IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/indcch/v34y2025i4p676-695..html

Entrepreneurs “from within”? Schumpeter and the emergence of pure novelty

Author

Listed:
  • Rémy Guichardaz
  • Julien Pénin

Abstract

The development of a dynamic model of endogenous economic change was a major objective for Schumpeter throughout his academic career. This requires, among other things, explaining the emergence of pure novelty, which Schumpeter never managed to do. As an explanation for this failure, existing literature put forward a methodological tension stemming from Schumpeter’s Walrasian commitment. In this paper, we propose that Schumpeter’s inability to build an endogenous theory of pure novelty is not only the mere logical consequence of his unsuitable methodological approach but also the inevitable outcome of his “theory” of how novelty is generated. We show that he could not depart from an individual and elitist dimension of entrepreneurship and from an energetic and vitalist axiom of social change, which is by nature hardly compatible with endogenous evolution. Furthermore, our revisiting of his last writings shows that, while there have been clear changes in his thinking on the entrepreneur, the “old” Schumpeter remained rooted in an individualistic, elitist, and energetic view of the apparition of pure novelty. These findings have important implications for understanding Schumpeter’s thinking and, in particular, his vision of capitalism, socialism, and economic development.

Suggested Citation

  • Rémy Guichardaz & Julien Pénin, 2025. "Entrepreneurs “from within”? Schumpeter and the emergence of pure novelty," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 34(4), pages 676-695.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:indcch:v:34:y:2025:i:4:p:676-695.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/icc/dtae040
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    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:oup:indcch:v:34:y:2025:i:4:p:676-695.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/icc .

    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.