Wage inequality and induced innovation in a classical-Marxian growth model

Stamegna, Marco (2022): Wage inequality and induced innovation in a classical-Marxian growth model.

Abstract

The present paper works out a classical-Marxian growth model with an endogenous direction of technical change and a heterogeneous labour force, made up of high-skilled and low-skilled workers. It draws on the Kaleckian mark-up pricing to link wage inequality to the relative unit labour cost at a firm level; on growth cycle models à la Goodwin to formalize the dynamic interaction between labour market and distributive shares of income; on the induced innovation literature to link the bias of technical change to the firm’s choice of the optimal combination of factor-augmenting technologies. We assume that economic growth is constrained by the growth rate of the high-skilled effective labour supply, whereas the low-skilled labour supply is perfectly elastic. Thus, we develop a three-dimensional system of differential equations for the output-capital ratio, the relative unit labour cost and the employment rate of the high-skilled workers, and investigate the stability and the main properties of the steady-state equilibrium. We find that, in contrast to the neoclassical literature on skill-biased technical change, the institutional framework governing the conflict over income distribution is the ultimate determinant of both wage inequality and the direction of technical change. A decline in low-skilled workers’ bargaining strength or a rise in product market concentration lead to both an increase in wage inequality and a bias of technical change favouring high-skilled over low-skilled labour productivity growth. As opposed to the Goodwin model with induced technical change and homogeneous labour force, labour market institutions thus affect steady-state income distribution, capital accumulation and labour productivity growth, and no necessary trade-off arises between labour market regulation and employment. Finally, if the steady-state value of wage inequality exceeds a critical value, an exogenous increase in the mark-up or in the high-skilled workers’ bargaining power allow both capitalists and high-skilled workers to increase their income shares at the expense of the low-skilled workers.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Wage inequality; growth; distribution; endogenous technical change
• Subjects: D - Microeconomics > D3 - Distribution > D33 - Factor Income Distribution; E - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics > E1 - General Aggregative Models > E11 - Marxian ; Sraffian ; Kaleckian; E - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics > E2 - Consumption, Saving, Production, Investment, Labor Markets, and Informal Economy > E24 - Employment ; Unemployment ; Wages ; Intergenerational Income Distribution ; Aggregate Human Capital ; Aggregate Labor Productivity; O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O3 - Innovation ; Research and Development ; Technological Change ; Intellectual Property Rights > O33 - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences ; Diffusion Processes

References

Acemoglu, D. (2002a), “Directed technical change”, The Review of Economic Studies, 69(4): 781-809.

Acemoglu, D. (2002b), “Technical change, inequality, and the labor market”, Journal of Economic Literature, 40 (1): 7-72.

Acemoglu, D. (2003), “Labor- and capital-augmenting technical change”, Journal of the European Economic Association, 1(1): 1371-1409.

Acemoglu, D. (2009), Introduction to modern economic growth, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Acemoglu, D. (2015), “Localised and biased technologies: Atkinson and Stiglitz’s new view, induced innovations, and directed technological change”, The Economic Journal, 125(583): 443-463.

Acemoglu, D., Aghion, P. and Violante, G.L. (2001), “Deunionization, technical change and inequality”, Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, 55(1): 229-264.

Acemoglu, D. and Autor, D. (2012), “What does human capital do? A review of Goldin and Katz’s The race between education and technology”, Journal of Economic Literature, 50(2): 426-463.

Aghion, P. and Howitt, P. (2010), The Economics of Growth, Cambridge (MA): MIT Press.

Blecker, R.A. and Setterfield, M. (2019), Heterodox macroeconomics: Models of demand, distribution and growth, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Brugger, F. and Gehrke, C. (2017), “The neoclassical approach to induced technical change: from Hicks to Acemoglu”, Metroeconomica, 68(4): 730-776.

Brugger, F. and Gehrke, C. (2018), “Skilling and deskilling: technological change in classical economic theory and its empirical evidence”, Theory and Society, 47: 663-689.

Card, D. and Lemieux, T. (1996), “Wage dispersion, returns to skill, and black-white wage differentials”, Journal of Econometrics, 74(2): 319-361.

Card, D. and Lemieux, T. (2001), “Can falling supply explain the rising return to college for younger man? A Cohort-based analysis”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116: 705-746.

Carvalho, L., Lima, G.T. and Serra, G.P. (2019), “Debt-financed knowledge capital accumulation, capacity utilization and economic growth”, Department of Economics, FEA/USP, Working Paper Series, n. 2017-32.

Carvalho, L. and Rezai, A. (2016), “Personal income inequality and aggregate demand”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 40(2): 491-505.

Checchi, D. and García-Peñalosa, C. (2008), “Labour market institutions and income inequality”, Economic Policy, 23(56): 602-649.

Desai, M.J. (1973), “Growth cycles and inflation in a model of the class struggle”, Journal of Economic Theory, 6: 527-545.

Desai, M.J., Henry, B., Mosley, A. and Penderton, M., (2006), “A clarification of the Goodwin model of the growth cycle”, Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 30: 2661-2670.

Duménil, G. and Lévy, D. (1995), “A stochastic model of technical change: An application to the US economy (1869-1989), Metroeconomica, 46(3): 213-245.

Duménil, G. and Lévy, D. (2003), “Technology and distribution: historical trajectories à la Marx”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 52(2): 201-233.

Duménil, G. and Lévy, D. (2015), “Neoliberal managerial capitalism: Another reading of the Piketty, Saez, and Zucman data”, International Journal of Political Economy, 44(2): 71-89.

Dutt, A.K. (2010), “Keynesian growth theory in the 21st century”, in Arestis, P. and Sawyer, M. (eds.), Twenty-first century Keynesian economics, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan: 39-80.

Dutt, A.K. (2011), “The role of aggregate demand in classical-Marxian models of economic growth”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 35(2): 357-382.

Dutt, A.K. (2013), “Endogenous technical change in classical-Marxian models of growth and distribution”, in Taylor, L., Michl, T. and Rezai, A. (eds.), Social fairness and economics: Economic essays in the spirit of Duncan Foley, New York: Routledge: 264-285.

Dutt, A.K. (2017), “Income inequality, the wage share, and economic growth”, Review of Keynesian Economics, 5(2): 170-195.

Dutt, A.K. and Veneziani, R. (2011), “Education, growth and distribution: classical-Marxian economic thought and a simple model”, Cahiers d’économie politique, 61(2): 157-185.

Dutt, A.K. and Veneziani, R. (2019), “Education and ‘human capitalists’ in a classical-Marxian model of growth and distribution”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 43: 481-506.

Dutt, A.K. and Veneziani, R. (2020), “A classical model of education, growth, and distribution”, Macroeconomic Dynamics, 24: 1186-1221.

Fiorio, C., Mohun, S., and Veneziani, R. (2013), “Social democracy and distributive conflict in the UK, 1950-2010”, Department of Economics, University of Massachusetts Amherst, Working Paper Series, n. 2013-06.

Foley, D.K. (2003), “Endogenous technical change with externalities in a classical growth model”, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 52(2): 167-189.

Foley, D.K., Michl, T.R., and Tavani, D. (2019), Growth and distribution. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Gandolfo, G. (2009), Economic Dynamics, Berlin: Spring Verlag.

Goldin, C. and Katz, L.F. (2008), The race between education and technology, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Goodwin, R. (1967), “A growth cycle”, in Feinstein, C. (ed.), Socialism, capitalism, and economic growth, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 54-58.

Hein, E. and Prante, F.J. (2020), “Functional distribution and wage inequality in recent Kaleckian growth models”, in Bougrine, H. and Rochon, L.-P. (eds.), Economic growth and macroeconomic stabilization policies in post-Keynesian economics, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar: 33-49.

Hicks, J.R. (1932), The theory of wages, London: Macmillan.

Hornstein, A., Krusell, P. and Violante, G.L. (2005), “The effects of technical change on labor market inequalities”, in Aghion, P. and Durlauf, S.N. (eds.), Handbook of economic growth, North-Holland: Elsevier: 1275-1370.

Julius, A. J., (2005), “Steady-state growth and distribution with an endogenous direction of technical change”, Metroeconomica, 56(1): 101-125.

Kapeller, J. and Schütz, B. (2014), “Debt, boom, bust: a theory of Minsky-Veblen cycles”, Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 36(4): 781-814.

Kapeller, J. and Schütz, B. (2015), “Conspicuous consumption, inequality and debt: the nature of consumption driven profit-led regimes”, Metroeconomica, 66(1): 51-70.

Katz, L and Autor, D. (1999), “Changes in the wage structure and earnings inequality”, in Ashenfelter, O. and Card, D. (eds.), Handbook of labor economics, vol. 3, Amsterdam: North-Holland: 1463-1555.

Kennedy, C. (1964), “Induced bias in innovation and the theory of distribution”, Economic Journal, 74(295): 541-547.

Keynes, J.M. (1936), The general theory of employment, interest, and money, London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Koeniger, W., Leonardi, M. and Nunziata, L. (2007), “Labor market institutions and wage inequality”, ILR Review, 60(3): 340-356.

Krusell, P., Ohanian, L.E., Ríos-Rull, J.-V. and Violante, G.L. (2000), “Capital-skill complementarity and inequality: A macroeconomic analysis”, Econometrica, 68(5): 1029-1053.

Kurz, H.D. and Salvadori, N. (1995), Theory of production: A long-period analysis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kurz, H.D. and Salvadori, N. (2003), Classical economics and modern theory: Studies in long-period analysis, New York: Routledge.

Lavoie, M. (2009), “Cadrisme within a post-Keynesian model of growth and distribution”, Review of Political Economy, 21(3): 369-391.

Lemieux, T. (2006), “Increasing residual wage inequality: composition effects, noisy data, or rising demand for skill?”, American Economic Review, 96(3): 461-498.

Lewis, W.A. (1954), “Economic development with unlimited supplies of labor”, The Manchester School, 22(2): 139-191.

Lima, G.T., Carvalho, L and Serra, G.P. (2019), “Human capital accumulation, income distribution and economic growth: A Neo-Kaleckian analytical framework”, Department of Economics, FEA/USP, Working Paper Series, n. 2018-19.

Lindbeck, A. and Snower, D.J. (1996), “Reorganization of firms and labor market inequality”, American Economic Review, 86: 315-321.

Lucas, R. E. (1988), “On the mechanics of economic development”, Journal of Monetary Economics, 22(1): 3-42.

Marx, K. (1976), Capital: A critique of political economy, Harmondsworth: Penguin Books Limited.

Mishel, L. and Bivens, J. (2021), “Identifying the policy levers generating wage suppression and wage inequality”, Economic Policy Institute, May 13, 2021: < https://www.epi.org/unequalpower/publications/wage-suppression-inequality/ >.

Mohun, S. (2014), “Unproductive labor in the U.S. economy 1964-2010”, Review of Radical Political Economics, 46(3): 355-379.

Mohun, S. and Veneziani, R. (2008), “Goodwin cycles and the U.S. economy, 1948-2004”, in Flaschel, P. and Landesmann, M. (eds.), Mathematical economics and the dynamics of capitalism, New York: Routledge.

Nelson, R.R. and Phelps, E.S. (1966), “Investment in humans, technological diffusion, and economic growth”, American Economic Review, 56: 69-75.

Neto, A.S.M. and Ribeiro, R.S.M. (2019), “A Neo-Kaleckian model of skill-biased technological change and income distribution”, Review of Keynesian Economics, 7(3): 292-307.

Nishi, H. (2020), “A two-sector Kaleckian model of growth and distribution with endogenous productivity dynamics”, Economic Modelling, 88: 223-243.

Okishio N. (1961), “Technical change and the rate of profit”, Kobe University Economic Review, 7: 86-99.

Ortigueira, S. (2013), “The rise and fall of centralized wage bargaining”, The Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 115(3): 825-855.

Palley, T.I. (2015a), “A neo-Kaleckian-Goodwin model of capitalist economic growth: monopoly power, managerial pay and labour market conflict”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 38(6): 1355-1372.

Palley, T.I. (2015b), “The middle class in macroeconomics and growth theory: a three-class neo-Kaleckian-Goodwin model”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 39(1): 221-243.

Palley, T.I. (2017a), “Inequality and growth in neo-Kaleckian and Cambridge growth theory”, Review of Keynesian Economics, 5(2): 146-169.

Palley, T.I. (2017b), “Wage- vs. profit-led growth: the role of the distribution of wages in determining regime character”, Cambridge Journal of Economics, 41: 49-61.

Piketty, T. (2014), Capital in the twenty-first century, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Piketty, T., and Saez, E. (2003), “Income inequality in the United States, 1913-1998”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 143: 1-39.

van der Ploeg, F. (1987), “Growth cycles, induced technical change, and perpetual conflict over the distribution of income”, Journal of Macroeconomics, 9(1): 1-12.

Prante, F.J. (2018), “Macroeconomic effects of personal and functional income inequality: Theory and empirical evidence for the US and Germany”, Panoeconomicus, 65(3): 289-318.

Rada, C. (2012), “Social security tax and endogenous technical change in an economy with an aging population”, Metroeconomica, 63(4): 727-756.

Salter, W.E.G. (1960), Productivity and technical change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Samuelson, P. (1965), “A theory of induced innovation along Kennedy-Weizsäcker lines”, Review of Economics and Statistics, 47(4): 343-356.

Shah, A. and Desai, M.J. (1981), “Growth cycles with induced technical change”, Economic Journal, 91(364): 1006-1010.

Skott, P. (2010), “Growth, instability and cycles: Harrodian and Kaleckian models of accumulation and income distribution”, in Setterfield, M. (ed.), Handbook of alternative theories of economic growth, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar: 108-131.

Tavani, D. (2012), “Wage bargaining and induced technical change in a linear economy: Model and application to the US (1963–2003)”, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 23(2): 117-126.

Tavani, D. (2013), “Bargaining over productivity and wages when technical change is induced: implications for growth, distribution, and employment”, Journal of Economics, 109: 207-244.

Tavani, D. and Vasudevan, R. (2014), “Capitalists, workers, and managers: wage inequality and effective demand”, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 30: 120-31.

Tavani, D. and Zamparelli, L. (2015), “Endogenous technical change, employment and distribution in the Goodwin model of the growth cycle”, Studies in Nonlinear Dynamics and Econometrics, 19(2): 209-226.

Tavani, D. and Zamparelli, L. (2016), “Public capital, redistribution and growth in a two-class economy”, Metroeconomica, 67(2): 458-476.

Tavani, D. and Zamparelli, L. (2018), “Endogenous technical change in alternative theories of growth and distribution”, in Veneziani, R. and Zamparelli, L. (eds.), Analytical political economy, Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell: 139-174.

Tinbergen, J. (1975), Income distribution: Analysis and policies, Amsterdam: North-Holland.

Uzawa, H. (1965), “Optimum technical change in an aggregative model of growth”, International Economic Review, 6(1): 18-31.

Veneziani, R. and Mohun, S. (2006), “Structural stability and Goodwin’s growth cycle”, Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 17: 437-451.

Violante, G.L. (2002), “Technological acceleration, skill transferability and the rise in residual inequality”, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117: 297-338.

Zamparelli, L. (2015), “Induced innovation, endogenous technical change and income distribution in a labor-constrained model of classical growth”, Metroeconomica, 66(2): 243-262.