Phases of economic development and the transitional dynamics of an innovation–education growth model

Iacopetta, Maurizio

doi:10.1016/j.euroecorev.2009.06.011

Cited by 34 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This empirical result is in line with recent distance-to-frontier threshold models in which human capital is the key factor enabling imitation-based catching up (e.g. Howitt and Mayer-Foulkes, 2005;Iacopetta, 2010).…”

Section: Proposition 1 the Internal Dynamics Of Innovative Capabilitysupporting

confidence: 75%

“…Specifically, threshold externalities models are based on the idea that the interactions between countries" R&D and innovation activities, on the one hand, and human capital and imitation activities, on the other, may generate different country clubs, and explain the transition of each national system from one stage of development to a more advanced one (Azariadis and Drazen, 1990;Howitt, 2000;Galor and Weil, 2000;Galor, 2005;Howitt and Mayer-Foulkes, 2005;Acemoglu et al, 2006;Iacopetta, 2010). In particular, these models argue that the key to explain countries" shift from an imitation to an innovation stage is the return to investment in human capital: this tends to grow during the development process, thus making it progressively more profitable for individuals to invest in education and, hence, sustaining further technological progress in the future.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The dynamics of national innovation systems: A panel cointegration analysis of the coevolution between innovative capability and absorptive capacity

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper puts forward the idea that the dynamics of national innovation systems is driven by the coevolution of two main dimensions: innovative capability and absorptive capacity. The empirical analysis employs a broad set of indicators measuring national innovative capabilities and absorptive capacity for a panel of 98 countries in the period 1980-2008, and makes use of panel cointegration analysis to investigate long-run relationships and coevolution patterns among these variables. The results indicate that the dynamics of national systems of innovation is driven by the coevolution of three innovative capability variables (technological output, scientific output, innovative input), on the one hand, and three absorptive capacity factors (income per capita, infrastructures and international trade), on the other.Keywords: national systems of innovation; innovative capability; absorptive capacity; economic growth and development; coevolution; panel cointegration analysis.JEL codes: O1, O3, O4 1 IntroductionThe study of national innovation systems (NIS) has attracted considerable attention in the last two decades (Lundvall, 2007). While a substantial amount of research has been devoted to the investigation of cross-country differences in technological capabilities and the related institutional and policy framework, much less attention has so far been given to the analysis of the dynamics of national systems over time.This is unfortunate, since evolution and change represent indeed key aspects of Schumpeterian research, which did in fact constitute some of the crucial motivations for the original development of the NIS approach. The lack of focus on dynamic aspects is partly explained by the non-availability of time series data for a sufficiently long period of time, and partly by the analytical and methodological difficulties that are faced when it comes to model and empirically analyse the dynamics of complex evolving systems (Foster, 1991).The Schumpeterian literature on innovation and economic growth does however provide important insights and key building blocks for developing an analytically stronger framework to study NIS dynamics. First, idea-based new growth models point out the important role of national innovation capability for the growth of the economic system (Romer, 1990;Furman, Porter and Stern, 2002). Secondly, technology-gap models highlight the important role played by countries" absorptive capacity for imitation-based catching up, and show the large set of factors that contribute to define a country"s absorptive capacity (Abramovitz, 1986;Verspagen, 1991;Godinho et al., 2006;Fagerberg and Srholec, 2008).Most of the empirical literature on innovation and growth, though, has so far neglected the study of two important issues. The first is that, while a substantial amount of research has been devoted to the analysis of the impacts of innovation on economic growth, the investigation of the determinants and drivers of national innovative activities, has so far received only limited attention...

show abstract

Section: Proposition 1 the Internal Dynamics Of Innovative Capabilitysupporting

confidence: 75%

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

The dynamics of national innovation systems: A panel cointegration analysis of the coevolution between innovative capability and absorptive capacity

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, a sequence in which innovation precedes education could agree with historical evidence as suggested by Iacopetta (2010). He also shows that the AFS model is able to generate transition dynamics in which innovation precedes education as well as the typical education-innovation sequence.…”

Section: Simulation Resultssupporting

confidence: 55%

“…Then, we show that the model is able to replicate the typical sequence of development in which education precedes innovation (e.g., Funke and Strulik, 2000) and also a transition in which innovation precedes knowledge formation. As recently argued by Iacopetta (2010), an innovation-education sequence could agree better than an education-innovation transition with the empirical fact that the rise in formal education to the masses follows rather than precedes the process of industrialization. Adding duplication externalities as well as R&D spillovers, we show that the model is able to generate a realistic transition yielding a roughly constant growth rate during the last century, together with increasing time allocated to education and (more modestly than to education) to research.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 91%

The Transitional Dynamics of an Endogenous Growth Model: Generalizing Production Functions

Gómez

Sequeira

2012

Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics &Amp; Econometrics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper devises a class of endogenous growth models with physical capital, human capital and product varieties. Unlike previous literature, we introduce a general specification of production that allows for disentangling the gains from specialization from the monopolistic markup. The consequences of separating both parameters on the equilibrium dynamics of the model are analyzed. We find that the long-run growth rate ceases to depend on the markup when it is disentangled from the returns to specialization, and the same happens with the conditions for saddle-path stability. Numerical simulations show that the steady-state equilibria are more prone to be stable in the model that disentangles parameters. Furthermore, the model is able to generate a rich variety of development scenarios, accounting for a number of stylized facts related to the development process of industrialized countries. * Helpful comments of an anonymous referee are gratefully acknowledged.

show abstract

“…Studies that focus on the transition from imitation to innovation includeWalz (1996),Currie et al (1999), Perez-Sebastian (2007),Mondal andGupta (2009), andIacopetta (2010). However, none of them discussed the role of public capital in that context.…”

mentioning

confidence: 96%

Middle-income growth traps

Agénor

Canuto

2015

Research in Economics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper studies the existence of middle-income growth traps in a twoperiod overlapping generations model of economic growth with two types of labor and endogenous occupational choices. It also distinguishes between "basic" and "advanced" infrastructure, with the latter promoting design activities, and accounts for a knowledge network externality associated with product diversification. Multiple steady-state equilibria may emerge, one of them taking the form of a low-growth trap characterized by low productivity growth and a misallocation of talent-defined as a relatively low share of high-ability workers in design activities. Improved access to advanced infrastructure may help to escape from that trap. The implications of other public policies, including the protection of property rights and labor market reforms, are also discussed. JEL Classification Numbers: H54, O31, O41.

show abstract

Phases of economic development and the transitional dynamics of an innovation–education growth model

Cited by 34 publications

References 24 publications

The dynamics of national innovation systems: A panel cointegration analysis of the coevolution between innovative capability and absorptive capacity

The dynamics of national innovation systems: A panel cointegration analysis of the coevolution between innovative capability and absorptive capacity

The Transitional Dynamics of an Endogenous Growth Model: Generalizing Production Functions

Middle-income growth traps

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About