---
entity_slug: colonial_economic_interdependence
evaluator: null
evaluated_at: '2026-02-23T04:46:16.272270'
overall_score: 4.0
scores:
- name: definition_precision
  value: 3.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: The definition captures a coherent concept of mutual economic relationships
    between colonies and other regions, but uses somewhat vague terms like "mutual
    economic relationships" and "greater interdependence" without specifying clear
    boundaries or mechanisms. The definition could be more precise about what constitutes
    interdependence versus simple trade.
- name: source_grounding
  value: 4.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: This entity is well-grounded in Smith's actual arguments about colonial
    trade policy, particularly his critique of monopolistic restrictions and advocacy
    for open trade relationships. The context accurately reflects Smith's position
    that artificial trade restrictions harm colonial development.
- name: domain_placement
  value: 5.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: The "Exchange" domain is perfectly appropriate for this concept, as colonial
    economic interdependence fundamentally concerns trade relationships, capital flows,
    and economic exchanges between different regions. This is clearly an exchange-based
    phenomenon rather than production, distribution, or consumption.
- name: vsm_relevance
  value: 4.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: This entity maps naturally to S4 (intelligence/environmental adaptation)
    as it concerns how colonial economies adapt to and integrate with broader global
    market environments. It also has relevance to S1 (primary operations) in terms
    of actual trade flows and economic activities.
- name: explanatory_value
  value: 4.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: The entity provides genuine explanatory power by illuminating the structural
    mechanism through which colonies develop economically via integration with global
    markets rather than isolation. It explains why Smith opposed monopolistic colonial
    policies and helps understand his broader theory of economic development through
    specialization and trade.
---

# Evaluation: Colonial Economic Interdependence

## definition_precision — 3.0 / 5.0

The definition captures a coherent concept of mutual economic relationships between colonies and other regions, but uses somewhat vague terms like "mutual economic relationships" and "greater interdependence" without specifying clear boundaries or mechanisms. The definition could be more precise about what constitutes interdependence versus simple trade.

## source_grounding — 4.0 / 5.0

This entity is well-grounded in Smith's actual arguments about colonial trade policy, particularly his critique of monopolistic restrictions and advocacy for open trade relationships. The context accurately reflects Smith's position that artificial trade restrictions harm colonial development.

## domain_placement — 5.0 / 5.0

The "Exchange" domain is perfectly appropriate for this concept, as colonial economic interdependence fundamentally concerns trade relationships, capital flows, and economic exchanges between different regions. This is clearly an exchange-based phenomenon rather than production, distribution, or consumption.

## vsm_relevance — 4.0 / 5.0

This entity maps naturally to S4 (intelligence/environmental adaptation) as it concerns how colonial economies adapt to and integrate with broader global market environments. It also has relevance to S1 (primary operations) in terms of actual trade flows and economic activities.

## explanatory_value — 4.0 / 5.0

The entity provides genuine explanatory power by illuminating the structural mechanism through which colonies develop economically via integration with global markets rather than isolation. It explains why Smith opposed monopolistic colonial policies and helps understand his broader theory of economic development through specialization and trade.
