Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Institutions, Firms and Consumers’ Choice: Extending Neoschumpeterian Competition to Consumption

  • Note
  • Published:
Evolutionary and Institutional Economics Review Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The notion of neoschumpeterian competition can be combined to insights from institutional economics in order to help explain consumers’ decision-making. Competition is a selective process whereby firms are led to create, re-shape or increase advantages toward other firms in a market—a loosely organized set of institutions with a large number of selective exchange goods. In a complex consumption environment, those institutions simplify, codify, and transmit information to consumers that use particular cognitive abilities and habits of thought to interpret it and thus make reasonable choices In this view, firms’ competitive advantages intertwine with market institutions. A firm promotes “upward causation” when it moulds such interaction to its favor, promoting changes in consumers’ desires, goals, and preferences. Hence, innovation in the form of a new product in the market is just part of a bigger process in which consumers’ perceptions and preferences concerning the usefulness and representation of products are also essential.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Boulding, K. (1956) The Image: Knowledge in Life and Society, University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M. (1998) “Introduction: The Embeddedness of Economic Markets in Economics,” in M. Callon (ed) The Laws of the Markets, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, pp. 1–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callon, M., C. Méadel and V. Rabeharisoa (2002) “The Economy of Qualities,” Economy and Society 31.2: 197–217.

    Google Scholar 

  • Commons, J. (1931) “Institutional Economics,” American Economic Review 21: 648–657.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cosgel, M. (1997) “Consumption Institutions,” Review of Social Economy 55.2: 153–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dequech, D. (2001) “Bounded Rationality, Institutions and Uncertainty,” Journal of Economic Issues 35.4: 911–929.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G. (1982) “Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories,” Research Policy 11.3: 147–162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G. (1988) “Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic Effects of Innovation,” Journal of Economic Literature 26.3: 1120–1171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolfsma, W. (2002) “Mediated Preferences — How Institutions Affect Consumption,” Journal of Economic Issues 36.2: 449–457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dolfsma, W. (2004) Institutional Economics and the Formation of Preferences: The Advent of Pop Music, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham and Northampton.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, M. and B. Isherwood (1996) [1979] The World of Goods: Towards an Anthropology of Consumption, Routledge, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dugger, W. (1980) “Power: an Institutional Framework of Analysis,” Journal of Economic Issues 15.4: 897–907.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fusfeld, D. (1989) “Toward a Revision of the Economic Theory of Individual Behavior,” Journal of Economic Issues 23.2: 357–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garcia, R. (2005) “Uses of Agent-based Modeling in Innovation/new Product Development Research,” Journal of Productive Innovation Management 22: 380–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, N. and P. Terna (2000) “How to Built and Use Agent-Based Models in Social Science,” Mind & Society 1: 57–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1973) “The Strength of Weak Ties,” American Journal of Sociology 78.6: 1360–1380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatanaka, M., C. Bain and L. Busch (2005) “Third-party Certification in the Global Agrifood System,” Food Policy 30: 354–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrington, J. and M. Chang (2005) “Co-evolution of Firms and Consumers and the Implications for Market Dominance,” Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control 29: 245–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, G. (1985) “The Rationalist Conceptions of Action,” Journal of Economic Issues 19.4: 825–851.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, G. (1988) Economics and Institutions, University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, G. (1998) “The Approach of Institutional Economics,” Journal of Economic Literature 36.1: 166–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, G. (2002) “Reconstitutive Downward Causation: Social Structure and Development of Individual Agency,” in E. Fullbrook (ed) Intersubjectivity in Economics: Agents and Structures, Routledge, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, G. (2003) “The Hidden Persuaders: Institutions and Individuals in Economic Theory,” Cambridge Journal of Economics 27: 159–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, G. (2006) “What are Institutions?,” Journal of Economic Issues 40.1: 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, G. (2007) “Institutions and Individuals: Interaction and Evolution,” Organization Studies 28.1:95–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hodgson, G. and T. Knudsen (2004) “The Complex Evolution of a Simple Traffic Convention: Functions and Implications of Habit,” Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization 54: 19–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ida, T. (2010) “On the Coevolution of the Product Quality and the Consumer Preferences,” Journal of Bioeconomics (forthcoming).

  • Klamer, A. and D. McCloskey (1988) “Economics in the Human Conversation,” In A. Klamer, D. McCloskey and R. Solow (eds) The Consequences of Economic Rhetoric, Cambridge University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langlois, R. and M. Cosgel (1998) “The Organization of Consumption,” in M. Bianchi (ed) The Active Consumer: Novelty and Surprise in Consumer Choice, Routledge, London and New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loasby, B. (1976) Choice, Complexity and Ignorance, Cambridge University Press, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loasby, B. (2001) “Cognition, Imagination and Institutions in Demand Creation,” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 11: 7–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Melody, W. (1987) “Information: An Emerging Dimension of Institutional Analysis,” Journal of Economic Issues 21.3: 1313–1339.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. (1991) “Why Do Firms Differ, and How Does it Matter?” Strategic Management Journal 12: 61–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. (1996) The Sources of Economic Growth, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. and S. Winter (1982) An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohori, K and S. Takahashi (2009) “Agent-based Analysis of Lead User Innovation in Consumer Product,” in T. Terano, H. Kita, S. Takahashi and H. Deguchi (eds) Agent-based Approaches in Economics and Social Complex System, V. Springer, Tokyo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, T. (1988) “Computer Simulation: The Third Symbol System,” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 24: 381–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Penrose, E. (1995) [1959] The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, Oxford University Press, New York.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Possas, M. (1985) Estruturas de mercado em oligopólio (in Portuguese), Hucitec, São Paulo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Possas, S. (1999) Concorrência e competitividade: notas sobre estratégia e dinâmica seletiva na economia capitalista (in Portuguese), Hucitec, São Paulo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Possas, S. (2006) “Concorrência e inovação (in Portuguese),” in V. Pelaez and T. Szmrecsányi (eds) Economia da inovação tecnológica, Hucitec, São Paulo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Redmond, W. (2006) “Instinct, Culture and Cognitive Science,” Journal of Economic Issues 40.2:431–438.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rizzello, S. (1997) “The Microfoundations of Path Dependency,” in L. Magnusson and J. Ottosson (eds) Evolutionary Economics and Path Dependence, Edward Elgar, Cheltenham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rook, D. (1985) “The Ritual Dimension of Consumer Behavior,” Journal of Consumer Research 12.3: 251–264.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, N. (1982) Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics, Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rutherford, M. (1996) Institutions in Economics: The Old and the New Institutionalism, Cambridge University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. (1934) [1911] The Theory of Economic Development, Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. (1950) [1942] Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Harper, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J. (2005) “What is an Institution?,” Journal of Institutional Economics 1.1: 1–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1978) “Rationality as Process and as Product of Thought,” American Economic Review 68.2: 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1957) Models of Man: Social and Rational, John Wiley and Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stein, J. (1997) “How Institutions Learn: A Socio-cognitive Perspective,” Journal of Economic Issues 31.3: 729–740.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strum, S. and B. Latour (2003) “Redefining the Social Link: From Baboons to Humans,” in D. Mackenzie and J. Wajcman (eds) The Social Shaping of Technology, Open U.P, Maidenhead.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veblen, T. (1899) The Theory of the Leisure Class, Penguin Books, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veblen, T. (1919a) The Place of Science in Modern Civilization an Other Essays, Viking, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veblen, T. (1919b) The Vested Interests and the Common Man, B.W. Huebsch, New York.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Federal University of Pampa, Rua Barão do Triunfo, 1048, Santana do Livramento, RS, CEP: 97573-590, Brazil

    Felipe Almeida

  2. Economics Department of the Federal, University of Paraná, Av. Prefeito Lothário Meissner, 632-térreo, Curitiba, PR, CEP: 80210-170, Brazil

    Huascar Pessali

Authors
  1. Felipe Almeida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Huascar Pessali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Felipe Almeida.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Almeida, F., Pessali, H. Institutions, Firms and Consumers’ Choice: Extending Neoschumpeterian Competition to Consumption. Evolut Inst Econ Rev 7, 373–394 (2011). https://doi.org/10.14441/eier.7.373

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.14441/eier.7.373

Keywords

JEL

Search

Navigation