IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/24125.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Scale versus Scope in the Diffusion of New Technology: Evidence from the Farm Tractor

Author

Listed:
  • Daniel P. Gross

Abstract

Using the farm tractor as a case study, I show that lags in technology diffusion arise along two distinct margins, which I term scale and scope. Though tractors are now used in nearly every agricultural field operation and in the production of nearly all crops, they first developed with much more limited application. Early diffusion was accordingly rapid in these narrower applications, but limited in scope until tractor technology generalized. The sequence of diffusion is consistent with a model of R&D in specific- versus general-purpose attributes and with other historical examples, suggesting that the key to understanding technology diffusion lies not only in explaining the number of different users, but also in explaining the number of different uses.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniel P. Gross, 2017. "Scale versus Scope in the Diffusion of New Technology: Evidence from the Farm Tractor," NBER Working Papers 24125, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:24125
    Note: DAE ITI PR
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w24125.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bresnahan, Timothy F. & Trajtenberg, M., 1995. "General purpose technologies 'Engines of growth'?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 83-108, January.
    2. Esther Duflo & Michael Kremer & Jonathan Robinson, 2008. "How High Are Rates of Return to Fertilizer? Evidence from Field Experiments in Kenya," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(2), pages 482-488, May.
    3. Susanto Basu & David N. Weil, 1998. "Appropriate Technology and Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 113(4), pages 1025-1054.
    4. Richard Hornbeck, 2010. "Barbed Wire: Property Rights and Agricultural Development," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 125(2), pages 767-810.
    5. Wolfgang Keller, 2002. "Geographic Localization of International Technology Diffusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(1), pages 120-142, March.
    6. Richard H. Steckel & William J. White, 2012. "Engines of Growth: Farm Tractors and Twentieth-Century U.S. Economic Welfare," NBER Working Papers 17879, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Wolfgang Keller, 2004. "International Technology Diffusion," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 752-782, September.
    8. Comin, D. & Hobijn, B., 2004. "Cross-country technology adoption: making the theories face the facts," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(1), pages 39-83, January.
    9. Olmstead, Alan L., 1975. "The Mechanization of Reaping and Mowing in American Agriculture, 1833–1870," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 327-352, June.
    10. Munshi, Kaivan, 2004. "Social learning in a heterogeneous population: technology diffusion in the Indian Green Revolution," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 185-213, February.
    11. Rodolfo E. Manuelli & Ananth Seshadri, 2014. "Frictionless Technology Diffusion: The Case of Tractors," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(4), pages 1368-1391, April.
    12. Pascaline Dupas, 2014. "Short‐Run Subsidies and Long‐Run Adoption of New Health Products: Evidence From a Field Experiment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 82(1), pages 197-228, January.
    13. Francesco Caselli & Wilbur John Coleman II, 2006. "The World Technology Frontier," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(3), pages 499-522, June.
    14. Warren C. Whatley, 1985. "A History of Mechanization in the Cotton South: The Institutional Hypothesis," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 100(4), pages 1191-1215.
    15. Clarke, Sally, 1991. "New Deal Regulation and the Revolution in American Farm Productivity. A Case Study of the Diffusion of the Tractor in the Corn Ielt, 1920–1940," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(1), pages 101-123, March.
    16. Cooper, Martin R. & Barton, Glen T. & Brodell, Albert P., 1947. "Progress of Farm Mechanization," Miscellaneous Publications 314796, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    17. Tavneet Suri, 2011. "Selection and Comparative Advantage in Technology Adoption," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 79(1), pages 159-209, January.
    18. Martini, Dinah Duffy & Silberberg, Eugene, 2006. "The Diffusion of Tractor Technology," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 66(2), pages 354-389, June.
    19. Alston, Lee J., 1983. "Farm Foreclosures in the United States During the Interwar Period," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(4), pages 885-903, December.
    20. Conley, T. G., 1999. "GMM estimation with cross sectional dependence," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 1-45, September.
    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. Bonnín Roca, Jaime & Vaishnav, Parth & Morgan, Granger M. & Fuchs, Erica & Mendonça, Joana, 2021. "Technology Forgiveness: Why emerging technologies differ in their resilience to institutional instability," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 166(C).
    2. Jung, Yeonha, 2020. "The long reach of cotton in the US South: Tenant farming, mechanization, and low-skill manufacturing," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    3. Philipp Ager & Marc Goñi & Kjell Salvanes, 2023. "Gender-Biased Technological Change: Milking Machines and the Exodus of Women from Farming," Working Papers 2023-017, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.

    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. Dominik Naeher, 2022. "Technology Adoption Under Costly Information Processing," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 63(2), pages 699-753, May.
    2. Edwin Goni & William F. Maloney, 2014. "Why don’t Poor Countries do R&D?," Documentos CEDE 11947, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    3. Matsumoto, Tomoya, 2014. "Disseminating new farming practices among small scale farmers: An experimental intervention in Uganda," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 43-74.
    4. Paul Beaudry & Mark Doms & Ethan Lewis, 2006. "Endogenous Skill Bias in Technology Adoption: City-Level Evidence from the IT Revolution," NBER Working Papers 12521, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Andrew D. Foster & Mark R. Rosenzweig, 2010. "Microeconomics of Technology Adoption," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 395-424, September.
    6. Dimitris KALLIORAS & Nickolaos TZEREMES & Panayiotis TZEREMES & Maria ADAMAKOU, 2021. "Technological Change, Technological Catch-Up And Market Potential: Evidence From The Eu Regions," Regional Science Inquiry, Hellenic Association of Regional Scientists, vol. 0(1), pages 135-151, June.
    7. Schulte, Patrick, 2015. "Does skill-biased technical change diffuse internationally?," ZEW Discussion Papers 15-088, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    8. Chen, Shuo & Lan, Xiaohuan, 2020. "Tractor vs. animal: Rural reforms and technology adoption in China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    9. Terrance Hurley & Jawoo Koo & Kindie Tesfaye, 2018. "Weather risk: how does it change the yield benefits of nitrogen fertilizer and improved maize varieties in sub‐Saharan Africa?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 49(6), pages 711-723, November.
    10. Valentina Bosetti & Elena Verdolini, 2013. "Clean and Dirty International Technology Diffusion," Working Papers 2013.43, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    11. Michelson, Hope & Fairbairn, Anna & Ellison, Brenna & Maertens, Annemie & Manyong, Victor, 2021. "Misperceived quality: Fertilizer in Tanzania," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    12. Levchenko, Andrei A. & Zhang, Jing, 2016. "The evolution of comparative advantage: Measurement and welfare implications," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 96-111.
    13. Macours, Karen & Behaghel, Luc & Gignoux, Jérémie, 2020. "Social learning in agriculture: does smallholder heterogeneity impede technology diffusion in Sub-Saharan Africa?," CEPR Discussion Papers 15220, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Maloney, William F. & Valencia Caicedo, Felipe, 2014. "Engineers, Innovative Capacity and Development in the Americas," IZA Discussion Papers 8271, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    15. Diego Comin & Bart Hobijn, 2010. "An Exploration of Technology Diffusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(5), pages 2031-2059, December.
    16. Raphaël Soubeyran, 2019. "Technology adoption and pro-social preferences," Working Papers halshs-02291905, HAL.
    17. Surya Bhushan, 2021. "Labour Productivity Dynamics in Indian Agriculture: 2000–2016," The Indian Journal of Labour Economics, Springer;The Indian Society of Labour Economics (ISLE), vol. 64(2), pages 371-388, June.
    18. Harou, Aurélie P. & Madajewicz, Malgosia & Michelson, Hope & Palm, Cheryl A. & Amuri, Nyambilila & Magomba, Christopher & Semoka, Johnson M. & Tschirhart, Kevin & Weil, Ray, 2022. "The joint effects of information and financing constraints on technology adoption: Evidence from a field experiment in rural Tanzania," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    19. Mercenier, Jean & Voyvoda, Ebru, 2018. "On Barriers to Technology Adoption, Appropriate Technology and Deep Integration (with implications for the European Union)," MPRA Paper 86364, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Zhu, Jessica, 2018. "Understanding the Rationale of Heterogeneous Farmers' Agricultural Technology Adoption Decisions," 2018 Annual Meeting, August 5-7, Washington, D.C. 274233, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • N52 - Economic History - - Agriculture, Natural Resources, Environment and Extractive Industries - - - U.S.; Canada: 1913-
    • O13 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Agriculture; Natural Resources; Environment; Other Primary Products
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • Q16 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - R&D; Agricultural Technology; Biofuels; Agricultural Extension Services

    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:24125. 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.