Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A new framework for analyzing technological change

  • Regular Article
  • Published:
Journal of Evolutionary Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Technological evolution is widely thought to be the primary process that brings about economic growth. It is one of the main targets of evolutionary economics, but how technological change induces economic growth has remained unexplained. Based on the new theory of value, this paper explains how technological change leads to long-run improvement in real wage rates and income per capita. Section 2 gives a brief overview of the new theory and presents two theorems (minimal price and the convergence theorem) that afford the basis of analyses in Sections 4 and 5. Before these, Section 3 compares two price systems, traditional and new, and compares efficiency from two points of view. Traditionally economics with equilibrium has been concerned with those conditions that provide allocative efficiency. However, technological evolution comprises a series of half-blind selections of ‘better’ production techniques and exhibits another kind of efficiency that can be named dynamic efficiency. The latter is more important than the former. Allocative efficiency is self-destructive, while dynamic efficiency is cumulative in its effects. Section 4 shows how technological change works cumulatively and how it leads to real wage increases and income per capita. Section 5 shows that the new theory can explain the emergence and growth of global value supply chains as a part of technology choice arising through international trade. This paper is mainly focused on supply-side theory, while problems concerning the demand side are considered in Section 6. Section 7 concludes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Pasinetti’s reduction assumes a homogeneous workforce. This method cannot be used in international trade. Saviotti and Pyka’s works are complementary to this paper. For a complete explanation of economic growth, see section 6 of this paper.

  2. Iben Taimiyah (1263–1328) wrote: “Thus, if the desires for the good increase while its availability decreases, its price rises. On the other hand if availability of the good increases and the desires for it decrease, the price declines.” Cited by Ghazanfar and Azim Islami, in Ghazanfar (2003 p.59).

  3. This also marks a big difference between the new theory of value and the neoclassical theory.

  4. Lee (1998) worries that unit cost may not be constant. When depreciations were included, the unit costs are no longer constant, but there is a method of cost accounting to handle this, e.g. Fujimoto’s total direct costs. See, on this point, Shiozawa (2019b) Section 2, supplementary note to Postulate 12 and footnote 36.

  5. Takahiro Fujimoto observes that this method is more reasonable than others to stimulate right incentives to the people in production sites. See Shiozawa (2019b, p.62).

  6. In our days, there are in the economy two domains: the real economy and financial economy. Each works on a totally different principle. The new theory of values applies to the real economy and not to the financial economy.

  7. When the unit cost includes cost of using machines and other fixed capital as in the case of total direct cost, it is necessary to remove this amount from the fixed cost.

  8. Kaleckians often identify markup rate with profit rate, but they are wrong.

  9. If the sales volume is a function of the price, as is ordinarily assumed, it is then possible to calculate the optimal product price. The famous formula (marginal revenue) = (marginal cost) in the theory of imperfect competition is obtained based on this assumption. As the assumption that the sales volume is a simple function of the product price is invalid, the formula is invalid as well.

  10. In his illustration of demand distribution on a line segment, Hotelling cited two situations: a main street in a town and a transcontinental railroad. The main street parable became more popular than the transcontinental railroad parable, but the latter better illustrates the dependence of price on total demand for each of two suppliers because we can more precisely calculate each buyers’ calculation.

  11. Note that Hotelling assumed zero production cost for producers. Thus, the c part is eliminated from his formulae (Hotelling 1929 pp.45, 51).

  12. For the simplicity of describing the minimal price theorem, we assume numbers of production techniques for each product are finite. Minimal price theorem can be formulated for the case where an infinite number of production techniques exist if we add some closedness condition for the set of production techniques. Samuelson’s original theorem was formulated with this assumption.

  13. This expression is adopted in order to make clear comparison with the case of international trade economy, which is explained in Subsection 2.9.

  14. Life expectancy of a machine is ordinarily very long. However, it may become obsolete because of the arrival of a new type of machine. So, life expectancy of the machine is assumed to be far shorter than physical life expectancy.

  15. The meaning of “slowness” is given in Shiozawa (2019b, p128). See also the notes following Theorem 2.5.

  16. The dimension of the matrix changes depending on the assumptions we make on stocks. Morioka assumed that firms keep input stocks (materials, parts and components) in addition to product stocks. Shiozawa (2019b Section 2.7) assumed that firms keep only their product stocks. In this case, the dimension of the matrix is N (τ + 2).

  17. Keynes’s notion of “employment function” for a firm or industry is quite near to the argument that leads to (2–13) (Keynes 1973[1936] Chapter 20).

  18. In the international trade situation, we must assume that two countries can produce the same product. This requires a delicate interpretation that is a little different from simple product differentiation concept, but we omit explaining that complication.

  19. In this section we use the term commodity instead of product. Commodity in international trade must be treated as common for all countries. If we distinguish commodity in each country, the number of products is equal to M・N, when M is the number of countries and N the number of commodities.

  20. We can treat in a similar way the case where there are many heterogeneous labor forces in a country if the mutual proportions of wage rates remain constant.

  21. The new theory of value assumes constant (marginal) cost up to the production capacity, but it stands on the increasing returns to scale assumption if we take fixed cost into account.

  22. Menu cost theory explains only this aspect of stickiness.

  23. A kind of circularity exists between assumptions and results we get. This is only solved by accepting the micro-macro loop argument (Shiozawa 2019a Subsection 1.5.3).

  24. See Huerta De Soto (2006 Second Part, 2009 Ch. 2) for a short history of “dynamic efficiency” from an Austrian point of view and Havyatt (2017) for a history of the trilogy comprised technological, allocative and dynamic efficiency. Ellerman (2016) gives a wider perspective on dynamic efficiency. One which may help us to reconsider why a market economy is more efficient than, for example, a centrally planned economy.

  25. Other topics concerning technical change and progress include path dependency, technological trajectories and the techno-economic paradigm. All these questions are skipped here, because our task is to make clear how individual improvements of production techniques accumulate to cause an overall improvement of the economic state. See also Subsection 4.6.

  26. Economic growth here means (real) income growth per capita after the definition of Arthur Lewis (1955). Abstracting index problems, income per capita is largely determined by the real wage level for majority of countries.

  27. We abstract the aspect that new production technique usually accompanies quality change of the product. Rosenberg (1982, Ch.1, §3) is a short summary of the debates on the direction of technological progress. It is necessary to distinguish ex-ante selection of possible techniques and the ex post identification of related technological change.

  28. If we use the ordinary representation (u, a1, a2)  (1, 0), the new representation takes the form (1, a1/u, a2/u) ⇒ (1/u, 0). Thus, a1 and a2 in Figure 2 express 1/u-a1/u and -a2/u in the standard representation with normalization condition b1 = 1.

  29. This is also a case of re-switching but probably more important (at least for growth theory) than that argued in the 1960’s in the capital controversy, i.e. a capital reverse and re-switching that are caused by the change of profit rate (Harcourt 1972; Cohen and Harcourt 2003).

  30. We can assume that technological change occurs quite randomly (the first stylized fact by G. Dosi 1988, p.222). This is not to claim that production and product techniques progress only by chance. Although we can find various law-like phenomena, as we have mentioned in section 4.1, it is unnecessary to the arguments that follow, to know what happens.

  31. We distinguish for vectors three inequalities <, ≤, and ≦. Inequalities < and ≦ signify that inequality holds for all respective components of the vectors. Inequality ≤ means that ≦ holds for all component pairs and there exists one component pair for which < holds.

  32. As was stated in Subsection 2.6, the minimal price theorem holds in a closed or near closed economy. In the globalized economy, we observe a different feature. For example, US workers’ median wage rate has been stagnating in real terms since the end of the 1970’s. This can only be explained by international trade scheme.

  33. To know the wage differences is not easy, because wage rates change according to areas of employment, industry, and required skills. The above numbers are a rough estimate based upon Japanese managers who worked in Chinese filial firms. According to ILO data (2009), monthly-wage ratio between Japan/China in 1990 was 18.9, but in 2000 it decreased to 13.2.

  34. One of main differences between the production function and the set of production techniques formulation lies in the tractability of the latter in the international trade situation. See Subsection 2.1.

  35. National productivity can be well defined for a closed economy, but in an international trade situation where input goods and services are freely traded national productivity of a nation can be decided only by using the new theory of international values.

  36. We have given a similar figure in Shiozawa (2017a) Figure 2. In order to describe the graph in a two dimensional plane, the horizontal axis is there taken in value terms. In this illustration of our present paper, we are assuming an N + 1 dimensional graph configuration reduced to a 2D plane. Both interpretations are possible.

  37. P2 is taken at the point that has the same abscissa as point PH. Then P2 and PH have the same circulating capital or cost of material input per unit of product. The labor cost of P2 is lower than PH because P2 has a lower labor cost than PH. Labor to fixed capital ratio is not known here but we can imagine a situation where P2 is more capital intensive in value terms. Note that we cannot compare physical capital intensity ratio either for circulating or fixed capital.

  38. For any RS trade theory (see Shiozawa 2017a, Section 2) with fixed labor power, the following theorem holds. To a facet F of the production possibility frontier there exists an open domain in which any final demand can only be produced as the net product of production techniques that belong to the spanning tree (or its superset) that is associated with facet F. The domain identified by the theorem is called the side domain of the facet F. This is the first time that this theorem has been publicly announced.

  39. Lipsey et al. (2006) counted among 24 transforming GPTs three organizational GPTs: factory system, mass production, and lean production. We may add global supply chains among these organizational GPTs.

  40. IMF World Economic Outlook. The rate is a simple average of GDP growth rates in real terms for years 1996 to 2005. These were years of rapid growth but trade in intermediates grew even faster than the world economy and total world trade.

  41. To know the most probable pattern is not easy to calculate. In a simpler case of 10 countries and 100 parts, where each country produces the same number of different commodities, Romeo Meštrović found that the most probable pattern is not completely symmetric as he shows that a form (14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6) has more combinations than when each country shares 10 parts and components. A general formula for a fixed pattern is given in his short note attached to his post on March 3., 2019 in reply to my question in ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_is_the_most_probable_pattern_when_we_distribute_N-items_into_M-boxes.

  42. Recent empirical research teaches us that the Engel curve’s behavior for a narrow group of commodities is quite complicated (Chai and Moneta 2010).

  43. Schumpeter (1926) referred to “demand creation” through the expression “opening of a new market” as being one of five entrepreneurial activities.

References

  • Amendola G, Guerrieri P, and Padoan PC(1998) International patterns of technological accumulation and trade. Chapter 7. In: Archibugi D, Michies J (eds) Trade, growth and technical change, 1998. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 141–167

  • Antonelli C (2011) Handbook on the economic complexity of technological change. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham

    Google Scholar 

  • Aoki M, Yoshikawa H (2002) Demand saturation, creation and economic growth. J Econ Behav Organ 2002(48):127–154

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow KJ (1951) Alternative proof of the substitution theorem for Leontief models in the general case. In: Koopmans (ed) Activity analysis of production and allocation. John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp 155–164

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow KJ, Debreu G (1954) The existence of equilibrium for a competitive economy I. Econometrica 26:265–290

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow KJ, Hahn FH (1971) General competitive analysis. Holdan-day, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Bair J (2009) Frontiers of commodity chain research, Stanford University Press

  • Baldwin R (2006) Globalisation: the great unbundling(s). Prime Minister's Office; Economic Council of Finland http://repository.graduateinstitute.ch/record/295612/files/Baldwin_06-09-20.pdf

  • Baldwin R (2012) Global supply chains: why they emerged, why they matter, and where they are going. Center for Trade and Economic Integration (CETEI) working paper: no. 2012-13. Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies, Geneva. http://repository.graduateinstitute.ch/record/15555/files/338.pdf

  • Beer S (1972) The brain of the firm. John Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Cantwell J (1989) Technological innovation and multinational corporations. Basil Blackwell, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Chai A (2017) Rethinking the economic possibilities of our grandchildren: what is the future of consumption? J Evol Econ 27(2):215–219

    Google Scholar 

  • Chai A, Moneta A (2010) Retrospectives: Engel curves. J Econ Perspect 24(1):225–240

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark G (2004) The condition of the working-class in England, 1200–2000: magna Carta to Tony Blair. Working paper (Department of Economics, University of California, Davis). https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f3ab/f9c4411430bd3cdaf85adca447e4acf70dc9.pdf

  • Cohen AJ, Harcourt GC (2003) Whatever happened to the Cambridge capital theory controversies? J Econ Perspect 17(1):199–214

    Google Scholar 

  • Deleidi D, Paternesi Meloni W, Stirati A (2018) Structural change, labour productivity and the Kalor-Verdoorn law: Evidence from European countries. WP 239 (Dipartiment di Economica Univesita di Studi Roma Tre)

  • DeSerpa AC (1971) A theory of the economics of time. Econ J 81(324):828–846

    Google Scholar 

  • Dopfer K (2001) History-friendly theories in economics: reconciling universality and context in evolutionary analysis. Chapter 6 () in Foster and Metcalfe (Eds.) Frontiers of evolutionary economics: competition, Slef-organization and innovation policy. Edward Elgar,

  • Dopfer K, Nelson R (2018) The evolution of evolutionary economics. Chapter 7, pp.208–229 in R. Nelson et al. (2018)

  • Dosi G (1988) The nature of innovation process. In Dosi et al. (eds.) (1988) chapter 10, pp.221-238

  • Dosi G, Freeman C, Nelson R, Silverberg G, Soete L (eds) (1988) Technical change and economic theory. Pinter Publishers, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Dosi G, Pavitt K, Soete L (1990) The economics of technical change and international trade. New York University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Faccarello G (2017) A calm investigation into Mr. Ricardo’s principles of international trade. Chapter 6. In: Senga F, Tabuchi (eds) Ricardo and International trade. Routledge, London, pp 85–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Foster J (2019) The US consumption function: a new perspective. Preprint available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335291449_THE_US_CONSUMPTION_FUNCTION_A_NEW_PERSPECTIVE

  • Freeman C (1988) Introduction. Chapter 1, pp.1-12 in Dosi et al. (1988)

  • Gereffi G (2018) Global value chains and development: redefining the contours of 21st century capitalism. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  • Gereffi G, Fernandez-Stark K (2016) Global value chain analysis: a primer, 2nd Edition, Center on Globalization, Governance & Competitiveness, Duke University

  • Gereffi G, Korxeniewicz M (1990) Commodity chains and footwear exports in the Semiperiphery. In: Martin WG (ed) Semiperipheral states in the world economy. Greenwood Press, New York, pp 45–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Ghanzanfar SM (ed) (2003) Medieval Islamic economic thought. Routledge Curzon, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Harcourt GC (1972) Some Cambridge controversies in the theory of capital. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayek FA (1945) The use of knowledge in society. Am Econ Rev 35(4):519–530

    Google Scholar 

  • Hotelling H (1929) Stability in competition. Econ J 39(153):41–57

    Google Scholar 

  • Huerta de Soto J (2006) Four hundred years of dynamic efficiency. https://doi.org/10.4325/9780203930601

  • ILO (2009) Globalization and theory of input trade. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones RW (2000) Globalization and the theory of input trade. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones RW, Kierzkowski H (2001) A framework for fragmentation. In: Amdt SW, Kierzkowski H (eds) Fragmentation, new production patterns in the world economy. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplinsky R, Morris M (2001) A handbook for value chain research. Link: http://sds.ukzn.ac.za/files/handbook_valuechainresearch.pdf

  • Kay N (1988) The R&D function: corporate strategy and structure. In Dosi et al (1988) Chpater 13, pp.292–294

  • Keen S (2011) Debunking economics - revised and expanded edition: the naked emperor dethroned? Expanded, Revised Edition. London: Zed Books

  • Keynes JM (1973 [1936]) general theory of employment, interest and money. The collected writings of John Maynard Keynes, volume 7, Macmillan

  • Kirman A (1989) The intrinsic limits of modern economic theory: the emperor has no clothes. Economic journal 99(396) supplement: conference papers, 126-139

  • Krüger JJ (2008) Productivity and structural change: a review of the literature. J Econ Surv 2:330–363

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee FS (1998) Post Keynesian Price theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis WA (1955) The theory of economic growth. Reprinted by Routledge, London, 2013

  • Lipsey R, Carlaw KI, Bekhar CT (2006) Economic transformations: general purpose technologies and long term economic growth. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Loasby BJ (1991) Equilibrium and evolution: an exploration of connecting principles in economics. Manchester University Press, Manchester

    Google Scholar 

  • Malerba F, Nelson RR, Orsenigo L, Winter SG (1999) The pharmaceutical industry and the revolution in molecular biology: exploring the interactions between scientific, institutional and organizational change. In: Mowery, Nelson (eds) Sources of industrial leadership. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Malerba F, Nelson Rr, Orsenigo L, Winter SG (2016) Innovation and the evolution of industries: history-friendly models. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Mankiw NG, Romer D (1991) New Keynesian economics. Volume 1 and 2, mass: Cambridge: The MIT Press

  • Markusen JR (2004) Multinational firms and the theory of international trade. Cambridge: The MIT Press. Paperback edition

  • Marshall (1920) The principles of economics, 8th edn. The Macmillan Press, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Miroudot S, Lanz R, Ragoussis A (2009) Trade in intermediate goods and services. OECD Trade Policy Working Papers, No. 93

  • Morioka M (2005) Sūryō Chōsetsu no Keizai Riron (in Japanese: an economic theory of quantity adjustment). Nihon Keizai Hyoronsha

  • Morioka M (2019a) The basic theory of quantity adjustment. Chapter 3, pp.139–194 in Shiozawa et al. (2019)

  • Morioka M (2019b) Dynamic properties of quantity adjustment process under demand forecast formed by moving average of past demands. Chapter 4 pp. 195–255 in Shiozawa et. al. (2019)

  • Nelson RR, Consoli D (2010) An evolutionary theory of household consumption. J Evol Econ 20(5):665–687

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson RR, Winter SG (1974) Neoclassical vs. evolutionary theories of economic growth: critique and prospectus. Econ J 84(336):886–905

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson R, Winter S (2002) Evolutionary theorizing in economics. J Econ Perspect 16(2):23–46

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson R, Dosi G, Helfat C, Pyka A, Saviotti PP, Lee K, Dopfer K, Malerba F, Winter S (2018) Modern evolutionary economics: an overview. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Nisticó S (2015) Enjoyment Takes Time: Some Implications for Choice Theory Economics 9: 2015–8. https://doi.org/10.5018/economics-ejournal.ja.2015-8

  • Pasinetti LL (1993) Structural economics dynamics: a theory of the economic consequences of human learning. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavitt K (1988) International patterns of technological accumulations. In: Hood N, Vahne JE (eds) Strategies in global competition. Croom Helm, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Ricardo D (1951[1821]) On the principles of political economy and taxation. The works and correspondence of David Ricardo, volume I, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

  • Rosenberg N (1982) Inside the black box: technology and economics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Samuelson PA (1951) Alternative proof of the substitution theorem for Leontief models in the general case. In: Koopmans (ed) Activity analysis of production and allocation. John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp 142–146

    Google Scholar 

  • Saviotti PP (2001) Variety, growth and demand. J Evol Econ 11(1):119–142

    Google Scholar 

  • Saviotti PP, Pyka A (2004) Economic development by the creation of new sectors. J Evol Econ 14(1):1–35

    Google Scholar 

  • Saviotti PP, Pyka A (2013) The co-evolution of innovation, demand and growth. Econ Innov New Technol 22(5):461–482

    Google Scholar 

  • Saviotti PP, Pyka A (2017) Innovation, structural change and demand evolution: does demand saturate? J Evol Econ 27(2):337–358

    Google Scholar 

  • Scarf HE (2002) Inventory theory. Oper Res 50(2):186–191

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter JA (1912) Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung, Reprinted with Introducuion by von Jochen Röpke and Olaf Schiller, Duncker & Humblot, Berlin, 2006.. Japanese edition Yagi and Araki (2020)

  • Schumpeter JA (1926) Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung: Eine Untersuchung über Unternehmergewinn, Kapital, Kredit, Zins und den Konjunkturzyklus. Translated from the second German edition by Redvers Opie, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass, 1934 with the title Theory of economic development

  • Shiozawa Y (1978) Non-simultaneous mark-up pricing processes. Kyoto Institute for Economic Research (Kyoto University) discussion paper no. 125. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315505189_Non-Simultaneous_Mark-up_Pricing_Processes

  • Shiozawa Y (1983) Kahn-Keynes katei no bisai kōzō (fine structure of Kahn-Keynes processes). Keizaigaku Zasshi 84(3): 48~64

  • Shiozawa Y (2016a) A guided tour of the backside of agent-based simulation. Chap. 1, pp.3–90 in Kita et al. (eds.) Realistic simulation of financial markets, Springer, Tokyo

  • Shiozawa Y (2016b) The revival of classical theory of values. Chap. 8, 151–172 in Yokokawa et al. (eds.) The rejuvenation of political economy. Routledge, London

  • Shiozawa Y (2017a) The new theory of international values: an overview. Chap. 1, pp.3–75, in Shiozawa et al. (eds.) A new construction of Ricardian theory of international values, Springer, Singapore

  • Shiozawa Y (2017b) An origin of the neoclassical revolution: Mill's "reversion" and its consequences. Chap. 7, pp.191–243 in Shiozawa et al. (eds.) A new construction of Ricardian theory of international values, Springer, Singapore

  • Shiozawa Y (2019a) Microfoundations of evolutionary economics. Chap. 1, pp. 1-52 in Shiozawa et al. (2019)

  • Shiozawa Y (2019b) A large economic system with minimally rational agents. Chap. 2, pp. 53-138 in Shiozawa et al. (2019)

  • Shiozawa Y, Fujimoto T (2018) The nature of international competition among firms. Chap. 3, pp. 43–96 in Fujimoto & Ikuine (eds.) Industrial competitiveness and design evolution, Springer, Tokyo

  • Shiozawa Y, Morioka M, Taniguchi K (2019) The microfoundations of evolutionary economics. Springer, Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

  • Skjott-Larsen T, Schany PB, Kotzab H, Mikkola JH (2007) Managing the global supply chain management, 3rd edn. Business School Press, Copenhagen

    Google Scholar 

  • Solow RM (1957) Technical change and the aggregate production function. Rev Econ Stat 39(3):312–320

    Google Scholar 

  • Sraffa P (1960) Production of commodities by means of commodities. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Sredojević, Cvetanović, Bošković (2016) Technological changes in economic growth theory: neoclassical, endogenous, and evolutionary-institutional approach. Econ Themes 54(2):177–194

    Google Scholar 

  • Steedman I (1977) Marx after Sraffa. New Left Books

  • Steedman I (2001) Consumption takes time, implications for economic theory. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • Taniguchi K (1997) Ikōkatei no Riron to Sūchi Jikken (in Japanese: a theory of transition process and numerical experiments). Keibunsha

  • Thompson P (2012) The relationship between unit costs and cumulative quantity and the evidence for organization learning-by-doing. J Econ Perspect 26(3):203–224

    Google Scholar 

  • Vernon R (Ed.) (1970) The technology factor in international trade. New York, National Bureau of Economic Research, Distributed by Columbia University Press

  • Wilson RJ (2010) An introduction to graph theory, 5th edn. Pearson, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Witt (2001) Learning to consume - a theory of wants and the growth of demand. J Evol Econ 11:23–36

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoon M, Lee K (2009) Agent-based and “history-friendly” models for explaining industrial evolution. Evol Inst Econ Rev 6:45–70

    Google Scholar 

  • Ziman J (ed.) (2000) Technological innovation as an evolutionary process, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author thanks Lee Keun who had invited him to the 17th International Joseph A. Schumpeter Society Conference at Seoul in Summer 2018. He is also thankful for the comments received there and for those of two referees of the submitted paper. Special thanks are given to Robin E. Jarvis for his comments and review of the drafts and to Naoki Yoshihara for his correcting comments. The author dedicates this paper to Professor Mitsuharu Ito, who has continued to emphasize the importance of J. A. Schumpeter.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Osaka City University, Osaka, Japan

    Yoshinori Shiozawa

Authors
  1. Yoshinori Shiozawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yoshinori Shiozawa.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The author declares that he has no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shiozawa, Y. A new framework for analyzing technological change. J Evol Econ 30, 989–1034 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-020-00704-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-020-00704-5

Keywords

JEL codes

Search

Navigation