Sector size, technical change and stability in the USA (1957-2006): a Schumpeterian approach

Konstantakis, Konstantinos N. and Michaelides, Panayotis G. and Papageorgiou, Theofanis (2014): Sector size, technical change and stability in the USA (1957-2006): a Schumpeterian approach. Published in: International Journal of Social Economics , Vol. 10, No. 41 (2014): pp. 956-974.

Abstract

The main purpose of this paper is to investigate two famous postulates of the Schumpeter hypothesis and its implications for the U.S. economy. Analytically, we investigate whether sector size matters for sectoral (i) technological change and (ii) stability, as expressed through the relevant quantitative measures and variables. To this end, we test a number of relevant models that express the various forms of this relationship. More precisely, we use panel data for the fourteen main sectors of economic activity in the U.S.A. over the period 1957-2006, just before the first signs of the US and global recession made their appearance. The results seem to be in line with the Schumpeterian postulate that market size matters for technological change and economic stability, for the US economy (1957-2006). Clearly, further research would be of great interest.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Schumpeter, sector size, technology, stability, cycles, USA
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C1 - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General; N - Economic History > N1 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics ; Industrial Structure ; Growth ; Fluctuations

References

Acs, Z. J. and D. B. Audretsch, P. Braunerhjelm, and B. Carlsson (2005), The Knowledge Spillover Theory of Entrepreneurship. London, UK: Center for Economic Policy Research, No. 5326.

Acs, Z.J. and D.B. Audretsch (1987), Innovation, Market Structure and Firm Size, Review of Economics and Statistics, 69, 567-575.

Aghion P. and Griffith R. (2005). Competition and growth, reconciling theory and evidence. MIT, Cambridge

Aghion P, Howitt P (1992) A model of growth trough creative destruction, Econometrica 60(2):323–351

Aghion, P, Bloom N, Blundell R, Griffith R and Howitt P. (2012), Competition and Innovation: An Inverted-U Relationship. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 120(2), 701–728.

Aghion, P. and Tirole, J. (1994), The Management of Innovation, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 109(4), 1185-1209.

Allison, P.D. (2005), Fixed Effects Regression Methods for Longitudinal Data, SAS Press.

Andersen, E.S. (2000), Schumpeterian games and innovation systems: Combining pioneers, adaptionists, imitators ,complementor sand mixers Note for the IKE seminar,

Arellano, M. and S. Bond (1991), Some tests of specification for panel data: Monte Carlo evidence and an application to employment equations. The Review of Economic Studies, 58. pp. 277 – 297.

Arellano, M. and O. Bover (1995), Another look at instrumental variables estimation of error-component models, Journal of Econometrics 68: 29–51.

Arrow, K. (1962), The Economic Implications of learning by Doing, Review of Economic Studies, 29(3), June, 155-173.

Artis M. and Zhang W. (1998), Membership of EMU: A fuzzy clustering analysis of alternative criteria. EUI Working Paper RSC No. 98/52

Baltagi B.H (2008), Econometric Analysis of Panel Data, 4th Edition, John Wiley and Sons.

Baudisch A.F. (2006), Functional Demand Satiation and Industrial Dynamics: The Emergence of the Global Value Chain for the U.S. Footwear Industry, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies in its series DRUID Working Papers with number 06-03.

Baum J.R., Locke E.A., Smith K.G. (2001), A Multidimensional Model of Venture Growth, The Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 292-303.

Baum J.R., Locke E.A., Smith K.G. (2001), A Multidimensional Model of Venture Growth, The Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 292-303.

Baxter, M. and R.G. King (1999), Measuring Business Cycles: Approximate Band-Pass Filters for Economic Time Series, The Review of Economics and Statistics 81, 575-593.

Blundell, R. and S. Bond (1998), Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel-data models. Journal of Econometrics 87: 115–143.

Bound, J., C.Cummins, Z.Griliches, B.H. Hall, A.B. Jaffe (1984), Who Does R&D and Who Patents?" R&D, Patents and Productivity, edited by Zvi Griliches. Chicago: Univeristy of Chicago Press, 21-54.

Brown P. and Brown H. (2011), Lessons from the Past Economic and Technological Impacts of U.S. Energy Policy, Science Eduacation and Public Policy. online at http://seceij.net/seceij/summer11/brown_lessons_f.html

Burns, A.F. and Mitchell, W.C. (1946), Measuring Business Cycles, National Bureau of Economic Research, New York, NY.

Cameron A. C. and P.K. Trivedi (1998), Regression Analysis of Count Data , New York Cambridge University Press

Choi, I. (2001), Unit root tests for panel data, Journal of International Money and Finance, 20, 249-272.

Christodoulakis, N., Dimelis, S. P. and Kollintzas, T. (1995), Comparison of business cycles in the EC, Economica, Vol. 62, pp. 1-27.

Cohen, W. and R. Levin (1989), Empirical Studies of Innovation and Market Structure, Handbook of Industrial Organisation, edited by R. Schmalensee and R.D. Willig, 1059-1107. London: North Holland.

Cohen, W.M., R.C. Levin and D.C. Mowery (1987), Firm Size and R&D Intensity: A Re-Examination, Journal of Industrial Economics, Vol. XXXV, No. 4, 543-565.

Comanor, W. S. (1967): Market Structure, Product Differentiation, and Industrial Research, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 81, No. 4, pp. 639–657

Danthine, J.P. and Donaldson J. (1993), Methodological and empirical issues in Real Business Cycle theory, European Economic Review, 37, pp. 1-35.

Dasgupta, P. and J. Stiglitz (1980), Industrial Structure and the Nature of Innovative Activity, Economic Journal, 90, 266-293.

Degne H. (2011), Do technological boom matter? New evidence on the relationship between firm size and innovativeness, Cliometrica, 5, 121-144.

Degner, H. & Streb, J. (2010), Foreign patenting in Germany: 1877 - 1932, FZID Discussion Papers 21-2010, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).

Dhawan R. (2001), Firm size and productivity differential: theory and evidence from a panel of US firms, Journal of Economic Behavior Organisation 44:269–293.

Dickerson A., Gibson H. and Tsakalotos E. (1998), Business Cycle Correspondence in the European Union, Economica, No. 25, pp. 51-77.

Dooley J. (2008), U.S. Federal Investments in Energy R&D: 1961-2008 . PNNL-17952, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, WA.

Dooley, J. (1999), Energy R&D in the United States, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, PNNL-12188.Economic Review 93, 1240-1267

Ericson R. and A. Pakes (1995), Markov-Perfect Industry Dynamics: A Framework for Empirical Work. Review of Economic Studies, 62(1):53–82

F. M. Scherer (1983), The propensity to Patent, International Journal of Industrial Organization 107-128. North-Holland

Fehner F. and Hall J. (1994), History Division, U.S. Department of Energy, Department of Energy 1977-1991: A Summary History, U.S. Department of Energy, p. 41.

Fiorito, R. and Kollintzas, T. (1994), Stylized facts of business cycles in the G7 from a real business cycles perspective, European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 235-269, February.

Fisher, F. M. and Temin, P. (1973), Returns to Scale in Research and Development: What Does the Schumpeterian Hypothesis Imply?, Journal of Political Economy 81, no. 1, 56-70.

Gayle, P.G. (2001), Market Concentration and Innovation: New Empirical Evidence on the Schumpeterian Hypothesis. University of Colorado at Boulder, Center of Economic Analysis, Working Paper No. 01-14.

Greene H.W (1990), A gamma distributed stochastic frontier model, Journal of Econometrics, 46 , pp. 141-163.

Griliches, Z. and Lichtenberg, F.(1984), R&D and Productivity Growth at the Industry Level: Is There Still a Relationship? R&D, Patents and Productivity, edited by Zvi Griliches. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 465-496.

Griliches, Z. (1980), R&D and the Productivity Slowdown, American Economic Review, Papers and Proceedings, 70(2), 343-348.

Halaby, C. N (2004). "Panel Models in Sociological Research: Theory into Practice," Annual Review of Sociology, vol. 30.

Hashmi, A.R and J. Van Biesebroeck, (2010), Market Structure and Innovation: A Dynamic Analysis of the Global Automobile Industry, National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper Series, No 15959.

Hodrick, R.J. and Prescott, E.C. (1997), Post-war U.S. Business Cycles: An Empirical Investigation, Journal of Money, Credit, and Banking, 29, pp. 1-16.

Ikenberry G. J. (1986), The irony of state strength: comparative responses to the oil shocks in the 1970s, International Organization, 40, pp 105-137.

Im, K.S., Pesaran, M.H., and Shin, Y. (1997), Testing for Unit Roots in Heterogeneous Panel, Department of Applied Econometrics, University of Cambridge.

Judson, R. and Owen, A. (1999), Estimating dynamic panel data models: a guide for macroeconomists, Economics Letters 65, 9-15.

Kamien, M.I. and N.L.Schwartz (1982), Market Structure and Innovation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kamien, MI and N. Schwartz (1976), On the Degree of Rivalry for Maximum Innovation Activity, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 90, 245- 60.

Kilian, L. and Park, C. (2009), The Impact of Oil Price Shocks on the U.S. Stock Market, International Economic Review 50, 1267-1287.

Kydland, F. E and Prescott, E. C, (1991), The Econometrics of the General Equilibrium Approach to Business Cycles, Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 93(2), pages 161-78.

Landes, D. (1969), The Unbound Prometheus, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Langlois R.N. (2007), The dynamics of industrial capitalism: Schumpeter, Chandler, and the new economy, The Graz Schumpeter lectures 2004, London, pp 20–24

Levin, A., C. Lin, and C.-J. Chu (2002), Unit Root Tests in Panel Data: Asymptotic and Finite-sample Properties. Journal of Econometrics 108, 1–24.

Levin, R.C., W.M. Cohen and D.C. Mowery (1985), R&D Appropriability, Opportunity, and Market Structure: New Evidence on Some Schumpeterian Hypotheses, American Economic Review, AEA Papers and Proceedings, 75, 20-

Link, A. N. (1980), Firm Size and Efficient Entrepreneurial Activity: A Reformulation of the Schumpeter Hypothesis, Journal of Political Economy, 88, 771-782.

Link, A.N. (1981), Basic Research and Productivity Increase in Manufacturing: Additional Evidence, The American Economic Review, Vol. 71, No. 5, 1111-1112.

Loury, G. C. (1979), Market Structure and Innovation, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 93, No. 3. pp. 395-410.

Lucas, R. E., Jr. (1977), Understanding business cycles, In K. Karl Brunner, & A. Meltzer (Eds.), Stabilization of the domestic and international economy, Amsterdam: North Holland.

Maddala, G.S. and S. Wu. (1999), A Comparative Study of Unit Root Tests with Panel Data and a new Simple Test, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 61, 631-652.

Malecki E J. (1980), Growth and change in the analysis of rank - size distributions: empirical findings, Environment and Planning A 12(1), 41–52.

Mankiw, N.G., Romer, D. and Weil, D.N. (1992), A Contribution to the Empirics of Economic Growth, The Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 107(2), 407-37.

Mansfield, E. (1964), Industrial Research and Development Expenditures: Determinants, Prospects and Relation of Size of Firm and Inventive Output, Journal of Political Economy, 72, 319-340

Margolis R. M. and Kammen, D. M. (1999), Underinvestment: The Energy Technology and R&D Policy Challange, Science 285, 690-692.

McCraw T. (2007), Prophet of Innovation: Joseph Schumpeter and Creative Destruction, Belknap Press.

Meisel, J.B. and Lin, S.A.Y. (1983), The impact of market structure on the firm’s allocation of resources to research and development, Quarterly Review of Economics and Business 23, 28 – 43

Mokyr, J. (1990), Are we Living in the Middle of an Industrial Revolution?, Economic Review, 82, vol. 2, 31-43.

Mokyr, J. (1990), The Lever of Riches, New York and Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Montoya L. A., De Haan J. (2008), Regional business cycle synchronization in Europe? International Economics and Economic Policy Vol. 5, No. 1, pp.123-137.

Nahm J.-W. (2001), Nonparametric quantile regression analysis of R&D-sales relationship for Korean firms. Empirical Economics 26: 259–270.

Nelder, J.A. and R.W.M. Wedderburn (1972), Generalized linear models, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 135:370--84.

Nelson, C.R., and Plosser, C.I. (1982), Trends and Random Walks in Macroeconomics Time Series: Some Evidence and Implications, Journal of Monetary Economics, 10, 139-167.

Nicholas T. (2003), Why Schumpeter was right: innovation, market power, and creative destruction in 1920s, American Journal of Economic History 63:1023–1058.

Levin R.and Reiss, P. C. (1984), Tests of a Schumpeterian Model of R&D and Market Structure, NBER Chapters, in: R & D, Patents, and Productivity, National Bureau of Economic Research, 175-208.

Rodriguez C. A. (1979), A Comment on Fisher and Temin on the Schumpeterian Hypothesis, The Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 87, No. 2 , pp. 383-385,

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

Salies, E. (2009), A test of the Schumpeterian Hypothesis in Panel of European electric utilities, OFCE.

Scepanti, E.and Zamagni, S. (1993), An Outline of the History of Economic Thought, Oxford.

Scherer, F. (1967), Research and Development Resource Allocation Under Rivalry, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 81, 524-531.

Scherer, F. (1992), Schumpeter and Plausible Capitalism, Journal of Economic Literature, 30, 1419-1436.

Scherer, F. M. (1965), Size of Firm, Oligopoly, and Research: A Comment, The Canadian Journal of Economics and Political Science / Revue Canadienne d' Economique et de Science politique, Vol. 31, No. 2, 256-266.

Schumpeter, J. A. (1939), Business Cycles: A Theoretical, Historical and Statistical Analysis of the Capitalist Process. New York: McGraw Hill,

Schumpeter, J. A. (1942), Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, New York: Harper and Row

Schumpeter, J. A. (1976), Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy, New York: Harper Torchbook Edition

Schumpeter, J.A. (1912/34), The Theory of Economic Development, Harvard university press, Cambridge, MA

Smith K. (2006), Measuring innovation, in: Fagerberg J, Movery DC, Nelson RR (eds) The Oxford handbook of innovation, New York, pp 148–177

Smythe J. D. (2010), A Schumpeterian view of the Great Merger Movement in American manufacturing, Cliometrica, Journal of Historical Economics and Econometric History, vol. 4(2), pp. 141-170.

Stikuts, D. (2003), Measuring output gap in Latvia, Working Paper 2/2003 - 22 S, Riga: Latvijas Banka.

Streb J, (1999), How to Win Schumpeterian Competition: Technological Transfers in the German Plastics Industry from the 1930s to the 1970s, Working Papers 811, Economic Growth Center, Yale University.

Symeonidis, G. (1996), Innovation, Firm size and Market structure: Schumpeterian Hypothesis and some themes, Economics Department Working Papers, No. 161, OCDE/GD(96)58.

Thomson, R. (1984), The Eco-technic Process and the Development of the Sewing Machine in Technique, Spirit and Form in the Making of the Modern Economies: Essays in Honor of William N. Parker, edited by Gary Saxonhouse and Gavin Wright, 243-69, Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Van Montfort Kees and Brouwer E. (2002), The non-trivial choice between innovation indicators, Econ Innovation New Technology 11(2):109–121

Wladimir R. and P. Mohnen, F. Palm and Van der Loeff, S. (2009), Innovative Sales, R&D and Total Innovation Expenditures Panel Evidence on their Dynamics, UNU-MERIT Working Papers.

Zachariadis, M. (2002), R&D, Inovation and technological progress: A test of the Schumpeterian framework without scale effects, Working Paper, Louisiana State University, No 18.