IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/124900.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Innovation and Income Inequalities: Comparing Entrepreneurial State and Standard Welfare Policies

Author

Listed:
  • Castellacci, Fulvio

Abstract

Innovation fosters economic growth and the long-run dynamics of national economies. However, recent literature shows that innovation is also a source of increasing income inequalities. Public policies face thus an important trade-off between efficiency and equity effects of innovation. What are the possible policy strategies to address this trade-off? The paper presents a model in which innovations can be developed by both private firms and public companies. Technological change increases the profit share in the long-run, exacerbating income inequalities between firms’ owners, employed workers, and the unemployed. I empirically calibrate the model for the US economy and carry out a simulation analysis to investigate the effects of different policies aimed at reducing the inequality effects of innovation. Specifically, the analysis compares two distinct policy strategies: one is based on a standard economic policy approach that increases taxes to finance welfare spending; the other is based on a new approach – the Entrepreneurial State – in which the profits of innovations developed by public R&D companies are used to finance welfare programs. The results point out the advantages and drawbacks of different strategies and show that the optimal policy strategy largely depends on the policy maker’s preferences regarding the income distribution.

Suggested Citation

  • Castellacci, Fulvio, 2024. "Innovation and Income Inequalities: Comparing Entrepreneurial State and Standard Welfare Policies," MPRA Paper 124900, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Apr 2025.
  • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:124900
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/124900/1/MPRA_paper_124900.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ezra Oberfield & Gene M. Grossman, 2022. "The Elusive Explanation for the Declining Labor Share," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 14(1), pages 93-124, August.
    2. Philippe Aghion & Ufuk Akcigit & Antonin Bergeaud & Richard Blundell & David Hemous, 2019. "Innovation and Top Income Inequality," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(1), pages 1-45.
    3. David Card & Jochen Kluve & Andrea Weber, 2010. "Active Labour Market Policy Evaluations: A Meta-Analysis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 120(548), pages 452-477, November.
    4. David Autor & David Dorn & Lawrence F Katz & Christina Patterson & John Van Reenen, 2020. "The Fall of the Labor Share and the Rise of Superstar Firms [“Automation and New Tasks: How Technology Displaces and Reinstates Labor”]," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 135(2), pages 645-709.
    5. Arnaud Costinot & Iván Werning, 2023. "Robots, Trade, and Luddism: A Sufficient Statistic Approach to Optimal Technology Regulation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 90(5), pages 2261-2291.
    6. Jakob B Madsen & Antonio Minniti & Francesco Venturini, 2021. "Wealth Inequality in the Long Run: A Schumpeterian Growth Perspective [The race between man and machine: implications of technology for growth, factor shares, and employment]," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(633), pages 476-497.
    7. Peretto, Pietro F., 2007. "Corporate taxes, growth and welfare in a Schumpeterian economy," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 137(1), pages 353-382, November.
    8. Berg, Andrew & Buffie, Edward F. & Zanna, Luis-Felipe, 2018. "Should we fear the robot revolution? (The correct answer is yes)," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 117-148.
    9. Daron Acemoglu & Pascual Restrepo, 2018. "The Race between Man and Machine: Implications of Technology for Growth, Factor Shares, and Employment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 108(6), pages 1488-1542, June.
    10. Joao Guerreiro & Sergio Rebelo & Pedro Teles, 2022. "Should Robots Be Taxed?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 89(1), pages 279-311.
    11. Jaimovich, Nir & Saporta-Eksten, Itay & Siu, Henry & Yedid-Levi, Yaniv, 2021. "The macroeconomics of automation: Data, theory, and policy analysis," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 1-16.
    12. Fulvio Castellacci, 2023. "Innovation and social welfare: A new research agenda," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 1156-1191, September.
    13. Daron Acemoglu & Todd Lensman, 2024. "Regulating Transformative Technologies," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 6(3), pages 359-376, September.
    14. Paolo Giovanni Piacquadio, 2017. "A Fairness Justification of Utilitarianism," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 85, pages 1261-1276, July.
    15. Madsen, Jakob & Strulik, Holger, 2020. "Technological change and inequality in the very long run," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 129(C).
    16. Prettner, Klaus & Strulik, Holger, 2020. "Innovation, automation, and inequality: Policy challenges in the race against the machine," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 249-265.
    17. Hillman, Arye L, 1982. "Declining Industries and Political-Support Protectionist Motives," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(5), pages 1180-1187, December.
    18. Mario Benassi & Matteo Landoni, 2019. "State-owned enterprises as knowledge-explorer agents," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(2), pages 218-241, February.
    19. Adler, Matthew D. & Fleurbaey, Marc (ed.), 2016. "The Oxford Handbook of Well-Being and Public Policy," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199325818, Decembrie.
    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. Burkhard Heer & Andreas Irmen & Bernd Süssmuth, 2023. "Explaining the decline in the US labor share: taxation and automation," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 30(6), pages 1481-1528, December.
    2. Mr. Andrew Berg & Lahcen Bounader & Nikolay Gueorguiev & Hiroaki Miyamoto & Mr. Kenji Moriyama & Ryota Nakatani & Luis-Felipe Zanna, 2021. "For the Benefit of All: Fiscal Policies and Equity-Efficiency Trade-offs in the Age of Automation," IMF Working Papers 2021/187, International Monetary Fund.
    3. Pablo Casas & José L. Torres, 2024. "Government size and automation," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 31(3), pages 780-807, June.
    4. Nakatani, Ryota, 2024. "Optimal Taxation in the Automated Era," MPRA Paper 121347, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Ichiro Muto & Fumitaka Nakamura & Makoto Nirei, 2024. "Digitalization, Entrepreneurship, and Wealth Inequality," IMES Discussion Paper Series 24-E-01, Institute for Monetary and Economic Studies, Bank of Japan.
    6. Guimarães, Luís & Mazeda Gil, Pedro, 2022. "Explaining the Labor Share: Automation Vs Labor Market Institutions," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    7. Kenichiro Ikeshita & Hideaki Uchida & Tamotsu Nakamura, 2023. "Automation and economic growth in a task‐based neoclassical growth model," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 74(4), pages 908-927, November.
    8. Nakatani, Ryota, 2022. "Optimal fiscal policy in the automated economy," MPRA Paper 115003, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Hideki Nakamura & Joseph Zeira, 2024. "Automation and unemployment: help is on the way," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 215-250, June.
    10. Koch, Michael & Manuylov, Ilya, 2023. "Measuring the technological bias of robot adoption and its implications for the aggregate labor share," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(9).
    11. Kosuke ARAI & Ippei FUJIWARA & Toyoichiro SHIROTA, 2021. "Robot Penetration and Task Changes," Discussion papers 21093, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    12. Guimarães, Luís & Mazeda Gil, Pedro, 2022. "Looking ahead at the effects of automation in an economy with matching frictions," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 144(C).
    13. Xu, Shaofeng & Liu, Tao & Liu, Fengliang, 2024. "On the role of automation in an epidemic," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 160(C).
    14. Oscar Afonso & Rosa Forte, 2023. "How powerful are fiscal and monetary policies in a directed technical change model with humans and robots?," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(3), pages 3008-3032, July.
    15. Madsen, Jakob & Minniti, Antonio & Venturini, Francesco, 2024. "Declining research productivity and income inequality: A centenary perspective," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    16. Pi, Jiancai & Fan, Yanwei, 2021. "The impact of robots on equilibrium unemployment of unionized workers," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 663-675.
    17. Venturini, Francesco, 2022. "Intelligent technologies and productivity spillovers: Evidence from the Fourth Industrial Revolution," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 194(C), pages 220-243.
    18. Jacob, Tinu Iype & Paul, Sunil, 2024. "Labour income share, market power and automation: Evidence from an emerging economy," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 37-45.
    19. Angus C. Chu & Yuichi Furukawa & Sushanta Mallick & Pietro Peretto & Xilin Wang, 2021. "Dynamic effects of patent policy on innovation and inequality in a Schumpeterian economy," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 71(4), pages 1429-1465, June.
    20. Pan, Junyu & Cifuentes-Faura, Javier & Zhao, Xin & Liu, Xiaoqian, 2024. "Unlocking the impact of digital technology progress and entry dynamics on firm's total factor productivity in Chinese industries," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation; income inequalities; labor share; public policies; Entrepreneurial State; public R&D.;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O1 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development
    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • O4 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity
    • O40 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - General

    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:pra:mprapa:124900. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.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.