Capitalism and democracy in the 21st century: a Kaleckian interpretation of a Schumpeterian problem

The paper reinterprets Schumpeter's views on the dynamic effects of taxation, as originally expressed in Crisis of the Tax State, from a Kaleckian perspective. In light of Schumpeter's rejection of Keynesian and Marshallian approaches to taxation, the paper argues that a recently developed Kaleckian approach provides an appropriate basis from which to analyse the effects on the business cycle of balanced changes in the structure of taxation. It is shown that, under certain shifting assumptions, increases in the taxation of wages or profits will stimulate investment and attenuate the amplitude of the business cycle. Ultimately, the shifting of taxes reduces to a conflict over income shares. The changing distribution of income in the United Kingdom in recent years suggests that investment is likely to remain sluggish unless there is a significant reversal of income shares. This may give rise to increasing economic and political tensions into the 21st century.     

Capitalism and democracy at a crossroads: the civilizational dimension

This paper evaluates Schumpeter's grand vision as reflected in his Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, and elaborates it in conjunction with the so-called “globalization” trends characteristic of the wake of the twenty-first century. In addition to the evolutionary nature of his methodology, the institutionalist dimension of Schumpeter's definitions are brought to light. A case is made for a fundamental process of “uncreative destruction” as far as the institutional setup of the economy is concerned. The contention of this paper is that there is ample support in Schumpeterian analysis for a counterpoint to the liberal thesis that envisages the worldwide spread of individualism, market economies, and democratic forms of government.     

Schumpeter and the revival of evolutionary economics: an appraisal of the literature

During the last two decades we have seen a revival of interest in the works of Joseph Schumpeter and “evolutionary” ideas in economics more generally. A professional society honouring Schumpeter's name has been founded, and linked to it we have had for more than fifteen years now a professional journal devoted to this stream of thought. However, it has been argued that, despite these developments, the link between Schumpeter's own work and the more recent contributions to evolutionary economics is in fact rather weak. This paper considers this claim. Based on an analysis of Schumpeter's contribution to economics the paper presents an overview and assessment of the more recent literature in this area. It is argued that although there are important differences between Schumpeter's work and some of the more recent contributions, there nevertheless remains a strong common core that clearly distinguishes the evolutionary stream from other approaches (such as, for instance, so-called “new growth theory”). RID="*" ID="*" Many people have contributed to this paper in various ways. Jon Hekland at the Norwegian Research Council started it all by asking me to make an overview of the contribution from “evolutionary economics” to our understanding of contemporary economies. Several people helped me on the way by supplying written material, comments and suggestions, and I am indebted to all of them. Brian Arthur, Stan Metcalfe, Keith Pavitt, Erik Reinert, Paolo Saviotti and Bart Verspagen may be particularly mentioned. A preliminary version was presented at the conference “Industrial R&D and Innovation Policy Learning – Evolutionary Perspectives and New Methods for Impact Assessment” organised by the Norwegian Research Council (“SAKI”) at Leangkollen, Asker, April 18–19.2002. I wish to thank the discussant, Tor Jakob Klette, and the participants at the conference for useful feedback. Moreover I have benefited from comments and suggestions from the editors and referees of this journal. The final responsibility is mine, however. Economic support from the Norwegian Research Council (“SAKI”) is gratefully acknowledged.     

The learning economy and embodied knowledge flows in Great Britain

This paper examines the `learning economy' from the perspective of occupational characteristics and changes in the British labour market between 1980 and 1992. Following a discussion of the learning and knowledge economy, cross-sectional employment data are analysed to ascertain which occupations can be classified as knowledge-based. Longitudinal career history data are then used to trace the flows of these `knowledge workers' over time. Sectoral shifts are examined, with a particular focus on the knowledge-intensive service sectors. The data come from the Employment in Britain survey: a large-scale employee survey from 1992. The approach used allows us to measure somewhat intangible aspects of economic behaviour such as learning and tacit knowledge and attempt to trace their flows. Shifts in knowledge from the manufacturing to the service sector are shown to be important and related to previous work which demonstrated the importance of knowledge intensive business services for both output and productivity in manufacturing.     

Reflections on the perspectives of the global economy from the point of view of emerging economies

 Recently a number of emerging economies, with high inflation and various kinds of imbalances have experienced what has come to be referred to as dollarization– the phenomenon of currency substitution where the dollar gradually replaces the national currency in the performance of its fundamental functions. The phenomenon is most commonly encountered as a component of the exchange-rate-based stabilization programs implemented in a number of emerging economies in Latin America, Asia and the Middle East. The fundamental issue we want to explore is whether this process forces the monetary authorities of emerging economies to act with their hands tied, as if caught in a trap. It is argued that when the expansion of liquidity and domestic credit is determined by the quantity of foreign-exchange reserves, an independent monetary policy vanishes and national sovereignty itself is shackled. Since this scenario typically occurs in a world of increasing globalization of finance, this paper also discusses (with reference to emerging economies) the risks and implications of capital inflows for macroeconomic policy autonomy, economic instability, and vulnerability to external shocks.     

Where Schumpeter was nearly right – the Swedish model and Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy<--RID="*"-->

In Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy Joseph A. Schumpeter concluded that socialism would eventually displace capitalism in Western democracies. This would come about as a result of the superior performance of capitalism. We extract six “stylized” propositions that are essential elements of Schumpeter's prediction about the fate of capitalism. These propositions are confronted with the development of the Swedish economy. The three main results of the analysis are: (1) The evolution of the Swedish economy closely followed Schumpeter's predictions until about 1980: Large firms became increasingly predominant in production and innovative activity, ownership of firms became more and more concentrated, individual entrepreneurship waned in importance, the general public grew increasingly hostile towards capitalism, and by the late 1970s explicit proposals for a gradual transfer of ownership of firms from private hands were launched. (2) Design of tax and industrial policies fueled a development of the economy along the lines predicted by Schumpeter. In general, the policies discouraged private wealth accumulation. In particular, the policies favored concentration of firms and concentration of private ownership. (3) The turning point away from the path to socialism coincides with real world developments that disclosed two major flaws in Schumpeter's analysis. First, the ever more obvious failure of socialism in Eastern Europe went against Schumpeter's assertion that socialism can work. Second, Schumpeter, who thought that modern technology would make the giant corporation increasingly predominant, did not foresee the revival of entrepreneurship that took place in the Western countries around 1980.     

Capitalism, profits and innovation in the new techno-economic paradigm

Innovative profits (of the kind conceptualized by Schumpeter) are today being increasingly created through international corporate networks for technological development. Such profits through innovation are encouraged by newer more flexible organizational forms, and further encouraged (unlike in the conventional perspective on profits and on the incentive to innovate) by knowledge flows between firms. Our empirical evidence, based on US patent data, shows that multinational companies are currently more likely to develop abroad technologies which are less science-based, and less dependent upon tacit knowledge. However, within the science-based industries firms may generate abroad some technologies which are heavily dependent on tacit knowledge, but normally in fields that lie outside their own core technological competencies. We find some evidence of a convergence in corporate technological diversification across large firms, facilitated by the now common spread in the use of information and communication technologies (ICT) as an integrator of formerly separate technological systems. This has led smaller firms to diversify, but giant firms to consolidate activity around those technologies that have become most interrelated.     

Knowledge of growth and the growth of knowledge

The central theme of this address is the complicated relationship between the growth of the economy and the growth of knowledge. This theme is explored with the help of a single concept “restless capitalism” which is used to capture the idea that capitalism in equilibrium is a contradiction in terms precisely because the growth of knowledge cannot be meaningfully formulated as the outcome of a constellation of equilibrating forces. This theme is explored through a discussion of growth accounting, the relationship between innovation, markets and institutions and, as an example, the development of innovation in the field of ophthalmology. We also discuss some pioneering contributions made by Simon Kuznets and Arthur Burns to the discussion of evolutionary growth. From this Schumpeterian perspective we see the economy as an ensemble not an aggregate entity and so see more clearly the importance of microdiversity in the relationship between growth of knowledge and growth of the economy.     

Routines and incentives in group tasks*

The artificial context “Target the Two” has been used in experiments to explore some of the features of routinization and learning. Two agents must learn to coordinate their actions to achieve a common goal, without being allowed to use verbal communication. This article reports an experiment, in which we compare the degree of routinization and the performance of players in two treatments. Each treatment submits players to the same sequence of starting configurations, but differs in terms of the payoff function. In the first treatment (A), the payoff is based on the number of moves required to achieve the goal, whereas in the second treatment (B) the payoff depends on the time required for completion. We observe that (1) in treatment B subjects tend to play in a more “routinized” way and (2) treatment B reduces the time spent on play, but does not decrease the resources (the number of moves) used, relative to treatment A.     

Persistent unemployment and co-ordination issues: an evolutionary perspective

Abstract. In this paper we look at unemployment as a phenomenon which reflects the co-ordination problems that characterize out-of-equilibrium processes of adjustment. The analysis carried out shifts the focus from structural factors to the economic process. It shows that unemployment cannot be satisfactorily explained – and policy interventions devised – by focusing only on specific characters of the technology or confining the analysis to structural factors concerning the labour market. The co-ordination mechanisms of adjustment processes rather than the fundamentals of the economy appear, in this light, as the main determinants of differences in unemployment trends in different economies; and monetary policy comes back to the center of the stage as an essential element of the working of these mechanisms. RID="*" ID="*" We thank anonymous referees for their very useful comments, and Elena Lega for the helpful support to the simulation analysis carried out. Correspondence to: J.-L. Gaffard     

Schumpeter and Steindl on the dynamics of competition

This paper compares and contrasts the contributions of Joseph Alois Schumpeter and Josef Steindl to the competitive paradigm. Both reject the static nature of traditional profit maximizing analysis and the analytical device of a representative firm. Instead they both opt for a dynamic framework in which there is a key role for innovation. Differences emerge in terms of the characteristics of individual firms that nurture the competitive struggle and are responsible for technical change. The maturation process of a capitalist economy, whereby a natural progression will involve an increase in concentration, as prescribed by Schumpeter and Steindl is also explored, as is criticism of their analyses. Finally the holistic approach to competitive modelling, a legacy of these two economists, is expounded and challenges for the future identified.     

Schumpeter and the `Schmollerprogramm': integrating theory and history in the analysis of economic development

This essay addresses the historical and institutional aspects of Schumpeter's thought. It suggests that Schumpeter prepared a pluralist research agenda, formulated in accordance with the conceptual perspective of the German Historical School, as presented by major scholars such as Schmoller, Sombart, Spiethoff and Max Weber. Schumpeter's notion of development, with its emphasis on the correspondence of economic and socio-cultural evolution, is therefore to be viewed in the context of the comprehensive Schmollerian approach. Moreover the ethical-evolutionary components of Schmoller's ideas point at the vital role of the German Historical School in the elaboration of a modern evolutionary economics in Schumpeterian terms. The essay concludes that the Schmollerprogramm is going to inspire further developments in Schumpeterian economics, as the integration of theory and history continuously marks the research agenda of evolutionary approaches to economic development.     

Uncertainty and the size distribution of rewards from innovation

 Previous research has shown that the distribution of profit outcomes from technological innovations is highly skew. This paper builds upon those detailed findings to ask: what stochastic processes can plausibly be inferred to have generated the observed distributions? After reviewing the evidence, this paper reports on several stochastic model simulations, including a pure Gibrat random walk with monthly changes approximating those observed for high-technology startup company stocks and a more richly specified model blending internal and external market uncertainties. The most highly specified simulations suggest that the set of profit potentials tapped by innovators is itself skew-distributed and that the number of entrants into innovation races is more likely to be independent of market size than stochastically dependent upon it.     

Darwinism in economics: from analogy to ontology

Several social scientists, including ‘evolutionary economists’, have expressed scepticism of ‘biological analogies’ and rejected the application of ‘Darwinism’ to socio-economic evolution. Among this group, some have argued that self-organisation is an alternative to biological analogies or Darwinism. Others have seen ‘artificial selection’ as an alternative to natural selection in the socio-economic sphere. Another objection is that Darwinism excludes human intentionality. It is shown that all these objections to ‘biological analogies’ and ‘Darwinism’ are ungrounded. Furthermore, Darwinism includes a broad theoretical framework for the analysis of the evolution of all open, complex systems, including socio-economic systems. Finally and crucially, Darwinism also involves a basic philosophical commitment to detailed, cumulative, causal explanations. For these reasons, Darwinism is fully relevant for economics and an adequate evolutionary economics must be Darwinian, at least in these fundamental senses. However, this does not undermine the need for auxiliary theories and explanations in the economic domain.     

Barriers to knowledge spillovers and regional convergence in an evolutionary model

This paper will present a multi-region/multi-country model in which inter-regional knowledge spillovers determine the growth of regions. Key parameters in the model are the learning capability of a region and the rate of knowledge generation (R&D). The intensity of spillovers depends on geographical distance between regions. The model is investigated by means of simulation techniques. What results is a core-periphery situation, the exact form of which depends on the assumed spatial structure. The impact of economic integration is investigated by introducing barriers-to-knowledge-spillovers in the model in the form of borders between countries. Contrary to the popular belief and some economic theories, we find that removing such spillover barriers may result in larger disparity of income levels between regions.     

Does the invisible hand hold or lead? Market adjustment in an entrepreneurial economy

Adam Smith's “invisible hand” is one of the best-known phrases in economics, but its meaning is somewhat ambiguous. The invisible hand might be viewed as holding the economy close to equilibrium, yet Smith actually says that individuals are led by an invisible hand. Entrepreneurial forces lead an economy along a path that generates economic progress, and that path is determined by the disruptive forces of entrepreneurship. Rather than viewing an economy as tending toward an equilibrium, it is more accurate to view an economy as characterized by continuing progress, led by the invisible hand of entrepreneurial activity. JEL Code B53, D21, E32, O31     

Growth and equilibrium indeterminacy: the role of capital mobility

Summary. The paper presents a human capital driven endogenous growth model which, in general, permits a multiplicity of equilibrium balanced growth paths. It is shown that allowing for perfect capital mobility across countries increases the range of parameter values for which the model permits equilibrium indeterminacy. As opposed to the closed capital markets case, simple restrictions on preferences are no longer sufficient to eliminate the indeterminacy. Intuitively, under perfect capital mobility agents are able to smooth consumption completely. This induces an economy with open capital markets to behave like a closed economy with linear preferences thereby increasing the possibility of equilibrium indeterminacy. Received: 18 November 1998; revised version: 10 August 1999     

Weber, Schumpeter and Knight on entrepreneurship and economic development

This paper interprets the discussion on entrepreneurship and economic development that started off with Weber's papers on the Protestant Ethic. Weber sought the reason for the relatively rapid growth of the Occident in the rational, Calvinist attitude to life. Calvinism – in his view – exactly suited a society of free labourers, who were not tied to master and soil by extra-economic considerations as in tribal and feudal societies. Schumpeter gave an alternative explanation, emphasizing the importance of innovation and entrepreneurship. Knight, who stressed neither rationality nor innovation but uncertainty and perceptiveness as the sole source of progress and profits, followed up German language writing on this subject. Only the investor who can detect hitherto hidden qualities in people can gain. The paper demonstrates how these three authors influenced each other. The debate between these three authors has raised many issues of governance and organization that feature contemporary thinking.     

Knowledge and markets

An economy is a coordinated system of distributed knowledge. Economic evolution occurs as knowledge grows and the structure of the system changes. This paper is about the role of markets in this process. Traditionally, the theory of markets has not been a central feature of evolutionary economics. This seems to be due to the orthodox view of markets as information-processing mechanisms for finding equilibria. But in economic evolution markets are actually knowledge-structuring mechanisms. What then is the relation between knowledge, information, markets and mechanisms? I argue that an evolutionary theory of markets, in the manner of Loasby (1999), requires a clear formulation of these relations. I suggest that a conception of knowledge and markets in terms of a graphical theory of complex systems furnishes precisely this.