Advertisement

The Phenomenon of Economic Change: Neoclassical vs. Schumpeterian Approaches

  • Kurt Dopfer
Part of the Recent Economic Thought book series (RETH, volume 36)

Abstract

This study addresses an issue that few economists have pioneered like Schumpeter: economic change. The prominence he achieved in this field reflects, however, not only his intellectual stature, but also an apparent reluctance of economists to deal with this issue. This analysis starts with a brief reflection on the neoclassical notion of change. It is increasingly recognized that neoclassical economics takes as exogenous exactly those variables that would represent the very core of a theory of economic change. The theoretical deficiency is viewed to consist not only in the static nature of the equilibrium concept, but also in the choice-theoretic scheme of relative allocation that ignores the issue of “energy for change.rd The analysis proceeds with an account of Austrian endeavors to overcome the neo-classical limitations by introducing a cognitively alert agent who searches actively for economic opportunities. This approach allows one to endogenize essential aspects of change relating to adjustment and equilibrium converging processes. It is argued in a next step that a global theory of economic change must put forth propositions that refer to the evolutionary dynamics—highlighting change from one local economic regime to another.

Keywords

Evolutionary Approach Economic Change Austrian Economic Neoclassical Economic Causality Principle 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Acs, Z.J., and Audretsch, D.B. 1991. Innovation and Technological Change: AnInternational Comparison, New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  2. Albert, H. 1990. “Methodologischer Individualismus und historische Analyse.” In K. Acham and W. Schulze (eds.). Theorie der Geschichte, Bd. 6: Teil und Ganzes. München, pp. 219–239.Google Scholar
  3. Allen, P.M. 1988. “Evolution, Innovation and Economics.” In G. Dosi, et al., eds. Technical Change and Economic Theory. London: Pinter, pp. 95–119.Google Scholar
  4. Andersen, E.S. 1992. “The Difficult Jump From Walrasian to Schumpeterian Analysis or Characterising Schumpeter’s Analysis: Dynamics, Development or Economic Evolution?”. Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22, 1992.Google Scholar
  5. Antonelli, C. (ed.). 1992. The Economics of Information Networks, London: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  6. Aoki, M. 1986. “Horizontal vs. Vertical Information Structure of the Firm.” American Economic Review 76(5), pp. 971–983.Google Scholar
  7. Arndt, H. 1992. Die Evolutorische Wirtschaftstheorie in ihrer Bedeutung für die Wirtschafts und Finanzpolitik: Lehrbuch der ökonomischen Entwicklungstheorie. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
  8. Arrow, K.J. 1962. “The Economic Implication of Learning by Doing.” Review of Economic Studies, 29 June, pp. 155–173.Google Scholar
  9. Arthur, W.B. 1985. “Competing Technologies and Lock-In by Historical Small Events: The Dynamics of Choice under Increasing Returns.” CEPR Paper 43, Palo Alto, CA: CEPR.Google Scholar
  10. Audretsch, D.B., and Acs, Z.J. 1992. “Entrepreneurial Activity, Innovation, and Macroeconomic Fluctuations.” Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22, 1992.Google Scholar
  11. Bauer, L., and Matis, H. (eds.). 1989. Evolution—Organisation—Management, ZurEntwicklung and Selbststeuerung komplexer Systeme. Berlin: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
  12. Best, M. 1990. The New Competition: Institutions of Industrial Restructuring. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  13. Bombach, G. 1991. “Konjunkturtheorie einst und heute.” Basel: Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  14. Bresnahan, T.F., and Trajtenberg, M.F. 1992. “General Purpose Technologies: Engines of Growth?”. Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22, 1992.Google Scholar
  15. Brunner, H.J. 1991. “Ascom—Lösungen für heterogene Netzwerke.” Referat Bufa-Fachseminar, October 1–5, 1991, Basel: Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  16. Carlsson B. (ed.). 1989. Industrial Dynamics: Technological, Organizational, and Structural Changes in Industries and Firms. Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  17. Carlsson, B., and Stankiewicz, R. 1991. “On the Nature, Function and Composition of Technological Systems.” Journal of Evolutionary Economics 1, pp. 93–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Carlsson, B. 1992. “Technological Sytems and Economic Development Potential: Four Swedish Case Studies”. Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22, 1992.Google Scholar
  19. Casson, M. (ed.). 1990. Entrepreneurship. Aldershot: Elgar.Google Scholar
  20. Casson, M. 1992. The Economics of Business Culture; Game Theory, Transaction Costs, and Economic Performance. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  21. Chaloupek, G. 1992. “Long Term Perspectives Compared: Joseph Schumpeter and Werner Sombart.” Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22, 1992.Google Scholar
  22. Cheah, H.B., and Robertson, P.L. 1992. “The Entrepreneurial Process and Innovation in the Product Life Cycle.” Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22, 1992.Google Scholar
  23. Clark, J.B. 1899. The Distribution of Wealth: A Theory of Wages, Interests and Profits. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  24. Clark, N., and Juma, C. 1987. Long-Run Economics: An Evolutionary Approachto Economic Growth. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  25. Cohen, W.M., and Klepper, S. 1992. “Firm Size and the Nature of Innovation within Industries: The Case of Process and Product R&D.” Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22, 1992.Google Scholar
  26. Colemont, P., Groholt, P., Rickards, T., and Smeekes, H. (eds.). 1988. Creativity and Innovation: Towards a European Network. Dordrecht Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  27. Corsi, M. 1991. “Stochastic Models of Division of Labour.” Presented at 6th Congress of the European Economic Association, Cambridge, Aug. 31–Sept. 2.Google Scholar
  28. Dahmén, E. 1989. Development Blocks in Industrial Economics. In Carlsson, B. ed. Industrial Dynamics: Technological, Organizational, and Structural Changes in Industries and Firms. Boston: Kluwer, pp. 109–122.Google Scholar
  29. De Bresson, C. 1987. “The Evolutionary Paradigm and the Economics of Technological Change.” Journal of Economic Issues 21, pp. 751–762.Google Scholar
  30. Dopfer, K. 1991. “The Complexity of Economic Phenomena: Reply to Tinbergenand Beyond.” Journal of Economic Issues 25, pp. 39–76.Google Scholar
  31. Dopfer, K. 1992. “The Institutional Entrepreneur: Innovative Origins of Economic Institutions.” Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22, 1992.Google Scholar
  32. Dorffner, G. 1991. Konnektionismus: Von neuronalen Netzwerken zu einer“naturlichen” KI. Stuttgart: Teubner.Google Scholar
  33. Dosi, G. 1988. “The Nature of the Innovative Process.” G. Dosi et al., eds. Technical Change and Economic Theory. London: Pinter, pp. 221–238.Google Scholar
  34. Dosi, G., Freeman, C., Nelson, R.R., Silverberg, G., and Soete, L. (eds.). 1988. Technical Change and Economic Theory. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  35. Eliasson, G. 1988a. “Schumpeterian Innovation, Market Structure, and the Stability of Industrial Development.” In H. Hanusch (ed.) Evolutionary Economics: Applications of Schumpeter’s Ideas. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 151–198.Google Scholar
  36. Eliasson, G. 1988b. The Knowledge Base of an Industrial Economy. Stockholm: IUI.Google Scholar
  37. Elliott, J.E. 1980. “Marx and Schumpeter on Capitalism’s Creative Destruction: A Comparative Restatement.” In The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 95, August, pp. 45–68.Google Scholar
  38. Fontalea, E. 1987. “Innovation et structure du marché.” In Schw. Zeitschrift füir Volkswirtschaft und Statistik. 123,3, pp. 275–288.Google Scholar
  39. Freeman, C. 1990a. Schumpeters Business Cycles Revisited, in Heertje, A., et al., (eds.) 17–38.Google Scholar
  40. Freeman, C. (ed.). 1990b. The Economics of Innovation. Aldershot: Elgar.Google Scholar
  41. Freeman, C., and Perez, C. 1986. “The Diffusion of Technical Innovation and Changes of Technoeconomic Paradigm.” Paper presented at Venice Conference on Innovation Diffusion, March 17–21, 1986.Google Scholar
  42. Goodwin, R.M. 1990. “Walras and Schumpeter: The Vision Reaffirmed.” In Heertje, A., et al. (eds.) Evolving Technology and Market Structure: Studies in Schumpeterian Economics, Michigan: University of Michigan Press, pp. 39–50.Google Scholar
  43. Gowdy, J.M. 1992. “Higher Selection Processes in Evolutionary Economic Change.” In Journal of Evolutionary Economics 2,1, pp. 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Gunning, J.P. 1991. “The Use of the Method of Imaginary Constructions to Elucidate Entrepreneurship.” National Tsing Hua Univ. Taiwan. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  45. Gustafsson, B. 1991. Power and Economic Institutions: Reinterpretations in Economic History. Aldershot: Elgar.Google Scholar
  46. Hagemann, H. 1991. “The Structural Theory of Economic Growth.” In Baranzini, M., Scazzieri, R. (eds.), The Economic Theory of Structure and Change. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 144–171.Google Scholar
  47. Hanusch, H. (ed.). 1988. Evolutionary Economics: Applications of Schumpeter’s Ideas. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  48. Harabi, N.M. 1992. “Appropriability, Technological Opportunity, Market Demand, and Technical Change—Empirical Evidence from Switzerland.” Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22.Google Scholar
  49. Hayashi, K. 1992. “From Network Externalities to Interconnection: The Changing Nature of Networks and Economy.” In Antonelli, C. (ed.), The Economics of Information Networks. London: Elsevier, pp. 195–215.Google Scholar
  50. Hayek, F.A. 1945. “The Use of Knowledge in Society.” In The American Economic Review, Vol. 35, Sept. 45, pp. 519–530.Google Scholar
  51. Heertje, A. 1988. “Schumpeter and Technical Change.” In Hanusch, H. (ed.), Evolutionary Economics: Applications of Schumpeter’s Ideas, pp. 71–89.Google Scholar
  52. Heertje, A., and Perlman, M. (eds.) 1990. Evolving Technology and Market Structure: Studies in Schumpeterian Economics. Michigan: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
  53. Herrmann-Pillath, C. 1991. “A Darwinian Framework for the Economic Analysis of Institutional Change in History.” In Journal of Social and Biological Structures, Vol. 14,No. 2, pp. 127–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Herrmann-Pillath, C. 1993. “Macht und Ordnung: Grundziige einer evolutions-theoretischen Neubegriindung der Ordnungstheorie,” book manuscript, Bergisch Gladbach.Google Scholar
  55. Hicks, J.R. 1973. Capital and Time: A Neo-Austrian Theory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  56. Hippel, E.U. 1988. The Sources of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  57. Hodgson, G.M. 1992. “Is There Still a Place for Neoclassical Theory?” In Journal of Economic Issues 26,3, pp. 749–767.Google Scholar
  58. Hodgson, G.M. 1993. Economics and Evolution: Bringing Back Life into Economics. Cambridge: Polity Press, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  59. Imai, K. 1990. “Patterns of Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Japan.” In Heertje, A., et al. (eds.), Evolving Technology and Market Structure: Studies in Schumpeterian Economics, Michigan: University of Michigan Press, pp. 187–201.Google Scholar
  60. Imai, K., and Yamazaki, A. 1992. “Dynamics of Japanese Industrial System from a Schumpeterian Perspective.” Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22.Google Scholar
  61. Ireland, T.R. 1990. “The Formation of Organizations, Networks and Markets.” In The Journal of Behavioral Economics 19,1, pp. 103–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Jay, E.J. 1964. “The Concepts of ‘Field’ and Network”. In Anthropological Research in Man, 64,177, pp. 137–139.Google Scholar
  63. Johanson, J., and Mattson, L.G. 1987. “Interorganizational Relations in Industrial Systems: A Network Approach compared with a Transaction-Cost Approach.” In International Studies of Management and Organisation 17, pp. 34–48.Google Scholar
  64. Kalmbach, P., and Kurz, H.D. 1986. “Economic Dynamics and Innovation: Ricardo, Marx and Schumpeter on Technical Change and Unemployment.” In Wagener, H.J., et al. (eds.). The Economic Law of Motion of Modern Society—a Marx-Keynes-Schumpeter Centennial. London: Cambridge Univ. Press, pp. 71–92.Google Scholar
  65. Kaplinsky, R. 1983. “Firm Size and Technical Change in a Dynamic Context.” In The Journal of Industrial Economics XXXII (September) pp. 39–59.Google Scholar
  66. Kerber, W. 1992. “Rights, Innovations, and Evolution: The Distributional Effects of Different Rights to Innovate. “ Paper, presented at 19th Annual Meeting of the History of Economics Society, Fairfax, May 30–June 2.Google Scholar
  67. Kessler, U. 1992. Unternehmensgrösse, Innovation und Wertschöpfungswachstum: Eine empirische Untersuchung im Lichte der Schumpeterschen Innovationsdiskussion. Frankfurt: Lang.Google Scholar
  68. Kindleberger, C.P. 1990. Historical Economics: Art or Science?, New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  69. Kingston, W. 1992. “Institutional Change and Long Cycles.” Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22.Google Scholar
  70. Kirzner, I.M. (ed.). 1982. Method, Process, and Austrian Economics: Essays in Honorof Ludwig von Mises. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, D.G. Heath and Company.Google Scholar
  71. Klein, B.H. 1988. “Luck, Necessity, and Dynamic Flexibility.” In Hanusch, H. (ed.), Evolutionary Economics: Applications of Schumpeter’s Ideas, New York: Cambridge Univ. Press, pp. 95–120.Google Scholar
  72. Klepper, S. 1992. “Entry, Exit, and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle: The Dynamics of First Mover Advantages, Declining Product Innovation, and Market Failure.” Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22.Google Scholar
  73. Kogut, B., and Kulatilaka, N. 1992. “What is Critical Capability?” Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22.Google Scholar
  74. Kregel, J.A. 1986. “Laws of the Market and Laws of Motion.” In Wagener, H.J., et al. (eds.), The Economic Law of Motion of Modern Society—a Marx-Keynes-Schumpeter Centennial, London: Cambridge Univ. Press, pp. 31–48.Google Scholar
  75. Langlois, R.N. 1989. “Economic Change and the Boundaries of the Firm” in Carlsson, B. (ed.), Industrial Dynamics: Technological, Organizational, and Structural Changes in Industries and Firms, Boston: Kluwer, pp. 85–108.Google Scholar
  76. Langlois, R.N., and Robertson, P.L. 1989. “Explaining Vertical Integration: Lessons from the American Automobile Industry.” In The Journal of Economu History XLIX,2, pp. 361–375.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Lazonick, W. 1990. “Organizational Integration in Three Industrial Revolutions”; Commentary by Y. Shionoya, in Heertje, A., et al. (eds.), Evolving Technology and Market Structure: Studies in Schumpeterian Economics. Michigan: University of Michigan Press, pp. 77–103.Google Scholar
  78. Leibenstein, H. 1987. Inside the Firm: The Inefficiencies of Hierarchy, Cambridge MA: Harvard Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  79. Loasby, B.J. 1991. “Change and Continuity in the Process of Innovation”. Paper presented at European Economic Association, Cambridge, 30 August–2 September.Google Scholar
  80. Lundvall, B.A. 1988. “Innovation as an Interactive Process: From User-Producerto the National System of Innovation”. In Dosi, G., et al. (eds.) Technical Change and Economic Theory. London: Pinter, pp. 349–379.Google Scholar
  81. Maclean Johns, C. 1992. Technology, Culture, and Creativity: Factors Connecting Invention and Scientific Discovery, St. Gallen: Diss.Google Scholar
  82. Mäki, U. 1990. “Practical Syllogism, Entrepreneurship and The Invisible Hand: A Critique of the Analytic Hermeneutics of G.H. von Wright”. In Lavoie, D., Economics and Hermeneutics. London: Routledge, pp. 149–176.Google Scholar
  83. Magnusson, L. 1991. “From Verlag to Factory: The Contest For Efficient Property Rights” In Gustafsson, B. (ed.), Power and Economic Institutions: Reinterpretations in Economic History, Aldershot: Elgar, pp. 195–222.Google Scholar
  84. Malerba, F. 1992. “Learning by Firms and Incremental Technical Change”. In The Economic Journal, Vol. 102, (July), pp. 845–859.Google Scholar
  85. Mansfield, E. 1985. “How rapidly does New Industrial Technology Leak Out?”, In The Journal of Industrial Economics, Vol. XXXIV, (December), pp. 217–223.Google Scholar
  86. Marengo, L. 1992. “Structure, Competence and Learning in an Adaptive Model of the Firm” In ESGEE, Papers on Economics & Evolution, No. 9203, Freiburg.Google Scholar
  87. Matthews, R.C.O. 1984. “Darwinism and Economic Change”, in Collard, D.A., Helm, D.R., Scott, M.F., Sen, A.K. (eds.), Economic Theory and Hicksian Themes, Oxford Economic Papers, Supplement, 36, Oxford: Clarendon, pp. 91–117.Google Scholar
  88. Mensch, G., Haag, G., Weidlich, W. 1989. “The Schumpeter Clock. A Micro-Macro Model of Economic Change: Applied to United States and West German Data”, paper: Paris, OECD-Seminar, June 5–8, 1989.Google Scholar
  89. Metcalfe, J.S. 1989. “Evolution and Economic Change”, in Silberston, A. (ed.), Technology and Economic Progress. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  90. Metz, R. 1993. Langfristige Konjunktur-und Wachstumsschwankungen: Zur theoretischen Konzeption, empirischen Evidenz und historischen Bedeutung langfristiger ökonomischer Prozesse. Köln: forthcoming.Google Scholar
  91. Mises, L. von. 1962. The Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science: An Essay on Method. Kansas City: Sheed Andrews and McMeel, Inc.Google Scholar
  92. Monge, P.R. 1987. “The Network Level of Analysis”. In Berger, C.R., Chaffee, S.H. (eds.), Handbook of Communication Science. London: Sage, pp. 239–270.Google Scholar
  93. Nelson, R.R. 1981. “Research on Productivity Growth and Productivity Differences: Dead Ends and New Departures”. In Journal of Economic Literature 19,3, pp. 1029–1064.Google Scholar
  94. Nelson, R.R., and Winter, S.G. 1982. An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  95. Nelson, R.R. 1989. “Capitalism as an Engine of Progress”, in Carlsson, B. (ed.), Industrial Dynamics: Technological, Organizational, and Structural Changes in Industries and Firms. Boston: Kluwer, pp. 177–192.Google Scholar
  96. Nooteboom, B., and Vossen, R.W. 1992. “R&D Spending and Efficiency in Relation to Firm Size”. Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, 19–22 August.Google Scholar
  97. Nooteboom, B. 1992. “Schumpeterian and Austrian Entrepreneurship: A Unified Process of Adjustment and Change”, Groningen: unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  98. Oakley, A. 1990. Schumpeter’s Theory of Capitalist Motion: A Critical Expositionand Reassessment. Aldershot: Elgar.Google Scholar
  99. Ötsch, W. 1991. “Gibt es eine Grundlagenkrise der neoklassischen Theorie?”. In Jahrbilcher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik, Bd. 208/6, pp. 642–656.Google Scholar
  100. Ötsch, W. 1991. Kreativität und Logik im ökonomischen Handlungsmodell Linz. Unpublished paper.Google Scholar
  101. Pareto, V. 1919. Traité de Sociologie Générate (Vol. II). Lausanne: Payot.Google Scholar
  102. Pareto, V. 1927. Manuel d’Economie Politique, Paris: Giard.Google Scholar
  103. Pasinetti, L.L. 1981. Structural Change and Economic Growth: A Theoretical Essayon the Dynamics of the Wealth of Nations. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  104. Pavitt, K. 1986. “Chips and Trajectories’: How Will the Semiconductor Influence the Sources and Directions of Technical Change?” in Macleod, R. (ed.), Technology and Human Prospect. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  105. Peitgen, H.O., Jürgens, H., and Saupe, D. 1992. Fractals for the Classroom. NewYork: Springer.Google Scholar
  106. Pelikan, P. 1988. “Can the Imperfect Innovation Systems of Capitalism be Out-performed?” In Dosi, G., et al. (eds.). Technical Change and Economic Theory, London: Pinter, pp. 370–398.Google Scholar
  107. Pelikan, P. 1992. “The Dynamics of Economic systems, or How To Transform a Failed Socialist Economy”. In Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Vol. 2,No. 1, pp. 39–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Perez, C. 1985. “Microelectronics, Long Waves and World Structural Change: New Perspectives for Developing Countries”, in World Development, Vol. 13,No. 3, pp. 441–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Perlman, M. 1988. “On the Coming Senescence of American Manufacturing Competence”. In Hanusch, H. (ed.), Evolutionary Economics: Applications of Schumpeter’s Ideas. New York: Cambridge Univ. Press, pp. 343–382.Google Scholar
  110. Rahmeyer, F. 1991. “Evolutorische Ökonomik, technischer Wandel und sektorales Produktivitätswachstum, in Beitrag 52, Univ. Augsburg, Institut für Volkswirt-schaftslehre.Google Scholar
  111. Reati, A. 1991. “Are We at the Beginning of a New Long Term Expansion Induced by Technological Change?”. Paper presented at Economic Papers, Directorate-General of Economic and Financial Affairs, Commission of the European Communities, No. 85, Brussels.Google Scholar
  112. Renault, M. 1991. Du Temps Newtonien Au Temps De L’Evolution Dans L’Analyse Economique, Rennes: Thèse de Doctorat.Google Scholar
  113. Richardson, G.B. 1972. “The Organisation of Industry”. In Economic Journal, 82, pp. 883–896.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Roepke, J. 1977. Die Strategic der Innovation: Eine systemtheoretische Untersuchung der Interpretation von Individuum, Organisation und Markt im Neuerungsprozess. Tübingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
  115. Rosegger, G. 1991. “Advances in Information Technology and the Innovative Strategies of Firms”. In CIRCIT Working Paper 1991/1, Melbourne.Google Scholar
  116. Rosenberg, N. 1982. Inside the Black Box: Technology and Economics, Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  117. Rosenberg, N. 1992. “Joseph Schumpeter: Radical Economist, paper”. Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22.Google Scholar
  118. Rothschild, K.W. 1986. “Capitalists and Entrepreneurs: Prototypes and Roles”. In Wagener, H.J., et al. (eds.), pp. 186–196.Google Scholar
  119. Ruggles, M. 1992. “The Value of Tacit Communicative Competences in Telecommunication Networks”. In CIRCIT Newsletter, Vol. 4,No. 9 (November), pp. 3–4.Google Scholar
  120. Rumelhart, D.E., and McClelland, J.L. 1986. Parallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition, Vol. 1, Foundations, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  121. Schefold, B. 1986. “Schumpeter as a Walrasian Austrian and Keynes as a Marshallian”. In Wagener, H.-J., et al. (eds.), pp. 93–111.Google Scholar
  122. Scherer, F.M. 1992. “Schumpeter and Plausible Capitalism”. Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, 19–22 August.Google Scholar
  123. Schmidt, C. 1992. “Concurrence, Concours Des Producteurs Et Modes D’Organisation De La Production Chez Antoine Augustin Cournot”. In Economies et Sociétés, Série Oeconomica, PE no. 16, pp. 71–99.Google Scholar
  124. Schumpeter, J.A. 1912. Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung. Leipzig: Duncker & Humblot.Google Scholar
  125. Schumpeter, J.A. 1939. Business Cycles: A Theoretical, Historical and Statistical Analysis of the Capitalist Process. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  126. Schumpeter, J.A. 1943. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  127. Schumpeter, J.A. 1952. Ten Great Economists: From Marx to Keynes. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
  128. Schumpeter, J.A. 1954. History of Economic Analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  129. Schumpeter, J.A. 1984. “The Meaning of Rationality in the Social Sciences.” In Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 140,4. (December), pp. 577–593.Google Scholar
  130. Shackle, G.L.S. 1990. Time, Expectations and Uncertainty in Economics: Selected Essays of G.L.S. Shackle. Aldershot: Elgar.Google Scholar
  131. Shionoya, Y. 1990. “The Origin of the Schumpeterian Research Program: A Chapter Omitted from Schumpeters Theory of Economic Development”, in Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics, Vol. 146,No. 2, June, pp. 314–327.Google Scholar
  132. Simon, H.A. 1978. “Rationality as Process and as Product of Thought”. In The American Economic Review, Vol. 68, pp. 1–6.Google Scholar
  133. Simonetti, R., Archibugi, D., and Evangelista, R. 1992. “Product and Process Innovations: How are They Defined? How are They Quantified?” Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22.Google Scholar
  134. Stankiewicz, R. 1990. “Basic Technologies and the Innovation Process”. In Sigurdsson, J. (ed.), Measuring the Dynamics of Technological Change, London: Pinter.Google Scholar
  135. Stiglitz, J.E. 1992. “Endogenous Growth and Cycles”. Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22.Google Scholar
  136. Stolper, W.F. 1988. “Development: Theory and Empirical Evidence”. In Hanusch, H. (ed.), pp. 9–22.Google Scholar
  137. Stolper, W.F. 1991. “The Theoretical Bases of Economic Policy: The Schumpeterian Perspective”. In Journal of Evolutionary Economics 1,3, pp. 189–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. Streissler, E.W. 1992. “The Influence of German and Austrian Economics on Joseph A. Schumpeter”. Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22.Google Scholar
  139. Swedberg, R. 1992. “Schumpeter’s Early Work”. In Journal of Evolutionary Economics 2,1, pp. 65–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Sydow, J. 1992. Strategische Netzwerke: Evolution und Organization, Berlin: Gabler Verlag.Google Scholar
  141. Teece, D.J. (ed.). 1987. The Competitive Challenge: Strategies for Industrial Innovation and Renewal. Cambridge MA: Ballinger.Google Scholar
  142. Torre, A. 1992. “Untraded and Technological Interdependencies: Some New Developments and Conclusions”. Paper presented at Kyoto Conference of the International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society, August 19–22.Google Scholar
  143. Tushman, M.L., and Nelson, R.R. 1990. “Introduction: Technology, Organizations and Innovation”. In Administrative Science Quarterly 35, pp. 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. Tylecote, A. 1992. The Long Wave in the World Economy: The Present Crisis in Historical Perspective. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  145. Utterback, J.M., and Abernathy, W.J. 1975. “A Dynamic Model of Process and Product Innovation.” In OMEGA 3,2, pp. 639–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  146. Valentino, R. 1990. “Schumpeter and Walras in Latin America: A Dualistic Structure of Innovation the Market versus the State”. In Heertje, A., et al. (eds.), Evolving Technology and Market Structure: Studies in Schumpeterian Economics. Michigan: University of Michigan Press, pp. 103–120.Google Scholar
  147. Veblen, T. 1898. “Why is Economics not an Evolutionary Science?” In The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 12 (July), pp. 373–397. Reprint in Veblen, T. (1990) The Place of Science in Modern Civilisation and Other Essays. New Brunswick: Transaction, pp. 56–81.Google Scholar
  148. Wagener, H.J., and Drukker, W. (eds.). 1985. The Economic Law of Motion of Modern Society—a Marx-Keymes-Schumpeter Centennial. London: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar
  149. Wagner, A. 1989. Mikroökonomik. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer.Google Scholar
  150. Weinel, I., and Crossland, P.D. 1989. “The Scientific Foundations of Technological Progress”. In Journal of Economic Issues, 23,3 (September), pp. 795–808.Google Scholar
  151. Williamson, O.E. 1990. “A Comparison of Alternative Approaches to Economic Organization.” In Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics 146,1 (March), pp. 61–71.Google Scholar
  152. Winter, S.G. 1984. “Schumpeterian Competition in Alternative Technological Regimes”. In Journal of Economic Behavior and Organisation 5,3–4, pp. 287–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  153. Winter, S.G. 1987. “Knowledge and Competence as Strategic Assets”, in Teece, D.J. (ed.), The Competitive Challenge: Strategies for Industrial Innovation and Renewal. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger, pp. 159–184.Google Scholar
  154. Witt, U. 1986. “Firms’ Market Behavior Under Imperfect Information and Economic Natural Selection”. In Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 7, pp. 265–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. Witt, U. 1992. “Evolutionary Economics: An Interpretative Survey”. In ESGEE, Papers on Economics & Evolution, No. 9104, Freiburg.Google Scholar
  156. Witt, U. 1993. Individualistic Foundations of Evolutionary Economics, Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1994

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kurt Dopfer
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of EconomicsSt. GallenSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations