Search

Economic growth theory distinguishes between reproducible and nonreproducible factors of production. In traditional growth models based on factor‐augmenting technical change, perpetual economic growth requires that each essential nonreproducible factor, such as labor, be augmented by a reproducible factor, such as human capital. Recent models of factor‐eliminating technical change deliver perpetual growth by eliminating the nonreproducible factors. Heretofore, the literature has kept factor augmentation and factor elimination separate. We analyze a model with both. The model generalizes the traditional factor augmentation approach by relaxing the usual restriction that factor elimination is absent. We obtain the striking result that factor‐augmenting technical change is a misspecification when factor‐eliminating technical change is present. The result raises several questions about technical change and endogenous growth. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We introduce borrowing constraints into a two‐sector Schumpeterian growth model and examine the impact of asset price bubbles on innovation. In this environment, rational bubbles arise when the intermediate good producing R&D sector is faced with adverse productivity shocks. Importantly, these bubbles help alleviate credit constraints and facilitate innovation in the stagnant economy. On the policy front, we make a case for debt financed credit to the R&D sector. Further, we establish that a constant credit growth rule (akin to the Friedman rule) outperforms the often prescribed counter‐cyclical "lean against the wind" credit policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When technological change affects the prices of tradeable assets, innovators can obtain speculative profits by exploiting their inside information as to the occurrence of innovations. We propose a tractable model of endogenous growth that formalizes this argument, originally due to Hirshleifer (1971). We then use the model to assess two claims advanced by Hirshleifer, namely, that speculative profits can generate excessive investment in R&D when they add to monopoly rents guaranteed by patent protection, or else even in a perfectly competitive economy. The analysis confirms the first claim, but casts doubts on the second one. ( JEL O30, O40) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Over the past decades, private R&D spending in the United States and other developed countries has been growing faster than gross domestic product. At the same time, the growth rates of per-capita and aggregate output have been rather stable, possibly declining slightly. This article proposes a growth model that can account for the observed phenomenon by explicitly describing competition among technological leaders and followers in individual markets in a way that is consistent with existing studies on firms' motivation to invest in R&D. The model shows the possibility that the unsustainable trend of rising R&D intensity persists for a very long time. ( JEL O3, O4, L1) [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]