IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

Towards a Dynamic (Schumpeterian) Welfare Economics

  • Dolfsma, W.A.

For an economy where knowledge plays an increasingly important role in shaping its dynamics, economics needs a dynamic (Schumpeterian) welfare theory. This paper sketches the role of knowledge in an economy and argues that a static Paretian welfare economics is inadequate, or at least needs to be supplemented. As suggested by the work of Schumpeter, a dynamic welfare economics acknowledges the role of knowledge. In a dynamic welfare economics, I suggest, different costs of communication are central, indicating that knowledge may not be readily diffused or exchanged. Recent developments in Intellectual Property Right (IPR) law are evaluated to determine the extent to which they affect communication costs and thus future economic welfare.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL:
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam in its series ERIM Report Series Research in Management with number ERS-2004-026-ORG.

in new window

Date of creation: 26 Apr 2004
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:ems:eureri:1264
Contact details of provider: Postal:
RSM Erasmus University & Erasmus School of Economics, PoBox 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam

Phone: 31-10-408 1182
Fax: 31-10-408 9020
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Steven Shavell & Tanguy van Ypersele, 1999. "Rewards versus Intellectual Property Rights," NBER Working Papers 6956, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  2. Takalo, Tuomas & Kanniainen, Vesa, 2000. "Do patents slow down technological progress?: Real options in research, patenting, and market introduction," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 18(7), pages 1105-1127, October.
  3. Dolfsma, W.A., 2005. "Collective Consuming: Consumers as Subcontractors on Electronic Markets," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2005-020-ORG, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
  4. David Encaoua & Abraham Hollander, 2002. "Competition Policy and Innovation," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 18(1), pages 63-79, Spring.
  5. Cowan Robin & David Paul & Foray Dominique, 1999. "The Explicit Economics of Knowledge Codification and Tacitness," Research Memorandum 025, Maastricht University, Maastricht Economic Research Institute on Innovation and Technology (MERIT).
  6. 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.
  7. Dudley, L., 1996. "Communication and Economic Growth," Cahiers de recherche 9620, Universite de Montreal, Departement de sciences economiques.
  8. Landes, William M & Posner, Richard A, 1989. "An Economic Analysis of Copyright Law," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(2), pages 325-63, June.
  9. Nelson, Richard R., 2004. "The market economy, and the scientific commons," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 455-471, April.
  10. Gerben Van Der Panne & Wilfred Dolfsma, 2003. "The odd role of proximity in knowledge relations: high-tech in the Netherlands," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 94(4), pages 453-462, 09.
  11. Paul Romer, 2002. "When Should We Use Intellectual Property Rights?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 213-216, May.
  12. Emily Dunt & Joshua S. Gans & Stephen P. King, 2002. "The Economic Consequences of DVD Regional Restrictions," Economic Papers, The Economic Society of Australia, vol. 21(1), pages 32-45, 03.
  13. Kai-Lung Hui & Ivan P.L. Png, 2002. "On the Supply of Creative Work: Evidence from the Movies," Law and Economics 0201002, EconWPA, revised 18 Jan 2002.
  14. Romer, Paul, 1994. "New goods, old theory, and the welfare costs of trade restrictions," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 5-38, February.
  15. Paul M Romer, 1999. "Increasing Returns and Long-Run Growth," Levine's Working Paper Archive 2232, David K. Levine.
  16. Adams, William James & Encaoua, David, 1994. "Distorting the direction of technological change," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(3-4), pages 663-673, April.
  17. Milgrom, Paul & Roberts, John, 1988. " Communication and Inventory as Substitutes in Organizing Production," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 90(3), pages 275-89.
  18. Denzau, Arthur T & North, Douglass C, 1994. "Shared Mental Models: Ideologies and Institutions," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 3-31.
  19. Richard R. Nelson, 1959. "The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 67, pages 297.
  20. Audretsch, David B, 1998. "Agglomeration and the Location of Innovative Activity," CEPR Discussion Papers 1974, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  21. Levinthal, Daniel A, 1998. "The Slow Pace of Rapid Technological Change: Gradualism and Punctuation in Technological Change," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(2), pages 217-47, June.
  22. Richard R. Nelson, 1981. "Assessing Private Enterprise: An Exegesis of Tangled Doctrine," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 12(1), pages 93-111, Spring.
  23. Mark Blaug, 2001. "Is Competition Such a Good Thing? Static Efficiency versus Dynamic Efficiency," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, vol. 19(1), pages 37-48, August.
  24. Boldrin, Michele & Levine, David, 2002. "The Case Against Intellectual Property," CEPR Discussion Papers 3273, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  25. Takeyama, Lisa N, 1994. "The Welfare Implications of Unauthorized Reproduction of Intellectual Property in the Presence of Demand Network Externalities," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 42(2), pages 155-66, June.
  26. Richard C. Levin & Alvin K. Klevorick & Richard R. Nelson & Sidney G. Winter, 1987. "Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 18(3), pages 783-832.
  27. Klaes, Matthias, 1997. "Sociotechnical constituencies, game theory, and the diffusion of compact discs. An inter-disciplinary investigation into the market for recorded music," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 25(8), pages 1221-1234, January.
  28. Rosenberg, Nathan, 1990. "Why do firms do basic research (with their own money)?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 165-174, April.
  29. Vickers, John, 1995. "Concepts of Competition," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 47(1), pages 1-23, January.
  30. Arundel, Anthony, 2001. "The relative effectiveness of patents and secrecy for appropriation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 611-624, April.
  31. Rosenberg,Nathan, 1994. "Exploring the Black Box," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521452700, November.
  32. Wilfred Dolfsma, 2001. "Metaphors of Knowledge in Economics," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 59(1), pages 71-91.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ems:eureri:1264. 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: (RePub)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.