IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Factor-augmenting technology choice and monopolistic competition

  • Jakub Growiec

    (National Bank of Poland, Economic Institute; Warsaw School of Economics, Institute of Econometrics)

We put forward a tractable, interpretable, and easily generalizable framework for modeling endogeneous factor-augmenting technology choice by monopolistically competitive firms. The setup is framed within the standard Dixit and Stiglitz (1977) model of monopolistic competition. Optimal technology choice is made here either by final goods producers or (differentiated) intermediate goods producers. These two cases have different implications for the distribution of output but they yield the same aggregate level of output, the same aggregate production function, and equivalent macroeconomic dynamics. Thanks to this property, the proposed framework can be used as a building block in a variety of embedding structures, including those which require to be solved recursively (separately for the dynamics of aggregate variables and for the distribution in each time period).

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 National Bank of Poland, Economic Institute in its series National Bank of Poland Working Papers with number 129.

in new window

Length: 24
Date of creation: 2012
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:nbp:nbpmis:129
Contact details of provider: Postal: 00-919 Warszawa ul. Świętokrzyska 11/21
Phone: (0-22) 653 10 00
Fax: (0-22) 620 85 18
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. repec:tpr:qjecon:v:124:y:2009:i:4:p:1403-1448 is not listed on IDEAS
  2. David N. Weil, 1996. "Appropriate Technology and Growth," Working Papers 96-24, Brown University, Department of Economics.
  3. Daron Acemoglu, 2005. "Equilibrium Bias of Technology," NBER Working Papers 11845, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  4. Chang-Tai Hsieh & Peter Klenow, 2009. "Misallocation and Manufacturing TFP in China and India," Working Papers 09-04, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
  5. Frank Smets & Raf Wouters, 2002. "An estimated dynamic stochastic general equilibrium model of the euro area," Working Paper Research 35, National Bank of Belgium.
  6. Growiec, Jakub, 2008. "Production functions and distributions of unit factor productivities: Uncovering the link," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 101(1), pages 87-90, October.
  7. Dixit, Avinash K & Stiglitz, Joseph E, 1977. "Monopolistic Competition and Optimum Product Diversity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(3), pages 297-308, June.
  8. Jakub Growiec, 2011. "A Microfoundation for Normalized CES Production Functions with Factor-Augmenting Technical Change," DEGIT Conference Papers c016_013, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
  9. Rainer Klump & Peter McAdam & Alpo Willman, 2012. "The Normalized Ces Production Function: Theory And Empirics," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(5), pages 769-799, December.
  10. Andrew B. Bernard & Jonathan Eaton & J. Bradford Jensen & Samuel Kortum, 2000. "Plants and Productivity in International Trade," Boston University - Institute for Economic Development 105, Boston University, Institute for Economic Development.
  11. Miguel A. Le�n-Ledesma & Peter McAdam & Alpo Willman, 2010. "Identifying the Elasticity of Substitution with Biased Technical Change," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(4), pages 1330-57, September.
  12. Paul Romer, 1989. "Endogenous Technological Change," NBER Working Papers 3210, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  13. Charles I. Jones & Paul M. Romer, 2010. "The New Kaldor Facts: Ideas, Institutions, Population, and Human Capital," American Economic Journal: Macroeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 224-45, January.
  14. Francesco Caselli & Wilbur John Coleman II, 2000. "The World Technology Frontier," NBER Working Papers 7904, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  15. Daron Acemoglu, 2003. "Labor- And Capital-Augmenting Technical Change," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 1(1), pages 1-37, 03.
  16. d'Aspremont, Claude & Dos Santos Ferreira, Rodolphe & Gerard-Varet, Louis-Andre, 1996. "On the Dixit-Stiglitz Model of Monopolistic Competition," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 623-29, June.
  17. GROWIEC, Jakub, 2006. "A new class of production functions and an argument against purely labor-augmenting technical change," CORE Discussion Papers 2006056, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  18. Harcourt, G C, 1969. "Some Cambridge Controversies in the Theory of Capital," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 7(2), pages 369-405, June.
  19. Mark J. Melitz, 2002. "The Impact of Trade on Intra-Industry Reallocations and Aggregate Industry Productivity," NBER Working Papers 8881, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  20. Rainer Klump & Peter McAdam & Alpo Willman, 2007. "Factor Substitution and Factor-Augmenting Technical Progress in the United States: A Normalized Supply-Side System Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 89(1), pages 183-192, February.
  21. Nakamura, Hideki, 2009. "Micro-foundation for a constant elasticity of substitution production function through mechanization," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 464-472, September.
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:nbp:nbpmis:129. 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: (Ewa Szymecka)

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.