IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/url/izvest/v21y2020i3p132-157.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Technological differentiation in the development of the Ural macroregion’s subjects

Author

Listed:
  • Marina V. Evseeva

    (Ural State University of Economics, Ekaterinburg, Russia)

Abstract

At the local level, regions are the entities that have to grapple with the problem of Russia’s technological breakthrough directly. The paper aims to uncover the reasons behind the differences in technological development of the subjects of the Ural macroregion. The econom ics of complexity and new Schumpeterian theory of economic growth constitute the methodo logical basis of the research. The author applies economic mathematical methods of analysis, as well as analytical tools of the ecosystem approach to examine the sample of 3,436 manufactur ing companies from the seven subjects of the Ural macroregion in the period of 2007–2019. The researcher specifies separate technologies by disagregating industries using All-Russian Classification of Economic Activities (OKVED-2). Companies are divided into three groups depending on the type of the main implemented technology: system, component or basic. The findings reveal that leading regions feature high degree of technological complexity determined on the basis of technological diversity and localisation of the system integrator companies. Ad ditionally, leaders significantly outperform other regions in total factor productivity of compa nies employing different groups of technologies. The research demonstrates that the presence of a system technology in a region stimulates the development of a family of related compo nent technologies, which may be located not only in the region of operation, but in also in the neighboring less technologically developed regions. This gives rise to the assumption that in the macroregion a separate technological ecosystem may form. The empirical data show that the domination of separate technologies in a region may slow down the technological development. The results of the research can be helpful while devising the plans for technological and spatial development of territories.

Suggested Citation

  • Marina V. Evseeva, 2020. "Technological differentiation in the development of the Ural macroregion’s subjects," Journal of New Economy, Ural State University of Economics, vol. 21(3), pages 132-157, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:url:izvest:v:21:y:2020:i:3:p:132-157
    DOI: 10.29141/2658-5081-2020-21-3-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://jne.usue.ru/images/download/88/7.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: http://jne.usue.ru/ru/2020/904
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.29141/2658-5081-2020-21-3-7?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Koen Frenken & Ron A. Boschma, 2007. "A theoretical framework for evolutionary economic geography: industrial dynamics and urban growth as a branching process," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(5), pages 635-649, September.
    2. Masahisa Fujita & Paul Krugman & Anthony J. Venables, 2001. "The Spatial Economy: Cities, Regions, and International Trade," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262561476, December.
    3. Robert M. Solow, 1956. "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 70(1), pages 65-94.
    4. Ron Martin & Peter Sunley, 2010. "Complexity Thinking and Evolutionary Economic Geography," Chapters, in: Ron Boschma & Ron Martin (ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    5. Elsner, Wolfram & Heinrich, Torsten & Schwardt, Henning, 2014. "The Microeconomics of Complex Economies," Elsevier Monographs, Elsevier, edition 1, number 9780124115859.
    6. Richard Nelson, 2008. "Economic Development from the Perspective of Evolutionary Economic Theory," Oxford Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(1), pages 9-21.
    7. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    8. Barro, Robert J & Sala-i-Martin, Xavier, 1997. "Technological Diffusion, Convergence, and Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 2(1), pages 1-26, March.
    9. Robert J. Stimson & Roger R. Stough & Brian H. Roberts, 2006. "Regional Economic Development," Springer Books, Springer, edition 0, number 978-3-540-34829-0, November.
    10. I. L. Lyubimov & A. G. Ospanova., 2019. "How to make an economy more complex? The determinants of complexity in historical perspective," VOPROSY ECONOMIKI, N.P. Redaktsiya zhurnala "Voprosy Economiki", vol. 2.
    11. Horst Hanusch & Andreas Pyka, 2007. "Principles of Neo-Schumpeterian Economics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(2), pages 275-289, March.
    12. Pistorius, C. W. I. & Utterback, J. M., 1997. "Multi-mode interaction among technologies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 67-84, March.
    13. E. V. Bessonova., 2018. "Analysis of Russian firms’ TFP growth in 2009—2015," VOPROSY ECONOMIKI, N.P. Redaktsiya zhurnala "Voprosy Economiki", vol. 7.
    14. Cesar A. Hidalgo & Ricardo Hausmann, 2009. "The Building Blocks of Economic Complexity," Papers 0909.3890, arXiv.org.
    15. Guanglu Zhang & Douglas Allaire & Venkatesh Shankar & Daniel A McAdams, 2019. "A case against the trickle-down effect in technology ecosystems," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-7, June.
    16. Lyubimov, I. & Gvozdeva, M. & Kazakova, M. & Nesterova, K., 2017. "Economic Complexity of Russian Regions and their Potential to Diversify," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 34(2), pages 94-122.
    17. Nigel Meade & Towhidul Islam, 1998. "Technological Forecasting---Model Selection, Model Stability, and Combining Models," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 44(8), pages 1115-1130, August.
    18. Zhang, Guanglu & McAdams, Daniel A. & Shankar, Venkatesh & Darani, Milad Mohammadi, 2017. "Modeling the evolution of system technology performance when component and system technology performances interact: Commensalism and amensalism," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 116-124.
    19. Inga Ivanova & Nataliya Smorodinskaya & Loet Leydesdorff, 2020. "On measuring complexity in a post-industrial economy: the ecosystem’s approach," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 54(1), pages 197-212, February.
    20. Russell, Martha G. & Smorodinskaya, Nataliya V., 2018. "Leveraging complexity for ecosystemic innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 114-131.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Luisa Corrado & Ron Martin & Melvyn Weeks, 2004. "Identifying And Interpreting Convergence Clusters Across Europe," Royal Economic Society Annual Conference 2004 145, Royal Economic Society.
    2. Pierre-Alexandre Balland & David L. Rigby, 2015. "The geography and evolution of complex knowledge," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1502, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jan 2015.
    3. Hidalgo, César A., 2023. "The policy implications of economic complexity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(9).
    4. Fredin, Sabrina, 2012. "The Dynamics and Evolution of Local Industries – The case of Linköping," Papers in Innovation Studies 2012/7, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    5. Danny MacKinnon & Andrew Cumbers & Andy Pike & Kean Birch & Robert McMaster, 2009. "Evolution in Economic Geography: Institutions, Political Economy, and Adaptation," Economic Geography, Clark University, vol. 85(2), pages 129-150, April.
    6. Heinrich, Torsten, 2015. "Growth Cycles, Network Effects, and Intersectoral Dependence: An Agent-Based Model and Simulation Analysis," MPRA Paper 79575, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 08 Jun 2017.
    7. Jürgen Essletzbichler & David L. Rigby, 2010. "Generalized Darwinism and Evolutionary Economic Geography," Chapters, in: Ron Boschma & Ron Martin (ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. O’Clery, Neave & Kinsella, Stephen, 2022. "Modular structure in labour networks reveals skill basins," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(5).
    9. Antonescu, Daniela, 2013. "The Regional Development Policy of Romania in the Post-Accession Period," Working Papers of National Institute for Economic Research 131209, Institutul National de Cercetari Economice (INCE).
    10. André Torre & Frederic Wallet Wallet, 2013. "The role of proximity relations in regional and territorial development processes," ERSA conference papers ersa13p792, European Regional Science Association.
    11. Muhammad Ali & Uwe Cantner, 2020. "Economic diversification and human development in Europe," Eurasian Economic Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 10(2), pages 211-235, June.
    12. Mirzadeh Phirouzabadi, Amir & Savage, David & Blackmore, Karen & Juniper, James, 2020. "The evolution of dynamic interactions between the knowledge development of powertrain systems," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 1-16.
    13. Voxi Heinrich Amavilah & Antonio Rodriguez Andres, 2022. "Knowledge Economy and the Economic Performance of African Countries: A Seemingly Unrelated and Recursive Approach," Working Papers 57, The German University in Cairo, Faculty of Management Technology.
    14. Elvira Uyarra, 2011. "Regional innovation systems revisited: networks, institutions, policy and complexity," Openloc Working Papers 1113, Public policies and local development.
    15. Guanglu Zhang & Douglas Allaire & Venkatesh Shankar & Daniel A McAdams, 2019. "A case against the trickle-down effect in technology ecosystems," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(6), pages 1-7, June.
    16. Kar, Sabyasachi & Pritchett, Lant & Raihan, Selim & Sen, Kunal, 2013. "Looking for a break: Identifying transitions in growth regimes," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 38(PB), pages 151-166.
    17. Kumar, Sanjesh & Singh, Baljeet, 2019. "Barriers to the international diffusion of technological innovations," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 74-86.
    18. Vos, Rob & Frenkel, Roberto & Ocampo, José Antonio & Palma, José Gabriel & Marfán, Manuel & Ros, Jaime & Taylor, Lance & Correa, Nelson & Cimoli, Mario, 2005. "Beyond Reforms: Structural Dynamics and Macroeconomic Vulnerability," IDB Publications (Books), Inter-American Development Bank, number 347.
    19. Mihály Borsi & Norbert Metiu, 2015. "The evolution of economic convergence in the European Union," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 657-681, March.
    20. Irwan Shah Zainal Abidin & Nor Aznin Abu Bakar & Muhammad Haseeb, 2014. "An Empirical Analysis of Exports between Malaysia and TPP Member Countries: Evidence from a Panel Cointegration (FMOLS) Model," Modern Applied Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(6), pages 238-238, December.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    technological development; Ural macroregion; total factor productivity; economics of complexity; diversity; processing industry;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O14 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Industrialization; Manufacturing and Service Industries; Choice of Technology
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • O47 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Empirical Studies of Economic Growth; Aggregate Productivity; Cross-Country Output Convergence

    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:url:izvest:v:21:y:2020:i:3:p:132-157. 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: Victor Blaginin (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/usueeru.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.