IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joecth/v52y2013i2p755-791.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Schumpeterian growth model with random quality improvements

Author

Listed:
  • Antonio Minniti
  • Carmelo Parello
  • Paul Segerstrom

Abstract

A common assumption in the Schumpeterian growth literature is that the innovation size is constant and identical across industries. This is in contrast with the empirical evidence which shows that: (1) innovation size is not identical across industries and (2) the size distribution of profit returns from innovation is highly skewed toward the low value side, with a long tail on the high value side. In the present paper, we develop a Schumpeterian growth model that is consistent with this evidence. In particular, we assume that when a firm innovates, the size of its quality improvement is the result of a random draw from a Pareto distribution. This enables us to extend the class of quality-ladder growth models to encompass firm heterogeneity. We study the policy implications of this new setup numerically and find that it is optimal to heavily subsidize R&D for plausible parameter values. Although it is optimal to tax R&D for some parameter values, this case only occurs when the steady-state rate of economic growth is very low. Copyright Springer-Verlag 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Antonio Minniti & Carmelo Parello & Paul Segerstrom, 2013. "A Schumpeterian growth model with random quality improvements," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 52(2), pages 755-791, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:joecth:v:52:y:2013:i:2:p:755-791
    DOI: 10.1007/s00199-011-0664-0
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00199-011-0664-0
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00199-011-0664-0?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Popp David, 2005. "Uncertain R&D and the Porter Hypothesis," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-14, June.
    2. Manuel Trajtenberg, 1990. "A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 172-187, Spring.
    3. Marc J. Melitz & Giancarlo I. P. Ottaviano, 2021. "Market Size, Trade, and Productivity," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Firms and Workers in a Globalized World Larger Markets, Tougher Competition, chapter 4, pages 87-108, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Silverberg, Gerald & Verspagen, Bart, 2007. "The size distribution of innovations revisited: An application of extreme value statistics to citation and value measures of patent significance," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 139(2), pages 318-339, August.
    5. Jones, Charles I., 2005. "Growth and Ideas," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 16, pages 1063-1111, Elsevier.
    6. Norrbin, Stefan C, 1993. "The Relation between Price and Marginal Cost in U.S. Industry: A Contradiction," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(6), pages 1149-1164, December.
    7. Jones, Charles I & Williams, John C, 2000. "Too Much of a Good Thing? The Economics of Investment in R&D," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 5(1), pages 65-85, March.
    8. Thompson, Peter, 2001. "The Microeconomics of an R&D-Based Model of Endogenous Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 6(4), pages 263-283, December.
    9. Paul S. Segerstrom, 2007. "Intel Economics," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 48(1), pages 247-280, February.
    10. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    11. Christian Groth & Karl-Josef Koch & Thomas Steger, 2010. "When economic growth is less than exponential," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 44(2), pages 213-242, August.
    12. Chol-Won Li, 2003. "Endogenous Growth Without Scale Effects: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 1009-1017, June.
    13. Ellen R. McGrattan & Edward C. Prescott, 2000. "Is the stock market overvalued?," Quarterly Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, vol. 24(Fall), pages 20-40.
    14. Thompson, Peter & Waldo, Doug, 1994. "Growth and trustified capitalism," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 445-462, December.
    15. Thompson, Peter, 1999. "Rationality, rules of thumb, and R&D," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 10(3-4), pages 321-340, December.
    16. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2000. "Market Value and Patent Citations: A First Look," NBER Working Papers 7741, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2001. "The NBER Patent Citation Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," NBER Working Papers 8498, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Robert M. Hunt, 2004. "Patentability, Industry Structure, and Innovation," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(3), pages 401-425, September.
    19. Samuel S. Kortum, 1997. "Research, Patenting, and Technological Change," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 65(6), pages 1389-1420, November.
    20. Leo Sveikauskas, 2007. "R&D and Productivity Growth: A Review of the Literature," Working Papers 408, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
    21. Susanto Basu, 1996. "Procyclical Productivity: Increasing Returns or Cyclical Utilization?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 111(3), pages 719-751.
    22. Mehra, Rajnish & Prescott, Edward C., 1985. "The equity premium: A puzzle," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 145-161, March.
    23. Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), 2005. "Handbook of Economic Growth," Handbook of Economic Growth, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    24. Fernando Leiva B., 2006. "Pricing Patents through Citations," 2006 Meeting Papers 834, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    25. Norrbin, Stefan C, 1993. "The Relation between Price and Marginal Cost in U.S. Industry: A Contradiction," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(6), pages 1149-1164, December.
    26. Marc J. Melitz, 2003. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(6), pages 1695-1725, November.
    27. Segerstrom, Paul S, 1998. "Endogenous Growth without Scale Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(5), pages 1290-1310, December.
    28. Ethier, Wilfred J, 1982. "National and International Returns to Scale in the Modern Theory of International Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(3), pages 389-405, June.
    29. Eaton, Jonathan & Kortum, Samuel, 1999. "International Technology Diffusion: Theory and Measurement," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 40(3), pages 537-570, August.
    30. Dinopoulos, Elias & Thompson, Peter, 1998. "Schumpeterian Growth without Scale Effects," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 3(4), pages 313-335, December.
    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. Viktor Slavtchev & Simon Wiederhold, 2016. "Does the Technological Content of Government Demand Matter for Private R&D? Evidence from US States," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 8(2), pages 45-84, April.
    2. Viktor Slavtchev & Simon Wiederhold, 2012. "Technological Intensity of Government Demand and Innovation," ifo Working Paper Series 135, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    3. Tatsuro Iwaisako & Kazuyoshi Ohki, 2019. "Innovation by Heterogeneous Leaders," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 121(4), pages 1673-1704, October.
    4. Angus C. Chu & Guido Cozzi & Haichao Fang & Yuichi Furukawa & Chih-Hsing Liao, 2019. "Innovation and Inequality in a Monetary Schumpeterian Model with Heterogeneous Households and Firms," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 34, pages 141-164, October.
    5. Edwin Lai, 2013. "Cumulative Innovation, Growth and Welfare-Improving Patent Policy," 2013 Meeting Papers 854, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    6. Cevikarslan S., 2015. "Research joint ventures in an R&D driven market with evolving consumer preferences: An evolutionary multi-agent based modelling approach," MERIT Working Papers 2015-007, United Nations University - Maastricht Economic and Social Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
    7. Angus C. Chu & Yuichi Furukawa & Sushanta Mallick & Pietro Peretto & Xilin Wang, 2021. "Dynamic effects of patent policy on innovation and inequality in a Schumpeterian economy," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(4), pages 1429-1465, June.
    8. Keiichi Kishi, 2014. "A patentability requirement and industries targeted by R&D," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 14-27-Rev., Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics, revised Oct 2014.
    9. Fukuda, Katsufumi, 2019. "Effects of trade liberalization on growth and welfare through basic and applied researches," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    10. Chu, Angus C. & Cozzi, Guido & Furukawa, Yuichi & Liao, Chih-Hsing, 2017. "Inflation and economic growth in a Schumpeterian model with endogenous entry of heterogeneous firms," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 392-409.
    11. Colin Davis & Laixun Zhao, 2022. "Innovation to Keep or to Sell and Tax Incentives," Discussion Paper Series DP2022-28, Research Institute for Economics & Business Administration, Kobe University, revised Nov 2022.
    12. Klein, Michael A., 2022. "The reward and contract theories of patents in a model of endogenous growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 147(C).
    13. Michael Klein & Fuat Sener, 2023. "Product Innovation, Diffusion and Endogenous Growth," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 48, pages 178-201, April.
    14. Prettner, Klaus & Werner, Katharina, 2016. "Why it pays off to pay us well: The impact of basic research on economic growth and welfare," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(5), pages 1075-1090.
    15. Angus C. Chu, 2022. "Inflation, innovation, and growth: A survey," Bulletin of Economic Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(3), pages 863-878, July.
    16. Ohki, Kazuyoshi, 2023. "Disruptive innovation by heterogeneous incumbents and economic growth: When do incumbents switch to new technology?," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    17. Klein, Michael A., 2020. "Secrecy, the patent puzzle and endogenous growth," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    18. You-Xun Lu & Ching-Chong Lai & Po-Yang Yu, 2024. "Effects of patent policy on growth and inequality: exogenous versus endogenous quality improvements," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 141(1), pages 1-28, January.
    19. Angus C. Chu & Guido Cozzi & Haichao Fang & Yuichi Furukawa & Chih-Hsing Liao, 2019. "Innovation and Inequality in a Monetary Schumpeterian Model with Heterogeneous Households and Firms," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 34, pages 141-164, October.
    20. Michael Klein & Fuat Sener, 2023. "Product Innovation, Diffusion and Endogenous Growth," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 48, pages 178-201, April.
    21. Lu, You-Xun & Lai, Ching-Chong, 2021. "Effects of patent policy on growth and inequality: A perspective of exogenous and endogenous quality improvements," MPRA Paper 111183, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    22. Stadler, Manfred, 2013. "Scientific breakthroughs, innovation clusters and stochastic growth cycles," University of Tübingen Working Papers in Business and Economics 60, University of Tuebingen, Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, School of Business and Economics.

    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. Minniti, A. & Parello, C. & Segerstrom, P. S., 2008. "A Schumpeterian Growth Model with Heterogenous Firms," MPRA Paper 13674, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Sener, Fuat, 2008. "R&D policies, endogenous growth and scale effects," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 32(12), pages 3895-3916, December.
    3. Bucci, Alberto, 2013. "Returns to specialization, competition, population, and growth," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(10), pages 2023-2040.
    4. Ohki, Kazuyoshi, 2023. "Disruptive innovation by heterogeneous incumbents and economic growth: When do incumbents switch to new technology?," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    5. Gray, Elie & Grimaud, André, 2014. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models: Knowledge diffusion, social value of innovations and optimal R&D incentives," TSE Working Papers 14-469, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    6. Tatsuro Iwaisako & Kazuyoshi Ohki, 2019. "Innovation by Heterogeneous Leaders," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 121(4), pages 1673-1704, October.
    7. Gray, Elie & Grimaud, André, 2014. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models: Knowledge diffusion, social value of innovations and optimal R&D incentives," IDEI Working Papers 821, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    8. Elie Gray & André Grimaud, 2014. "The Lindahl Equilibrium in Schumpeterian Growth Models: Knowledge Diffusion, Social Value of Innovations and Optimal R&D Incentives," CESifo Working Paper Series 4678, CESifo.
    9. Elie Gray & André Grimaud, 2016. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 101-142, March.
    10. Dean Scrimgeour, 2015. "Dynamic Scoring in a Romer-Style Economy," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 81(3), pages 697-723, January.
    11. repec:wly:soecon:v:81:3:y:2015:p:697-723 is not listed on IDEAS
    12. Cozzi, Guido & Galli, Silvia, 2011. "Privatization of Knowledge: Did the U.S. Get It Right? (New Version)," MPRA Paper 29710, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Bucci, Alberto & Parello, Carmelo Pierpaolo, 2009. "Horizontal innovation-based growth and product market competition," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 213-221, January.
    14. Minniti, Antonio & Venturini, Francesco, 2017. "The long-run growth effects of R&D policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 316-326.
    15. repec:bla:germec:v:7:y:2006:i::p:297-316 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Dean Scrimgeour, 2015. "Dynamic Scoring in a Romer‐Style Economy," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 81(3), pages 697-723, January.
    17. Richard M. H. Suen, 2013. "Research Policy and U.S. Economic Growth," Working papers 2013-18, University of Connecticut, Department of Economics.
    18. Bettina Büttner, 2006. "Effectiveness versus Efficiency: Growth‐Accelerating Policies in a Model of Growth without Scale Effects," German Economic Review, Verein für Socialpolitik, vol. 7(3), pages 297-316, August.
    19. Tiago Sequeira, 2012. "Facts and distortions in an endogenous growth model with physical capital, human capital and varieties," Portuguese Economic Journal, Springer;Instituto Superior de Economia e Gestao, vol. 11(3), pages 171-188, December.
    20. Giammario Impullitti, 2007. "International Schumpeterian Competition and Optimal R&D subsidies," Economics Working Papers ECO2007/55, European University Institute.
    21. Capolupo, Rosa, 2009. "The New Growth Theories and Their Empirics after Twenty Years," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 3, pages 1-72.
    22. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Schumpeterian growth; Heterogenous firms; R&D; Optimal policy; E10; L16; O31; O38;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • E10 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General Aggregative Models - - - General
    • L16 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Industrial Organization and Macroeconomics; Macroeconomic Industrial Structure
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    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:spr:joecth:v:52:y:2013:i:2:p:755-791. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.