We present a new evolutionary political economy approach to the study of transition dynamics based on a co-evolutionary model of differential citizen contributions to competing 'utopias'-market fundamentalism, socialism, and environmentalism. We model sustainability transitions as an outcome of 'utopia competition' in which environmentalism manages to coexist with the market, while socialism vanishes. Our simulation-based framework suggests that the individual economic contributions of citizens to the battle of ideas-both the distribution within a utopia, and the interaction between different utopias-are crucial but much overlooked micro-factors in explaining the dynamics of sustainability transitions.

In this paper, we seek to shed new light on the sources of industrial leadership and catch-up in science-based industries. We propose an evolutionary model which incorporates scientists' training and migration, endogenous R&D decisions and the possibility of funding capital accumulation through debt. The analysis of the model allows us to characterize a robust pattern of industrial catch-up. Likewise, the sensitivity analysis shows which parameters act as pro-catch up factors or slow down the process. The identification of stationary-state conditions of the model helps us to interpret the simulations, and highlights crucial interactions between technology-supporting institutions and market demand at the basis of industrial catch-up. Finally, the robustness analysis reveals further interdependencies among innovation, scientist mobility and demand.

No abstract

No abstract

In this paper, we seek to analyse the role of national university systems in combination with technological and market factors as sources of industrial leadership and industry growth in sciencebased industries. We propose a model in which national university systems and their respective national firms and industries are considered as co-evolving. National firms compete on a worldwide level and they rely on the progress of science and the availability of scientists to innovate. As the global industry develops, firms try to mold their national university systems, but they achieve different degrees of success. Apart from highlighting the role of institutional responsiveness as a source of competitive advantage, our model points to the access to essential inputs for production, the technological and strategic characteristics of firms, the international diffusion of knowledge, and the initial distribution of market demand as key sources of leadership and industry growth. The international mobility of scientists seems to foster the emergence of industrial leadership shifts.