IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/joevec/v28y2018i2d10.1007_s00191-017-0521-9.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Testing evolutionary theory of household consumption behavior in the case of novelty - a product characteristics approach

Author

Listed:
  • Kenza Qaoumi

    (CGS - The Center for Management Science, MINES ParisTech)

  • Pascal Masson

    (CGS - The Center for Management Science, MINES ParisTech)

  • Benoit Weil

    (CGS - The Center for Management Science, MINES ParisTech)

  • Aytunç Ün

    (CGS - The Center for Management Science, MINES ParisTech)

Abstract

This article tests and extends the evolutionary theory of household consumption behavior, which is an alternative to neoclassical theory. Evolutionary economists offer novel approaches to the analysis of consumption behavior that emphasize the major role of learning in the evolution of consumer preferences and wants. As a possible inspiration for further progress in evolutionary thought, this paper examines the idea of consumer learning by studying the nature of what consumers should learn in the context of ‘novelty’. Our empirical results regarding novelty during the learning process show that consumers learn the ‘new characteristics’ of consumer goods, contrary to the Lancasterian approach, which suggests that the characteristics space of goods is fixed. We show that during the process of consumption, ‘consumer learning’ extends the characteristics space of consumer goods; this phenomenon is far from negligible and differs across product types. Moreover, our results show that the emergence of new characteristics cannot be modeled as a Poisson process because these new characteristics exhibit clear interdependence over time.

Suggested Citation

  • Kenza Qaoumi & Pascal Masson & Benoit Weil & Aytunç Ün, 2018. "Testing evolutionary theory of household consumption behavior in the case of novelty - a product characteristics approach," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 437-460, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:joevec:v:28:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s00191-017-0521-9
    DOI: 10.1007/s00191-017-0521-9
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00191-017-0521-9
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00191-017-0521-9?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. María-Isabel Encinar & Félix-Fernando Muñoz, 2006. "On novelty and economics: Schumpeter’s paradox," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 255-277, August.
    2. Richard Nelson & Davide Consoli, 2010. "An evolutionary theory of household consumption behavior," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 20(5), pages 665-687, October.
    3. Richard Nelson, 2013. "Demand, supply, and their interaction on markets, as seen from the perspective of evolutionary economic theory," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 17-38, January.
    4. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    5. Giada Di Stefano & Alfonso Gambardella & Gianmario Verona, 2012. "Technology Push and Demand Pull Perspectives in Innovation Studies: Current Findings and Future Research Directions," Post-Print hal-00696607, HAL.
    6. Richard Nelson, 2012. "Why Schumpeter has had so little influence on today’s main line economics, and why this may be changing," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 901-916, November.
    7. Richard N. Langlois, 2001. "special issue: Knowledge, consumption, and endogenous growth," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 77-93.
    8. Dosi, Giovanni, 1993. "Technological paradigms and technological trajectories : A suggested interpretation of the determinants and directions of technical change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 102-103, April.
    9. Kelvin J. Lancaster, 1966. "A New Approach to Consumer Theory," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 74(2), pages 132-132.
    10. K. J. Arrow, 1971. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: F. H. Hahn (ed.), Readings in the Theory of Growth, chapter 11, pages 131-149, Palgrave Macmillan.
    11. Giovanni Dosi & Christopher Freeman & Richard Nelson & Gerarld Silverberg & Luc Soete (ed.), 1988. "Technical Change and Economic Theory," LEM Book Series, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy, number dosietal-1988, March.
    12. Pier Paolo Saviotti, 2001. "special issue: Variety, growth and demand," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 119-142.
    13. Witt, Ulrich, 2009. "Propositions about novelty," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 70(1-2), pages 311-320, May.
    14. Witt, Ulrich, 2010. "Symbolic consumption and the social construction of product characteristics," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 17-25, March.
    15. Ulrich Witt, 2001. "special issue: Learning to consume - A theory of wants and the growth of demand," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 23-36.
    16. Zakaria Babutsidze, 2011. "Returns to product promotion when consumers are learning how to consume," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 21(5), pages 783-801, December.
    17. Wilhelm Ruprecht, 2005. "The historical development of the consumption of sweeteners - a learning approach," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 15(3), pages 247-272, August.
    18. Sanderson, Susan & Uzumeri, Mustafa, 1995. "Managing product families: The case of the Sony Walkman," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(5), pages 761-782, September.
    19. Mowery, David & Rosenberg, Nathan, 1993. "The influence of market demand upon innovation: A critical review of some recent empirical studies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 107-108, April.
    20. Cowan, Robin & Cowan, William & Swann, Peter, 1997. "A model of demand with interactions among consumers," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 15(6), pages 711-732, October.
    21. Alfred Kleinknecht & Jeroen O. N. Reijnen & Wendy Smits, 1993. "Collecting Literature-based Innovation Output Indicators. The Experience in the Netherlands," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: Alfred Kleinknecht & Donald Bain (ed.), New Concepts in Innovation Output Measurement, chapter 3, pages 42-84, Palgrave Macmillan.
    22. Markus Becker & Thorbjørn Knudsen & Richard Swedberg, 2012. "Schumpeter’s Theory of Economic Development: 100 years of development," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 917-933, November.
    23. J.S. Metcalfe, 2001. "special issue: Consumption, preferences, and the evolutionary agenda," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 11(1), pages 37-58.
    24. Di Stefano, Giada & Gambardella, Alfonso & Verona, Gianmario, 2012. "Technology push and demand pull perspectives in innovation studies: Current findings and future research directions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 1283-1295.
    25. Coombs, R. & Narandren, P. & Richards, A., 1996. "A literature-based innovation output indicator," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 403-413, May.
    26. Chris Freeman & Luc Soete, 1997. "The Economics of Industrial Innovation, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 3, volume 1, number 0262061953, December.
    27. Markus C. Becker & Thorbjørn Knudsen & James G. March, 2006. "Schumpeter, Winter, and the sources of novelty," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 15(2), pages 353-371, April.
    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. John Foster, 2021. "The US consumption function: a new perspective," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 773-798, July.
    2. Maxime Thomas & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil & Julien Legrand, 2021. "The future of digital platforms: Conditions of platform overthrow," Post-Print hal-03094851, HAL.

    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. Kenza El Qaoumi & Pascal Le Masson & Benoit Weil & Aytunç Ün, 2017. "Testing Evolutionary Theory of Household Consumption Behavior in the case of Novelty – Product characteristics approach," Post-Print hal-01619967, HAL.
    2. Andreas Chai, 2017. "Tackling Keynes’ question: a look back on 15 years of Learning To Consume," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 251-271, April.
    3. Marco Valente, 2012. "Evolutionary demand: a model for boundedly rational consumers," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 22(5), pages 1029-1080, November.
    4. Attila Havas, 2016. "Social and Business Innovations: Are Common Measurement Approaches Possible?," Foresight-Russia Форсайт, CyberLeninka;Федеральное государственное автономное образовательное учреждение высшего образования «Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики», vol. 10(2 (eng)), pages 58-80.
    5. Vanessa OLTRA & Maïder SAINT JEAN, 2009. "Environmental Innovations and Industrial Dynamics (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2009-22, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    6. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    7. Tommaso Ciarli & André Lorentz & Maria Savona & Marco Valente, 2010. "The Effect Of Consumption And Production Structure On Growth And Distribution. A Micro To Macro Model," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 61(1), pages 180-218, February.
    8. Richard Nelson & Davide Consoli, 2010. "An evolutionary theory of household consumption behavior," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 20(5), pages 665-687, October.
    9. Sam Aflaki & Syed Abul Basher & Andrea Masini, 2015. "Does Economic Growth Matter? Technology-Push, Demand-Pull and Endogenous Drivers of Innovation in the Renewable Energy Industry," Working Papers hal-02011423, HAL.
    10. Attila Havas, 2015. "Various approaches to measuring business innovation: their relevance for capturing social innovation," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1554, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    11. Havas, Attila, 2016. "Recent economic theorising on innovation: Lessons for analysing social innovation," MPRA Paper 77385, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Mark Knell & Simone Vannuccini, 2022. "Tools and concepts for understanding disruptive technological change after Schumpeter," Jena Economics Research Papers 2022-005, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    13. Dario Guarascio & Mario Pianta & Francesco Bogliacino, 2017. "Export, R&D and New Products: A Model and a Test on European Industries," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Andreas Pyka & Uwe Cantner (ed.), Foundations of Economic Change, pages 393-432, Springer.
    14. Michael Peneder & Karl Aiginger & Gernot Hutschenreiter & Markus Marterbauer, 2001. "Structural Change and Economic Growth," WIFO Studies, WIFO, number 20668, April.
    15. Antonelli, Cristiano & Gehringer, Agnieszka, 2015. "Knowledge externalities and demand pull: The European evidence," Economic Systems, Elsevier, vol. 39(4), pages 608-631.
    16. João Bernardino & Tanya Araújo, 2013. "On positional consumption and technological innovation: an agent-based model," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 1047-1071, November.
    17. Rinaldo Evangelista, 2018. "Technology and Economic Development: The Schumpeterian Legacy," Review of Radical Political Economics, Union for Radical Political Economics, vol. 50(1), pages 136-153, March.
    18. Janger, Jürgen & Schubert, Torben & Andries, Petra & Rammer, Christian & Hoskens, Machteld, 2017. "The EU 2020 innovation indicator: A step forward in measuring innovation outputs and outcomes?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(1), pages 30-42.
    19. Rengs, Bernhard & Scholz-Waeckerle, Manuel, 2017. "Consumption & Class in Evolutionary Macroeconomics," MPRA Paper 80021, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. José García-Quevedo & Gabriele Pellegrino & Maria Savona, 2017. "Reviving demand-pull perspectives: The effect of demand uncertainty and stagnancy on R&D strategy," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 41(4), pages 1087-1122.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Evolutionary economics; Novelty; Household consumption behavior; Innovation; Consumer learning;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • E2 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - Consumption, Saving, Production, Employment, and Investment

    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:joevec:v:28:y:2018:i:2:d:10.1007_s00191-017-0521-9. 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.