Innovation economics

Last updated

Innovation economics is new, and growing field of economic theory and applied/experimental economics that emphasizes innovation and entrepreneurship. It comprises both the application of any type of innovations, especially technological, but not only, into economic use. In classical economics this is the application of customer new technology into economic use; but also it could refer to the field of innovation and experimental economics that refers the new economic science developments that may be considered innovative. In his 1942 book Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy , economist Joseph Schumpeter introduced the notion of an innovation economy. He argued that evolving institutions, entrepreneurs and technological changes were at the heart of economic growth. However, it is only in recent years[ when? ] that "innovation economy," grounded in Schumpeter's ideas, has become a mainstream concept". [1]

Contents

Historical origins

Joseph Schumpeter was one of the first and most important scholars who extensively tackled the question of innovation in economics. [2] In contrast to his contemporary John Maynard Keynes, Schumpeter contended that evolving institutions, entrepreneurs and technological change were at the heart of economic growth, not independent forces that are largely unaffected by policy. He argued that "capitalism can only be understood as an evolutionary process of continuous innovation and 'creative destruction'". [3] [4]

It is only in the 21st century that a theory and narrative of economic growth focused on innovation that was grounded in Schumpeter's ideas has emerged. Innovation economics attempted to answer the fundamental problem in the puzzle of total factor productivity growth. Continual growth of output could no longer be explained only in increase of inputs used in the production process as understood in industrialization. Hence, innovation economics focused on a theory of economic creativity that would impact the theory of the firm and organization decision-making. Hovering between heterodox economics that emphasized the fragility of conventional assumptions and orthodox economics that ignored the fragility of such assumptions, innovation economics aims for joint didactics between the two. As such, it enlarges the Schumpeterian analyses of new technological system by incorporating new ideas of information and communication technology in the global economy. [5]

Innovation economics emerges from other schools of thought in economics, including new institutional economics, new growth theory, endogenous growth theory, evolutionary economics and neo-Schumpeterian economics. It provides an economic framework that explains and helps support growth in today's knowledge economy.

Leading theorists of innovation economics include both formal economists as well as management theorists, technology policy experts and others. These include Paul Romer, Elhanan Helpman, Bronwyn Hall, W. Brian Arthur, Robert Axtell, Richard R. Nelson, Richard Lipsey, Michael Porter, Keun Lee and Christopher Freeman.

Theory

Innovation economists believe that what primarily drives economic growth in today's knowledge-based economy is not capital accumulation as neoclassical economics asserts, but innovative capacity spurred by appropriable knowledge and technological externalities. Economic growth in innovation economics is the end-product of: [5] [6]

In 1970, economist Milton Friedman said in the New York Times that a business's sole purpose is to generate profits for their shareholders, and companies that pursued other missions would be less competitive, resulting in fewer benefits to owners, employees and society. [7] Yet, data over the past several decades shows that while profits matter, good firms supply far more, particularly in bringing innovation to the market. This fosters economic growth, employment gains and other society-wide benefits. Business school professor David Ahlstrom asserts that "the main goal of business is to develop new and innovative goods and services that generate economic growth while delivering benefits to society". [8]

In contrast to neoclassical economics, innovation economics offer differing perspectives on main focus, reasons for economic growth and the assumptions of context between economic actors:

Economic thoughtFocusGrowthContext
NeoclassicalMarket price signals in using scarce resourcesProductive factor accumulation (capital, labor)Individuals and firms behaving in vacuum
InnovationInnovative capacity and free enterprise to create more effective processes, products, business modelsKnowledge/technology (R&D, patents)Institutions of research, government, society

Despite the differences in economic thought, both perspectives are based on the same core premise, namely the foundation of all economic growth is the optimization of the utilization of factors and the measure of success is how well the factor utilization is optimized. Whatever the factors, it nonetheless leads to the same situation of special endowments, varying relative prices and production processes. Thus, while the two differ in theoretical concepts, innovation economics can find fertile ground in mainstream economics, rather than remain in diametric contention. [5]

Evidence

Empirical evidence worldwide points to a positive link between technological innovation and economic performance. The drive of biotech firms in Germany was due to the R&D subsidies to joint projects, network partners and close cognitive distance of collaborative partners within a cluster. For instance:

Concisely, evidence shows that innovation contributes to steady economic growth and rise in per capita income. [8]

However, some empirical studies investigating the innovation-performance-link lead to rather mixed results and indicate that the relationship is more subtle and complex than commonly assumed. [12] In particular, the relationship between innovativeness and performance seems to differ in intensity and significance across empirical contexts, environmental circumstances and conceptual dimensions.

All of the above has taken place in an era of data constraint as identified by Zvi Griliches in the 1990s. [13] Because the primary domain of innovation is commerce, the key data resides there, continually out of campus reach in reports hidden within factories, corporate offices and technical centers. This recusal still stymies progress today. Recent attempts at data transference have led not least to the positive link (above) being upgraded to exact algebra between R&D productivity and GDP, allowing prediction from one to the other. This is pending further disclosure from commercial sources, but several pertinent documents are already available. [14]

Geography

While innovation is important, it is not a happenstance occurrence as a natural harbor or natural resources are, but a deliberate, concerted effort of markets, institutions, policymakers and effective use of geographic space. In global economic restructuring, location has become a key element in establishing competitive advantage as regions focus on their unique assets to spur innovation (i.e. information technology in Silicon Valley, or digital media in Seoul). Even more, thriving metropolitan economies that carry multiple clusters (i.e. Tokyo, Chicago and London) essentially fuel national economies through their pools of human capital, innovation, quality places and infrastructure. [15] Cities become "innovative spaces" and "cradles of creativity" as drivers of innovation. They become essential to the system of innovation through the supply side as ready, available, abundant capital and labor, good infrastructure for productive activities and diversified production structures that spawn synergies and hence innovation. In addition, they grow due to the demand side as diverse population of varying occupations, ideas and skills, high and differentiated level of consumer demand and constant recreation of urban order especially infrastructure of streets, water systems, energy and transportation. [6]

Worldwide examples

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Joseph Schumpeter</span> Austrian political economist (1883–1950)

Joseph Alois Schumpeter was an Austrian political economist. He served briefly as Finance Minister of Austria in 1919. In 1932, he emigrated to the United States to become a professor at Harvard University, where he remained until the end of his career, and in 1939 obtained American citizenship.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kondratiev wave</span> Hypothesized cycle-like phenomena in the modern world economy

In economics, Kondratiev waves are hypothesized cycle-like phenomena in the modern world economy. The phenomenon is closely connected with the technology life cycle.

Creative destruction is a concept in economics that describes a process in which new innovations replace and make obsolete older innovations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Innovation</span> Practical implementation of improvements

Innovation is the practical implementation of ideas that result in the introduction of new goods or services or improvement in offering goods or services. ISO TC 279 in the standard ISO 56000:2020 defines innovation as "a new or changed entity, realizing or redistributing value". Others have different definitions; a common element in the definitions is a focus on newness, improvement, and spread of ideas or technologies.

The knowledge economy, or knowledge-based economy, is an economic system in which the production of goods and services is based principally on knowledge-intensive activities that contribute to advancement in technical and scientific innovation. The key element of value is the greater dependence on human capital and intellectual property as the source of innovative ideas, information and practices. Organisations are required to capitalise on this "knowledge" in their production to stimulate and deepen the business development process. There is less reliance on physical input and natural resources. A knowledge-based economy relies on the crucial role of intangible assets within the organisations' settings in facilitating modern economic growth.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Economies of agglomeration</span>

One of the major subfields of urban economics, economies of agglomeration, explains, in broad terms, how urban agglomeration occurs in locations where cost savings can naturally arise. This term is most often discussed in terms of economic firm productivity. However, agglomeration effects also explain some social phenomena, such as large proportions of the population being clustered in cities and major urban centers. Similar to economies of scale, the costs and benefits of agglomerating increase the larger the agglomerated urban cluster becomes. Several prominent examples of where agglomeration has brought together firms of a specific industry are: Silicon Valley and Los Angeles being hubs of technology and entertainment, respectively, in California, United States; and London, United Kingdom, being a hub of finance.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Carlota Perez</span> Venezuelan economist (born 1939)

Carlota Perez is a British-Venezuelan scholar specialized in technology and socio-economic development. She researches the concept of Techno-Economic Paradigm Shifts and the theory of great surges, a further development of Schumpeter's work on Kondratieff waves. In 2012 she was awarded the Silver Kondratieff Medal by the International N. D. Kondratieff Foundation and in 2021 she was awarded an Honorary Doctorate by Utrecht University.

Hirsh Zvi Griliches was an economist at Harvard University. The works by Zvi Griliches mostly concerned the economics of technological change, including empirical studies of diffusion of innovations and the role of R & D, patents, and education. In 2023 he had 126 publication listed in Web of Science and a Hirsch index of 49, which places him into 2% of most productive economics professors in the USA.

Entrepreneurial economics is the field of study that focuses on the study of entrepreneur and entrepreneurship within the economy. The accumulation of factors of production per se does not explain economic development. They are necessary factors of production, but they are not sufficient for economic growth.

Schumpeterian rents are earned by innovators and occur during the period of time between the introduction of an innovation and its successful diffusion. It is expected that successful innovations, in time, will be imitated, but until that occurs, the innovator will earn Schumpeterian rents. They were named after economist Joseph Schumpeter, who saw profits made by businesses as resulting from the development of new processes which disturb economic equilibrium, temporarily raising revenues above their resource costs. This type of profit is also called entrepreneurial rent.

Frederic Michael Scherer is an American economist and expert on industrial organization. Since 2006, he continues as a professor of economics at the JFK School of Government at Harvard University.

Nathan Rosenberg was an American economist specializing in the history of technology.

Christopher Freeman a British economist, recognised as one of the founders of the post-war school of Innovation Studies. He played a lead role in the development of the neo-Schumpeterian tradition focusing on the crucial role of innovation for economic development and of scientific and technological activities for well-being.

Innovation management is a combination of the management of innovation processes, and change management. It refers to product, business process, marketing and organizational innovation. Innovation management is the subject of ISO 56000 series standards being developed by ISO TC 279.

The technological innovation system is a concept developed within the scientific field of innovation studies which serves to explain the nature and rate of technological change. A Technological Innovation System can be defined as ‘a dynamic network of agents interacting in a specific economic/industrial area under a particular institutional infrastructure and involved in the generation, diffusion, and utilization of technology’.

The Other Canon Foundation is a center and network for research of heterodox economics founded by Erik Reinert. The name refers to the founders' message of there being another economic canon, alternative to the ruling neoclassical economics. Their suggestions, they claim, are valid for and can be applicated in the first, second and third world.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mariana Mazzucato</span> Italian-American economist and professor (born 1968)

Mariana Francesca Mazzucato is an Italian–American-British economist and academic. She is a professor in the Economics of Innovation and Public Value at University College London (UCL) and founding director of the UCL Institute for Innovation and Public Purpose (IIPP). She is best known for her work on dynamics of technological change, the role of the public sector in innovation, and the concept of value in economics. The New Republic have called her one of the "most important thinkers about innovation".

Zizhu chuangxin is a term frequently used in China by the Chinese government, academics, and businesses to describe the Chinese technology-led economic transformation in the past decades.

The Norwegian paradox is a dilemma of Norway's economic performance where economic performance is strong despite low R&D investment.

Neo-Schumpeterian economics is a school of thought that places technological innovation at the core of economic growth and transformation processes. It is inspired by the work of Joseph Schumpeter who coined the term creative destruction for the continuous introduction of technological change that drives growth by replacing old, less productive structures with new, more productive ones. Where Schumpeter explained the innovation drive by an exogenous factor called entrepreneurial spirits, neo-Schumpeterian economists refer to endogenous factors such as science and technology policies and corporate strategies of research and development to explain innovation. Neo-Schumpeterian economics is a form of evolutionary economics and closely related to innovation studies.

References

  1. Hoque, Faisal (February 18, 2013). "The 3 Pillars Of The Innovation Economy". Fast Company. Retrieved December 16, 2018.
  2. See Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung (1911), Business Cycles (1939) and the most famous Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (1942).
  3. Christopher Freeman (2009) «Schumpeter's Business Cycles and Techno-economic Paradigms», in Wolfgang Drechsler, Erik Reinert and Rainer Kattel (Eds.) Techno-economic Paradigms: Essays in Honor of Carlota Perez, p. 126.
  4. Schumpeter, J. A. (1943). Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy (6th ed.). Routledge. pp. 81–84.
  5. 1 2 3 Antonelli, C. (2003). The Economics of Innovation, New Technologies, and Structural Change. London: Routledge. ISBN   978-0415406437.
  6. 1 2 Johnson, Bjorn (2008). "Cities, systems of innovation and economic development". Innovation: Management, Policy, and Practice. 10 (2/3): 146–55. doi:10.5172/impp.453.10.2-3.146. S2CID   20510519.
  7. Friedman, M. (September 13, 1970). "A Friedman doctrine—; The Social Responsibility Of Business Is to Increase Its Profits". New York Times Magazine .
  8. 1 2 Ahlstrom, D. (2010). "Innovation and Growth: How Business Contributes to Society". Academy of Management Perspectives. 24 (3): 11–24. doi:10.5465/amp.24.3.11.
  9. Fornahl, D.; Broekel, T.; Boschma, R. (2011). "What drives patent performance of German biotech firms? The impact of R&D subsidies, knowledge networks and their location". Papers in Regional Science. 90 (2): 395–418. Bibcode:2011PRegS..90..395F. doi: 10.1111/j.1435-5957.2011.00361.x .
  10. Peilei, F. (2011). "Innovation capacity and economic development: China and India". Economic Change and Restructuring (Submitted manuscript). 44 (1/2): 49–73. doi:10.1007/s10644-010-9088-2. hdl: 10419/63470 . S2CID   53555230.
  11. Steil, B.; Victor, D. G.; Nelson, R. R. (2002). Technological Innovation and Economics Performance. A Council of Foreign Relations Book. Princeton University Press.
  12. Salge, T. O.; Vera, A. (2009). "Hospital innovativeness and organizational performance". Health Care Management Review . 34 (1): 54–67 [in particular pp. 56–58]. doi:10.1097/01.HMR.0000342978.84307.80. PMID   19104264.
  13. Griliches. Z ‘Productivity, R&D, and the Data Constraint’ American Economic Review, Vol. 84, No. 1, (March 1994) pp. 1 – 23
  14. Farrell C.J.‘Economics, R&D and Growth', Archived 2019-06-01 at the Wayback Machine
  15. Mark, M.; Katz, B.; Rahman, S.; Warren, D. (2008). "MetroPolicy: Shaping A New Federal Partnership for a Metropolitan Nation". Brookings Institution: Metropolitan Policy Program Report. 2008: 4–103.

Further reading