Abstract
The Economics of Innovation emerged as an independent field of investigation at the beginning of the last century as has been described by Antonelli 2003, Dosi 1988, Dosi 2000, Rosenberg 1982, Stonemen 1995, and von Tunzelmann 1995. Then, very quickly, two specializations within, or approaches to, the subject emerged creating distinct subfields, each with its own theoretical road map. The first approach emphasizes the innovation itself, i.e., the technology, and the second focuses on the innovator, usually a firm. Consequently, in the first approach, the innovation is the unit of analysis while, in the second, the firm is the central unit of investigation. In the first of these two approaches the analysis concerns how a new technology emerges, is adopted, developed, diffused, and incrementally improved over time. Technological trajectories, paradigm shifts (Dosi, 1982), technological systems (Carlson, 1997), and related concepts provide the basis for the models and schemes of analysis in this approach. The accent is placed on the accumulation of technological change along a trajectory or on the systemic interactions between technologies. Most innovation diffusion models, in particular those based on epidemic schemes, fall into this first category.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Aghion, P. and Howitt, P. (1992), “A Model of Growth through Creative Destruct ion,” Econometrica 60: 323–51.
Antonelli, C. (1995), The Economics of Localized Technological Change and Industrial Dynamics. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Boston.
Archibugi, D., Lundvall, B. eds., (2001), The Globalizing Learning Economy, Oxford University Press.
Carlson, B. (ed) (1997), Technological Systems and Industrial Dynamics. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Boston.
Chiaromonte et al. (1993). “Innovative Learning and Institutions in the Process of Development. On the Microfoundations of Growth Regimes,” in Ross Thomson, ed., Learning and Technological Change. MacMillan Press, 117–49.
Dosi et al., eds., (1988), Technical Change and Economic Theory. Pinter Publishers.
Le Bas, C. and Négassi, S. (2002), “Les structures des activités d’innovation en France et comparaison avec celles des principaux partenaires commerciaux. Convention d’étude no 19/2000 COMMISSARIAT GENERAL DU PLAN. Final Report November.
Le Bas, C, (2004), “Demand Growth as a Determinant of R&D Expenditures: An Empirical Model in the Schmooklerian Tradition,” Revue d’Économie Industrielle, Mars.
Le Bas, C. and Patel, P. (2005), “Does internationalisation of technology determine technological knowledge diversification in large firms?” Revue d’Économie Industrielle
Efendioglu, U.D., von Tunzelman, N. (2001) Investment, Demand and Innovation: An empirical analysis for OECD countries, 1950-1995. Mimeo SPRU.
Geroski, P., Walters, C.F. (1995), Innovative Activity over the Business Cycle. Economic Journal, pp 916–928.
Geroski, P., Van Reenen, J., C. F. Walters (2002), “Innovations, Patents and Cash Flow,” In Kleinknecht and Mohnen (eds) Innovation and Firm Performance. Palgrave.
Lhuillery, S., (1996), “L’innovation dans l’industrie manufacturière française: une revue des résultats de l’enquête communautaire sur l’innovation,” in Innovation, brevets et stratégies technologiques, OCDE.
Lhuillery, S. (2003), “Les entreprises biotechnologies en France en 2001,” Note de recherche. Ministère de la recherche. Septembre.
Mansfield, E.(1961), “Technical Change and the Rate of Imitation,” Econometrica, 29, pp 741–66.
Mansfield, E.(1963), “The Speed of Response of Firms to New Techniques,” Quarterly Journal of Economics. pp 290–311.
Mansfield, E.(1968), Industrial Research and Technological Innovation, Norton New-York.
Schmookler, J. (1966), Invention and Economic Growth. CUP. Cambridge.
Scotchmer, S., (1991), “Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Cumulative Research and the Patent Law, ” Journal of Economic Perspectives, Symposium on Intellectual Property Law, vol. 5, n° 1, pp. 29–41.
Von Tunzelmann, G.N. (2004), Integrating economic policy and technology policy in the EU.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer Science+Business Media, Inc.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Le Bas, C., Latham, W. (2006). Principal Findings, Policy Implications and Research Agenda. In: Latham, W.R., Le Bas, C. (eds) The Economics of Persistent Innovation: An Evolutionary View. Economics of Science, Technology and Innovation, vol 31. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-29245-8_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-29245-8_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-0-387-28872-7
Online ISBN: 978-0-387-29245-8
eBook Packages: Business and EconomicsEconomics and Finance (R0)