Skip to main content
Log in

Selection processes and appropriability in art, science and technology

  • Published:
Journal of Cultural Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recently, there has been a mutually beneficial interchange of models and ideas between the sociology of science and the economics of technological innovation. Concepts such as the “paradigm” and the “network” seem to lend themselves to useful application in both fields. To these is added the concept of the “selection system”. The major aim of this paper is to show that the development of the arts can be described using the same conceptual framework. This allows the development of hypotheses concerning the relationship between art, science and technology, and also about the effect of appropriability conditions.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Biagoli, M. (1993)Galileo Courtier: The Practice of Science in the Culture of Absolutism. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boschloo, A.W.A., Hendrikse, E.J., Smit, L.C. and van der Sman, G-J. (1989)Academies of Art; Between Renaissance and Romanticism. SDU uitgeverij, s'Gravenhage.

  • Bourdieu, P. and Passeron, J.C. (1970)La reproduction: Elements pour une Theorie du Systeme d'Enseignement. Minuit, Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burt, R.S. (1987) “Social Contagion and Innovation: Cohesion versus Structural Equivalence”,American Journal of Sociology, 92(May): 1287–1335.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, T.J. (1991) “Jackson Pollock's Abstraction”, in S. Guibault (ed.),Reconstructing Modernism, MIT Press, Cambridge (Mass), pp. 172–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crane, D. (1987)The Transformation of the Avant-Garde. University of Chicago Press, Chicago & London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crow, T. (1983) “Modernism and Culture in the Visual Arts” in B.H.D. Buchlohet al. (eds.),Modernism and Modernity. The Press of Nova Scotia College of Art and Design, pp. 215–64.

  • Debackere, K., Clarysse, B., Wijnberg, N.M. and Rappa, M.A. (1994) “Science and Industry: A Story of Networks and Paradigms”,Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 6(1): 21–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G. (1982) “Technological Paradigms and Technological Trajectories”,Research Policy, 11: 147–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G. (1988) “Sources, Procedures, and Microeconomic effects of Innovation”,Journal of Economic Literature, 26(September): 1120–1171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, P. (1991)Making and Effaccing Art: Modern American Art in a Culture of Museums. Oxford University Press, New York & Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, M. (1993)Finding the Muse: a sociopsychological enquiry into the conditions of artistic creativity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frey, B.S. and Pommerehne, W.W. (1989)Muses and Markets. Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geertz, C. (1983)Local Knowledge. Basic Books, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D.L. (1988)Science as a Process, University of Chicago Press, Chicago & London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T.S. (1970)The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press, Chicago & London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, R., Klevorick, A., Nelson, R. and Winter, R. (1987) “Appropriating the Returns to Industrial R & D”,Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, 3: 783–831.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martindale, C. (1990)The Clockwork Muse. Basic Books, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martorella, R. (1990)Corporate Art. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mossetto, G. (1993)Aesthetics and Economics. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht/Boston/London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R.R., and Winter, S.G. (1982)An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (Mass.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Saviotti, P.P. and Metcalve, J.S. (1984) “A Theoretical Approach to the Construction of Technological Output Indicators”,Research Policy, 13: 141–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shapin, S. (1989) “The House of Experiment in Seventeenth Century England”,Isis, 79: 373–404.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wijnberg, N.M. (1994) “National Systems of Innovation: Selection Environments and Selection Processes”,Technology in Society, 16(3): 313–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wijnberg, N.M. (1995) “Technological Paradigms and Strategic Groups: Putting Competition back into the Definitions”,Journal of Economic Issues, March, pp. 254–258.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wijnberg, N.M. Selection processes and appropriability in art, science and technology. J Cult Econ 19, 221–235 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01074051

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01074051

Key Words

Navigation