Upward and downward complementarity: the meso core of evolutionary growth theory

2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 753-763 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kurt Dopfer ◽  
Jason Potts ◽  
Andreas Pyka
2016 ◽  
Vol 54 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-194 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dragoslava Sredojević ◽  
Slobodan Cvetanović ◽  
Gorica Bošković

Abstract The aim of the research in this paper is to analyse the issue of the treatment of the category of technological changes within the main aspects of economic growth theory. The analysis of the key positions of neoclassical theory (Solow), endogenous approach (Romer), and evolutionary growth theory (Freeman) advocates has pointed to the conclusion that these approaches agree on the fact that the category of technological changes is a key generator of economic growth. Neoclassicists were the first to explicitly analyse the category of technological changes in growth theory. They exerted a strong influence on a large number of governments to allocate significant funds for scientific and research development, to stimulate the creation and diffusion of innovation. Supporters of endogenous theory also see the category of technological changes as a key driver of economic growth. Unlike neoclassicists, they emphasise the importance of externalities, in the form of technological spillover and research and development activities, for the creation and diffusion of innovation. Finally, evolutionary and institutional economists explore the category of technological changes inseparably from the economic and social environment in which they are created and diffused. Recommendations of this research can be of particular use to economic growth and development policy makers in the knowledge economy, whose basic and substantial feature is the so-called fourth industrial revolution


2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 418 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kemal Soyer ◽  
Hale Ozgit ◽  
Husam Rjoub

In this globalized era of strict competition, all actors in countries must focus on their strengths for continuous growth, which would presumably lead to sustainable economic development. Amongst the three components of sustainable development, this paper focuses on the economic and social aspects. Many countries are becoming service-oriented for economic growth. Education is a form of human capital investment which significantly contributes to countries’ national income via students, particularly international cross-border students in higher education institutions. While endogenous growth models dismiss the importance of governments in the growth process, in this paper, the Keynesian and new growth theories are combined to form an evolutionary growth theory. This research aims to analyze the short and long-term relationships between macroeconomic variables, international students, and their impact on the gross domestic product (GDP) of a small island with the intention of policy implications for stakeholders to reach or maintain sustainable economic development. Using an evolutionary growth theory with 34 years of time-series data on quarterly base, the vector autocorrection (VAR) model helps reveal the short and long-run relationships as well as impacts on the economy for sustainable economic growth. The results confirmed a long-run relationship via cointegration. Moreover, they approved bidirectional causality between student numbers, general secondary school enrolment, and GDP. Findings suggest significant implications for all stakeholders, particularly for higher education institutions, the government, and local citizens due to the importance of micro and macro-economic variables’ effect on GDP. The results prove that educated human capital contributes to economic growth. Governments should continue their existing strategy regarding secondary school enrolment rates as it is found to be the most effective variable in the long-run. As education, knowledge, and information transfer rises, it contributes to sustainable development through promoting social stability. Limitation of the unavailability of the total yearly population, GDP was opted instead of GDP per capita.


2009 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.S. Metcalfe ◽  
John Foster

2002 ◽  
Vol 12 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 17-28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard R. Nelson

1999 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 33-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Northover

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document