© 1994 Oxford University Press
research-article |
The Co-evolution of Technology, Industrial Structure, and Supporting Institutions
School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University 420 West 118th Street, New York, NY 10227, USA
Abstract
There is a large intellectual discrepancy between most formal growth models described by economists and descriptions of growth in economic history. This paper draws on an evolutionary theory of economic growth that brings together appreciative theorizing regarding growth and formal theorizing. It aims to piece together a relatively coherent appreciative theoretical account of economic development at a sectoral level by laying out a story of the growth, and development, of a manufacturing sector, from birth to maturity, and perhaps until death, that seems to fit many cases and which can serve as a target for formalization. The paper first describes and tries to link two broad bodies of appreciative evolutionary theoretic writing. The first proposes that a new technology develops along a relatively standard track from the time it is born, to its maturity, and that firm and industry structure ‘coevolve’ with the technology. The other is concerned with the development of institutions in response to changing economic conditions, incentives, and pressures. The paper then considers ‘punctuated equilibrium’ before concluding with a consideration of two economic developmental implications that appear to flow from the analysis. One concerns the pattern of change of productivity, of capital intensity, and relative variables associated with economic growth, as a technology and industry structure develop. The other is concerned with implicitly cross-country comparisons, and is focused on how ‘comparative advantage’ develops in a new industry.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  F. Malerba, R. Nelson, L. Orsenigo, and S. Winter Vertical integration and disintegration of computer firms: a history-friendly model of the coevolution of the computer and semiconductor industries Ind. Corp. Change, April 1, 2008; 17(2): 197 - 231. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. H. Grote Foreign banks' attraction to the financial centre Frankfurt--an inverted 'U'-shaped relationship J. Econ. Geogr., March 1, 2008; 8(2): 239 - 258. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Fatas-Villafranca, J. Sanchez-Choliz, and G. Jarne Modeling the co-evolution of national industries and institutions Ind. Corp. Change, February 1, 2008; 17(1): 65 - 108. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 D. Leslie and N. M. Rantisi Governing the Design Economy in MontrEal, Canada Urban Affairs Review, January 1, 2006; 41(3): 309 - 337. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 P. P. Patrucco The emergence of technology systems: knowledge production and distribution in the case of the Emilian plastics district Camb. J. Econ., January 1, 2005; 29(1): 37 - 56. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Dequech Uncertainty: individuals, institutions and technology Camb. J. Econ., May 1, 2004; 28(3): 365 - 378. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. M. Carman and L. V. Dominguez Organizational Transformations in Transition Economies: Hypotheses Journal of Macromarketing, December 1, 2001; 21(2): 164 - 180. [Abstract] [PDF]
|
|