Innovation Heterogeneity, Schumpeterian Growth and Evolutionary Theorizing
AbstractSchumpeterian growth models revolve around two tacit assumptions that are at odds with the empirical evidence, namely: all innovations are equally important for economic growth (equipollent innovation) and all innovations occur in one sector only (confined innovation). The present paper shows that it is possible to dispose of both implicit assumptions by disaggregating the "ideas production function" without altering the gist of the theoretical framework. The paper refers briefly to the concepts of macro and microinventions, and introduces the concept of "innovatory discontinuity". The extended theoretical framework developed here throws light on the ongoing controversy between neoclassical and evolutionary theorizing.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by School of Economics, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia in its series Economics Working Papers with number wp04-21.
Length: 18 pages
Date of creation: 2004
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: School of Economics, University of Wollongong, Northfields Avenue, Wollongong NSW 2522 Australia
Phone: +612 4221-3659
Fax: +612 4221-3725
Web page: http://business.uow.edu.au/econ/index.html
More information through EDIRC
Innovation heterogeneity; ideas production function; scale effects problem; innovatory discontinuity; neoclassical and evolutionary theorizing;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- O31 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Technological Change; Research and Development; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
- O32 - Economic Development, Technological Change, and Growth - - Technological Change; Research and Development; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2005-01-02 (All new papers)
- NEP-DEV-2005-01-02 (Development)
- NEP-ENT-2005-01-02 (Entrepreneurship)
- NEP-INO-2005-01-02 (Innovation)
- NEP-PKE-2005-01-02 (Post Keynesian Economics)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Paul Romer, 1991.
"Endogenous Technological Change,"
NBER Working Papers
3210, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Charles I. Jones, 1999.
"Growth: With or Without Scale Effects?,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 89(2), pages 139-144, May.
- Jones, Charles I, 1995. "Time Series Tests of Endogenous Growth Models," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 110(2), pages 495-525, May.
- Nelson, Richard R, 1982. "The Role of Knowledge in R&D Efficiency," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 97(3), pages 453-70, August.
- Pavitt, Keith, 1984. "Sectoral patterns of technical change: Towards a taxonomy and a theory," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(6), pages 343-373, December.
- Elias Dinopoulos & Peter Thompson, 1999. "Scale effects in Schumpeterian models of economic growth," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 157-185.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Peter Siminski).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.