as blood flows through in a body. In a healthy Tableau, i.e. in a healthy state of the economy, the creation of value will enable the economy to reproduce itself. Quesnay and the Physiocrats thought that value was created only from land, and thus agriculture was the only “productive” activity that would increase the nation’s wealth. Conclusions – With the Tableau, Quesnay was offering an economic counsel to the French monarchy in view of a dire economic situation. He was pursuing the means to recover and expand the wealth of the French nation. In the process, Quesnay sought to expand the role of government in the economy.