tailieunhanh - INNOVATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH

Th ere are a multitude of corporate structures and terminologies used in capitalist economies. For purposes of this discussion we will focus on publicly listed corporations (or fi rms) typical of those traded on stock markets. Th ese are defi ned as consisting of shareholders, directors representing shareholder inter- ests, executives reporting to the directors, and employees managed by the execu- tives ( Jensen and Mecklin 1976). Execu- tives are employees with power over the corporation’s assets. Th is paper was prepared largely before the advent of the global fi nancial crisis of late 2008. Data considered is based on. | INNOVATION AND ECONOMIC GROWTH by Nathan Rosenberg Professor of Economics Emeritus Stanford University Abstract This paper illustrates why technological innovation is considered as a major force in economic growth and focuses on some of the most distinctive features of innovation in the highly industrialized economies of the OECD area. In particular the paper attempts to examine a primary single feature uncertainty that dominates the search for new technologies by drawing several cases on the American experience. It also touches on the impact of technological innovation in the tourism industry and how it is transforming the tourism business model. Technological innovation a major force in economic growth It is taken as axiomatic that innovative activity has been the single most important component of long-term economic growth and this paper will start by drawing upon the findings of a very influential paper published by my colleague at Stanford Prof. Abramovitx back in the mid-1950s. In the most fundamental sense there are only two ways of increasing the output of the economy 1 you can increase the number of inputs that go into the productive process or 2 if you are clever you can think of new ways in which you can get more output from the same number of inputs. And if you are an economist you are bound to be curious to know which of these two ways has been more important - and how much more important. Essentially what Abramovitz did was to measure the growth in the output of the American economy between 1870 and 1950. Then he measured the growth in inputs of capital and labor over the same time period. He then made what were thought to be reasonable assumptions about how much a growth in a unit of labour and how much a growth in a unit of capital should add to the output of the economy. It turned out that the measured growth of inputs . in capital and labor between 1870 and 1950 could only account for about 15 of the actual growth in the output of the economy.