IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/16984.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Diversity and Technological Progress

Author

Listed:
  • Daron Acemoglu

Abstract

This paper proposes a tractable model to study the equilibrium diversity of technological progress and shows that equilibrium technological progress may exhibit too little diversity (too much conformity), in particular, foregoing socially beneficial investments in "alternative" technologies that will be used at some point in the future. The presence of future innovations that will replace current innovations imply that social benefits from innovation are not fully internalized. As a consequence, the market favors technologies that generate current gains relative to those that will bear fruit in the future; current innovations in research lines that will be profitable in the future are discouraged because current innovations are typically followed by further innovations before they can be profitably marketed. A social planner would choose a more diverse research portfolio and would induce a higher growth rate than the equilibrium allocation. The diversity of researchers is a partial (imperfect) remedy against the misallocation induced by the market. Researchers with different interests, competences or ideas may choose non-profit maximizing and thus more diverse research portfolios, indirectly contributing to economic growth.

Suggested Citation

  • Daron Acemoglu, 2011. "Diversity and Technological Progress," NBER Working Papers 16984, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:16984
    Note: EFG
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w16984.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin F. Jones, 2009. "The Burden of Knowledge and the "Death of the Renaissance Man": Is Innovation Getting Harder?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(1), pages 283-317.
    2. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    3. Philippe Aghion & Jean Tirole, 1994. "The Management of Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 109(4), pages 1185-1209.
    4. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1986. "Technology Adoption in the Presence of Network Externalities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 94(4), pages 822-841, August.
    5. Jean-Michel Dalle, 1997. "Heterogeneity vs. externalities in technological competition: A tale of possible technological landscapes," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 395-413.
    6. William A. Brock & Steven N. Durlauf, 1999. "A formal model of theory choice in science," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 14(1), pages 113-130.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Miles Parker & Andrew Acland & Harry J Armstrong & Jim R Bellingham & Jessica Bland & Helen C Bodmer & Simon Burall & Sarah Castell & Jason Chilvers & David D Cleevely & David Cope & Lucia Costanzo & , 2014. "Identifying the Science and Technology Dimensions of Emerging Public Policy Issues through Horizon Scanning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(5), pages 1-17, May.
    2. Agnieszka Lipieta & Elżbieta Pliś, 2022. "Diversity and mechanisms of economic evolution," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 1265-1286, September.
    3. Badarinza, Cristian & Gross, Marco, 2011. "Macroeconomic vulnerability and disagreement in expectations," Working Paper Series 1407, European Central Bank.
    4. Rob Aalbers & Victoria Shestalova & Viktoria Kocsis, 2012. "Innovation policy for directing technical change in the power sector," CPB Discussion Paper 223, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    5. Wang, Jinxiu & Deng, Kun, 2022. "Impact and mechanism analysis of smart city policy on urban innovation: Evidence from China," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 574-587.
    6. Aalbers, Rob & Shestalova, Victoria & Kocsis, Viktória, 2013. "Innovation policy for directing technical change in the power sector," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 1240-1250.
    7. Elżbieta Pliś, 2020. "Diversity and Innovation in Economic Evolution," Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics, Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics, vol. 12(4), pages 347-367, December.
    8. Guo, Qingbin & Zhong, Jinrong, 2022. "The effect of urban innovation performance of smart city construction policies: Evaluate by using a multiple period difference-in-differences model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    9. Bryan, Kevin A. & Lemus, Jorge, 2017. "The direction of innovation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 247-272.
    10. Marcin Woźniak, 2015. "Can the Stochastic Equilibrium Job Search Models Fit Transition Economies?," Acta Oeconomica, Akadémiai Kiadó, Hungary, vol. 65(4), pages 567-591, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Patrick Legros & Andrew F. Newman & Eugenio Proto, 2014. "Smithian Growth through Creative Organization," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(5), pages 796-811, December.
    2. Laurent R. Bergé, 2017. "Network proximity in the geography of research collaboration," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 96(4), pages 785-815, November.
    3. Balland, Pierre-Alexandre & Broekel, Tom & Diodato, Dario & Giuliani, Elisa & Hausmann, Ricardo & O'Clery, Neave & Rigby, David, 2022. "Reprint of The new paradigm of economic complexity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(8).
    4. LeBel, Phillip, 2008. "The role of creative innovation in economic growth: Some international comparisons," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 334-347, August.
    5. Guido Cozzi & Silvia Galli, 2009. "Upstream Innovation Protection: Common Law Evolution and the Dynamics of Wage Inequality," Working Papers 2009_20, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
    6. Cristiano Antonelli, 2011. "The Economic Complexity of Technological Change: Knowledge Interaction and Path Dependence," Chapters, in: Cristiano Antonelli (ed.), Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Raphael Auer & Philip Sauré, 2011. "Spatial Competition in Quality, Demand Induced Innovation, and Schumpeterian Growth," DEGIT Conference Papers c016_067, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    8. Giacomo Damioli & Vincent Van Roy & Daniel Vertesy, 2021. "The impact of artificial intelligence on labor productivity," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 11(1), pages 1-25, March.
    9. Richard M. H. Suen, 2013. "Research Policy and U.S. Economic Growth," Working papers 2013-18, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    10. Peter Gustafsson & Paul Segerstrom, 2010. "Trade Liberalization and Productivity Growth," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(2), pages 207-228, May.
    11. Guido Cozzi & Silvia Galli, 2014. "Sequential R&D and blocking patents in the dynamics of growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 19(2), pages 183-219, June.
    12. Richard T. Carson & Joshua Graff Zivin & Jordan J. Louviere & Sally Sadoff & Jeffrey G. Shrader, 2022. "The Risk of Caution: Evidence from an Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(12), pages 9042-9060, December.
    13. Hyvärinen, Jari, 2004. "EU Outsourcing to the East, Governance and Innovation Systems in the Baltic Countries - A Three-Stage Approach," Discussion Papers 934, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.
    14. Simon Wiederhold, 2012. "The Role of Public Procurement in Innovation: Theory and Empirical Evidence," ifo Beiträge zur Wirtschaftsforschung, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, number 43.
    15. Chetty, Raj & Bell, Alex & Jaravel, Xavier & Petkova, Neviana & Van Reenen, John, 2019. "Do tax cuts produce more Einsteins? The impact of financial incentives vs. exposure to innovation on the supply of inventors," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 102606, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    16. Cecilia García-Peñalosa & Jean-François Wen, 2008. "Redistribution and entrepreneurship with Schumpeterian growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 13(1), pages 57-80, March.
    17. Pigeard de Almeida Prado, Fernando & Belitsky, Vladimir & Ferreira, Alex Luiz, 2011. "Social interactions, product differentiation and discontinuity of demand," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(4-5), pages 642-653.
    18. Jose E. Gomez-Gonzalez & Oscar Mauricio Valencia, 2014. "Innovation and Growth under Private Information," Borradores de Economia 845, Banco de la Republica de Colombia.
    19. Patrick Legros & Andrew F. Newman & Eugenio Proto, 2014. "Smithian Growth through Creative Organization," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(5), pages 796-811, December.
    20. L. Rachel Ngai & Roberto M. Samaniego, 2006. "An R&D-Based Model of Multi-Sector Growth," CEP Discussion Papers dp0762, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C65 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Miscellaneous Mathematical Tools
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:16984. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.