IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/koe/wpaper/0915.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Competing process and quality innovation in a model of occupational choice

Author

Listed:
  • Colin Davis

    () (Kobe University, Graduate School of Economics)

  • Yasunobu Tomoda

    () (Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research)

Abstract

We develop a simple model of endogenous growth and occupational choice in which skill differentiated workers choose between three types of employment activity: production, process innovation,and quality innovation. Incumbent firms invest in process innovation to reduce production costs and market entrants invest in quality improvements in order to capture the market from vintage product lines. We use this framework to examine innovation incentives for incumbent firms in an environment of creative destruction and find that there are two plausible and stable patterns of product evolution: a corner equilibrium with quality growth alone, and an interior equilibrium with both productivity growth and quality growth. We also show that the process innovation of an interior equilibrium has important policy implications for economic growth.

Suggested Citation

  • Colin Davis & Yasunobu Tomoda, 2009. "Competing process and quality innovation in a model of occupational choice," Discussion Papers 0915, Graduate School of Economics, Kobe University.
    • Handle: RePEc:koe:wpaper:0915
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.kobe-u.ac.jp/RePEc/koe/wpaper/2009/0915.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Yeaple, Stephen Ross, 2005. "A simple model of firm heterogeneity, international trade, and wages," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 1-20, January.
    2. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1991. "Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 58(1), pages 43-61.
    3. Bottazzi, Laura & Peri, Giovanni, 2003. "Innovation and spillovers in regions: Evidence from European patent data," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 687-710, August.
    4. Pietro Peretto & Sjak Smulders, 2002. "Technological Distance, Growth And Scale Effects," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 112(481), pages 603-624, July.
    5. Alwyn Young, 1998. "Growth without Scale Effects," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 106(1), pages 41-63, February.
    6. Peretto, Pietro F, 1996. "Sunk Costs, Market Structure, and Growth," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 37(4), pages 895-923, November.
    7. A. D. Roy, 1951. "Some Thoughts On The Distribution Of Earnings," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 135-146.
    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. Colin Davis & Yasunobu Tomoda, 2018. "Competing incremental and breakthrough innovation in a model of product evolution," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 123(3), pages 225-247, April.
    2. Elie Gray & André Grimaud, 2016. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 101-142, March.
    3. 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).
    4. Chu, Angus C. & Cozzi, Guido & Galli, Silvia, 2012. "Does intellectual monopoly stimulate or stifle innovation?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(4), pages 727-746.
    5. Christopher Laincz & Pietro Peretto, 2006. "Scale effects in endogenous growth theory: an error of aggregation not specification," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 263-288, September.
    6. Angus C. Chu & Yuichi Furukawa & Lei Ji, 2016. "Patents, R&D subsidies, and endogenous market structure in a schumpeterian economy," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 82(3), pages 809-825, January.
    7. Elie Gray & André Grimaud, 2016. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 101-142, March.
    8. Gwanghoon Lee, 2006. "Optimal R&D Competition and Economic Growth," Korean Economic Review, Korean Economic Association, vol. 22, pages 267-297.
    9. Colin R. Davis, 2009. "Interregional Knowledge Spillovers And Occupational Choice In A Model Of Free Trade And Endogenous Growth," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(5), pages 855-876, December.
    10. Takaaki Morimoto, 2018. "Occupational choice and entrepreneurship: effects of R&D subsidies on economic growth," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 123(2), pages 161-185, March.
    11. 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.
    12. Christopher A. Laincz & Pietro F. Peretto, 2004. "Scale Effects, An Error of Aggregation Not Specification: Empirical Evidence," DEGIT Conference Papers c009_037, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    13. Jaewon Jung, 2019. "Technology, skill, and growth in a global economy," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 68(3), pages 609-641, October.
    14. James B. Ang & Jakob B. Madsen, 2011. "Can Second-Generation Endogenous Growth Models Explain the Productivity Trends and Knowledge Production in the Asian Miracle Economies?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 1360-1373, November.
    15. Piotr Stryszowski, 2005. "Intellectual Property Rights and National R&D Subsidy Policies in a Two-Country Schumpeterian Framework," DEGIT Conference Papers c010_027, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    16. Joonkyung Ha & Peter Howitt, 2007. "Accounting for Trends in Productivity and R&D: A Schumpeterian Critique of Semi-Endogenous Growth Theory," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 39(4), pages 733-774, June.
    17. 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.
    18. Antoine Gervais, 2015. "Product quality, firm heterogeneity and trade liberalization," The Journal of International Trade & Economic Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(4), pages 523-541, June.
    19. T. Gries & R. Grundmann & I. Palnau & M. Redlin, 2017. "Innovations, growth and participation in advanced economies - a review of major concepts and findings," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 293-351, April.
    20. Marcus Berliant & Masahisa Fujita, 2011. "The Dynamics of Knowledge Diversity and Economic Growth," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 77(4), pages 856-884, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Process innovation; Quality innovation; Endogenous growth; Occupational choice;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:koe:wpaper:0915. 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: (Kimiaki Shirahama) The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Kimiaki Shirahama to update the entry or send us the correct email address. General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fekobjp.html .

    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 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.

    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.