Innovation, Growth, and Inequality: Plausible Scenarios of Wage Disparities in a World with Nanotechnologies

Chapter
Part of the Yearbook of Nanotechnology in Society book series (YNTS, volume 2)

Abstract

Walter Valdivia provides another economic analysis of the patterns nanotechnology is weaving. Although much growth theory neglects distributional issues, one version considers the income dynamics connected to the diffusion of a new general purpose technology (GPT). A GPT is a technology that causes widespread change because it radically affects the productivity of many other technologies. Because nanotechnology research is so pervasive in the sciences and engineering, many observers are working with the assumption that it will be as important a GPT as computing technology. Using a model proposed by Philippe Aghion to explain the relationship between skill and the diffusion of a GPT, Valdivia analyzes ways wage inequality might appear in several possible paths for the development of nanotechnologies.

Keywords

Skilled Labor Wage Inequality Unskilled Labor Contingency Planning Endogenous Growth Model 
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.

References

  1. Acemoglu, Daron. 1998. Why do new technologies complement skills? Directed technical change and wage inequality. Quarterly Journal of Economics CXIII: 1055–1090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Acemoglu, Daron. 2002. Technical change, inequality, and the labor market. Journal of Economic Literature 40: 7–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aghion, Philippe. 2002. Schumpeterian growth theory and the dynamics of income inequality. Econometrica 70: 855–882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Aghion, Philippe, Eve Caroli, and Cecilia Garcia-Peñalosa. 1999. Inequality and economic growth: The perspective of the new growth theories. Journal of Economic Literature 37: 1615–1660.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aghion, Philippe, and Peter Howitt. 1992. A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica 60: 323–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Aghion, Philippe, and Peter Howitt. 2006. Joseph Schumpeter Lecture, appropriate growth policy: A unifying framework. Journal of the European Economic Association 4: 269–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Barben, Daniel, Erik Fisher, Cynthia Selin, and David H. Guston. 2008. Anticipatory governance of nanotechnology: Foresight, engagement, and integration. In The handbook of science and technology studies, 3rd ed., ed. Edward J. Hackett, Olga Amsterdamska, Michael Lynch, and Judy Wajcman. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  8. Bartels, Larry M. 2008. Unequal democracy: The political economy of the new Gilded Age. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Bresnahan, Timothy F., and Manuel Trajtenberg. 1992. General purpose technologies: Engines of growth? NBER working paper 4148. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  10. Bresnahan, Timothy F., and Manuel Trajtenberg. 1995. General purpose technologies: engines of growth? Journal of Econometrics 65: 83–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boin, Arjen, and Paul ‘t Hart. 2003. Public leadership in times of crisis: Mission impossible? Public Administration Review 63: 544–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. David, Paul A. 1989. Computer and dynamo: The modern productivity paradox in a not-too-distant mirror. Center for Economic Policy Research, No. 172. Palo Alto: Stanford University.Google Scholar
  13. David, Paul A. 1990. The dynamo and the computer: An historical perspective on the modern productivity paradox. American Economic Review 80: 355–361.Google Scholar
  14. David, Paul A., and Gavin Wright. 1999. General purpose technologies and surges in productivity: Historical reflections on the future of the ICT revolution. Discussion papers in economic and social history. Oxford: University of Oxford.Google Scholar
  15. Drucker, Peter. 1954. The practice of management. New York, NY: Harper.Google Scholar
  16. Frankel, Marvin. 1962. The production function in allocation and growth: A synthesis. American Economic Review 52: 995–1022.Google Scholar
  17. Freeman, Richard B. 1991. How much has de-unionisation contributed to the rise in male earnings inequality? NBER working paper 3826. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  18. Grossman, Gene M. and Elhanan Helpman. 1991. Innovation and growth in the global economy. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  19. Grossmann, Volker. 2001. Inequality, economic growth, and technological change: New aspects in an old debate. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Guston, David H., and Daniel Sarewitz. 2002. Real-time technology assessment. Technology in Society 24: 93–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Jones, Charles I. 1995. R&D-based models of economic growth. The Journal of Political Economy 103: 759–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hall, Bronwyn H., Adam B. Jaffe, and Manuel Trajtenberg. 2001. The NBER patent citations data file: Lessons, insights and methodological tools. NBER working paper 8498. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
  23. Hicks, John R. 1937. Mr. Keynes and the “classics”: A suggested interpretation. Econometrica 5: 147–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Jones, Charles I. 1995. R&D-based models of economic growth. Journal of Political Economy 103: 759–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Karinen, Risto, and David H. Guston. 2009. Toward anticipatory governance; The experience with nanotechnology. In Governing future technologies: Nanotechnology and the rise of an assessment regime, ed. Mario Kaiser, Monika Kurath, Sabine Maasen, and Cristoph Rehmann-Sutter, 217–232. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  26. Lipsey, Richard G., Cliff Bekar, and Kenneth Carlaw. 1998. What requires explanation? In General purpose technologies and economic growth, ed. Elhanan Helpman, 15–54. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  27. Lux Research, Inc. 2007. The nanotech report™. Investment overview and market research for nanotechnology, 5th ed. New York, NY: Lux Research Inc.Google Scholar
  28. Milgrom, Paul, and John Roberts. 1990. The economics of modern manufacturing: Technology, strategy, and organization. The American Economic Review 80: 511–528.Google Scholar
  29. Modigliani, Franco. 1944. Liquidity preference and the theory of interest and money. Econometrica 12: 45–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mokyr, Joel. 1990. The lever of riches: Technological creativity and economic progress. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Nelson, Richard R. 2005. Technology, institutions, and economic growth. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Nelson, Richard R., and Edmund S. Phelps. 1966. Investments in humans, technological diffusion, and economic growth. American Economic Review 56: 69–75.Google Scholar
  33. Palmberg, Christopher, and Tuomo Nikulainen. 2006. Industrial renewal and growth through nanotechnology? An overview with focus on Finland. ETLA discussion paper 1020. Helsinki: ETLA Elinkeinoelämän Tutkimuslaitos, The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy.Google Scholar
  34. Parente, Stephen L. 2001. The failure of endogenous growth. Knowledge, Technology and Policy 13: 49–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Roberts, Nancy C., and Linda Wargo. 1994. The dilemma of planning in large scale public organizations: The case of the United States Navy. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory 4: 469–491.Google Scholar
  36. Romer, Paul. 1986. Increasing returns and long-run growth. The Journal of Political Economy 94: 1002–1037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Romer, Paul. 1990. Endogenous technological change. The Journal of Political Economy, Part 2: The Problem of Development: A conference of the Institute for the Free Enterprise Systems 98: S71–S102.Google Scholar
  38. Rosenberg, Nathan. 1998. Chemical Engineering as a general purpose technology. In General purpose technologies and economic growth, ed. Elhanan Helpman, 15–54. Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  39. Rosen, Sherwin. 1981. The economics of superstarts. The American Economic Review 71: 845–858.Google Scholar
  40. Ruttan, Vernon W. 2006. Is war necessary for economic growth? Military procurement and technology development. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Saint-Paul, Gilles. 2008. Innovation and inequality: How does technical progress affects workers? Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Samuelson, Paul A. 1947. Foundations of economic analysis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1942. Capitalism, socialism, and democracy. New York, NY: Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar
  44. Shea, Christine M. 2005. Future management research directions in nanotechnology: A case study. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management 22: 185–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Simon, Herbert A. 1987. The steam engine and the computer: What makes technology revolutionary. EDUCOM Bulletin 22: 2–5.Google Scholar
  46. Smits, Ruud, Rutgerg van Merkerk, David H. Guston, and Daniel Sarewitz. 2009. Strategic intelligence; The role of TA in systemic innovation policy. Utrecht University, Innovation Studies Utrecht, Working Paper 08.01. http://www.geo.uu.nl/isu/pdf/isu0801.pdf. (accessed November 1, 2009).
  47. Solow, Robert M. 1956. A contribution to the theory of economic growth. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 70: 65–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Verspagen, Bart. 2005. Innovation and economic growth. In The Oxford handbook of innovation, ed. Jan Fagerberg, David Mowery, and Richard R. Nelson, 487–513. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  49. Youtie, Jan, Maurizio Iacopetta, and Stuart Graham. 2008. Assessing the nature of nanotechnology: Can we uncover an emerging general purpose technology? Journal of Technology Transfer 33: 315–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zimmerman, Rae. 1985. The relationship of emergency management to governmental policies on man-made technological disasters. Public Administration Review 45: 29–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Arizona State UniversityTempeUSA

Personalised recommendations