IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Industrialization, Technological Change and Long-Run Growth


  • Peretto, Pietro F.


I explore the interaction of market structure and growth in a model of industrialization and endogenous technological change. Along the industrialization path, new manufacturing firms enter the market and expand the variety of goods available to consumers. Competing in the marketplace, firms accumulate knowledge capital in order to reduce costs, offer lower prices, and win market share. As each firm invests in R&D, it contributes to the pool of public knowledge. These intertemporal spillovers allow the economy to grow at a constant rate in steady state. This is reached when entry peters out and the economy settles into a stable industrial structure. The dynamic interdependence of price, investment and entry decisions produce interesting results. The scale effect is zero in this model. An increase in the size of the labor force leads to entry and a larger number of firms. This crowding-in effect induces dispersion of R&D resources across firms, and completely offsets the positive effect of the scale of the economy on the firms' incentives to do R&D. The transitional dynamics provide additional insights. Along the transition path, as entry takes place and the number of firms increases, the growth rate of productivity falls toward its steady state value. The intuition is simple. At the time of the increase in the labor force, the number of firms is pre-determined and does not change. The larger labor supply leads to an increase in aggregate R&D which yields an initially higher growth rate. As entry begins, the dispersion effect due to the crowding of the market kicks in and drives down the rate of growth. Market performance involves two dimensions in this model: the rate of growth of consumption of each good and the variety of consumption goods. Firms do not internalize the trade-off between growth and variety since they do not take into account that establishing in-house R&D programs builds up barriers to entry and reduces product variety. This leads to a Pareto inefficient allocation of resources. The market grows too much and supplies too little variety. This result obtains despite the fact that the presence of intertemporal spillovers, not internalized by the individual firms, should lead to too little growth.

Suggested Citation

  • Peretto, Pietro F., 1996. "Industrialization, Technological Change and Long-Run Growth," Working Papers 96-22, Duke University, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:duk:dukeec:96-22

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    File Function: main text
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Boyle Kevin J. & Desvousges William H. & Johnson F. Reed & Dunford Richard W. & Hudson Sara P., 1994. "An Investigation of Part-Whole Biases in Contingent-Valuation Studies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 64-83, July.
    2. Haab, Timothy C. & McConnell, Kenneth E., 1997. "Referendum Models and Negative Willingness to Pay: Alternative Solutions," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 251-270, February.
    3. Smith, V. Kerry & Osborne, Laura L., 1996. "Do Contingent Valuation Estimates Pass a "Scope" Test? A Meta-analysis," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 287-301, November.
    4. Diamond, Peter, 1996. "Testing the Internal Consistency of Contingent Valuation Surveys," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 30(3), pages 337-347, May.
    5. Paul R. Portney, 1994. "The Contingent Valuation Debate: Why Economists Should Care," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 3-17, Fall.
    6. Richard T. Carson & W. Michael Hanemann, & Raymond J. Kopp & Jon A. Krosnick & Robert C. Mitchell & Stanley Presser & Paul A. Rudd & V. Kerry Smith & Michael Conaway & Kerry Martin, 1997. "Temporal Reliability of Estimates from Contingent Valuation," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 73(2), pages 151-163.
    7. Richard T. Carson & W. Michael Hanemann & Raymond J. Kopp & Jon A. Krosnick & Robert Cameron Mitchell & Stanley Presser, 1998. "Referendum Design And Contingent Valuation: The Noaa Panel'S No-Vote Recommendation," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(3), pages 484-487, August.
    8. Ronald Cummings & Glenn Harrison, 1995. "The measurement and decomposition of nonuse values: A critical review," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 5(3), pages 225-247, April.
    9. Peter A. Diamond & Jerry A. Hausman, 1994. "Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better than No Number?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 45-64, Fall.
    10. Daniel McFadden, 1994. "Contingent Valuation and Social Choice," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(4), pages 689-708.
    11. W. Michael Hanemann, 1994. "Valuing the Environment through Contingent Valuation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 19-43, Fall.
    12. Griffin, Charles C, et al, 1995. "Contingent Valuation and Actual Behavior: Predicting Connections to New Water Systems in the State of Kerala, India," World Bank Economic Review, World Bank Group, vol. 9(3), pages 373-395, September.
    13. Carson, R.T. & Mitchell, R.C. & Hanemann, W.M. & Kopp, R.J. & Presser, S. & Ruud, P.A., 1992. "A Contingent Valuation Study of Lost Passive Use Values Resulting From the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill," MPRA Paper 6984, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)


    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.

    Cited by:

    1. Cristiana Benedetti-Fasil & Miguel Sanchez-Martinez & Peder Christensen, 2017. "Entry barriers and their macroeconomic impact in the EU: an assessment using QUEST III," JRC Working Papers JRC108932, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).

    More about this item

    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
    • O40 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - General


    Access and download statistics


    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:duk:dukeec:96-22. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Department of Economics Webmaster). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.