IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/ajarec/v47y2003i3p367-388.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An evolutionary economic perspective on technical change and adjustment in cane harvesting systems in the Australian sugar industry

Author

Listed:
  • Lisa Brennan
  • Wegener Malcolm

Abstract

Australian sugar‐producing regions have differed in terms of the extent and rate of incorporation of new technology into harvesting systems. The Mackay sugar industry has lagged behind most other sugar‐producing regions in this regard. The reasons for this are addressed by invoking an evolutionary economics perspective. The development of harvesting systems, and the role of technology in shaping them, is mapped and interpreted using the concept of path dependency. Key events in the evolution of harvesting systems are identified, which show how the past has shaped the regional development of harvesting systems. From an evolutionary economics perspective, the outcomes observed are the end result of a specific history.

Suggested Citation

  • Lisa Brennan & Wegener Malcolm, 2003. "An evolutionary economic perspective on technical change and adjustment in cane harvesting systems in the Australian sugar industry," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(3), pages 367-388, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:ajarec:v:47:y:2003:i:3:p:367-388
    DOI: 10.1111/1467-8489.00219
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8489.00219
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/1467-8489.00219?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John Laurent, 2001. "Darwin, Economics and Contemporary Economists," Chapters, in: John Laurent & John Nightingale (ed.), Darwinism and Evolutionary Economics, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Pierre Garrouste & Stavros Ioannides (ed.), 2001. "Evolution and Path Dependence in Economic Ideas," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 1790.
    3. Arthur, W Brian, 1989. "Competing Technologies, Increasing Returns, and Lock-In by Historical Events," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(394), pages 116-131, March.
    4. Elster,Jon, 1983. "Explaining Technical Change," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521270724, October.
    5. David, Paul A, 1985. "Clio and the Economics of QWERTY," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(2), pages 332-337, May.
    6. Veblen, Thorstein, 1915. "Imperial Germany and The Industrial Revolution," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number veblen1915.
    7. Ruttan, Vernon W, 1997. "Induced Innovation, Evolutionary Theory and Path Dependence:," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(444), pages 1520-1529, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Brennan, Lisa E. & Wegener, Malcolm K., 2003. "An evolutionary economic perspective on technical change and adjustment in cane harvesting systems in the Australian sugar industry," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 47(3), pages 1-22, September.
    2. Marechal, Kevin, 2007. "The economics of climate change and the change of climate in economics," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 5181-5194, October.
    3. Dosi, Giovanni & Nelson, Richard R., 2010. "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 51-127, Elsevier.
    4. Fulvio Castellacci, 2007. "Evolutionary And New Growth Theories. Are They Converging?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 585-627, July.
    5. Giovanni Dosi & Richard Nelson, 2013. "The Evolution of Technologies: An Assessment of the State-of-the-Art," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 3(1), pages 3-46, June.
    6. Cristiano Antonelli, 2011. "The Economic Complexity of Technological Change: Knowledge Interaction and Path Dependence," Chapters, in: Cristiano Antonelli (ed.), Handbook on the Economic Complexity of Technological Change, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Brennan, Lisa E., 2000. "Redefining economic efficiency using a case study of sugarcane harvest-transport systems. A job for pluralist thinking," 2000 Conference (44th), January 23-25, 2000, Sydney, Australia 123610, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    8. Roberta Capello & Camilla Lenzi, 2018. "The dynamics of regional learning paradigms and trajectories," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 727-748, September.
    9. Loschel, Andreas, 2002. "Technological change in economic models of environmental policy: a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 105-126, December.
    10. Bajmócy, Zoltán & Málovics, György, 2009. "A fenntarthatóság közgazdaságtani értelmezései [Economic interpretations of sustainability]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(5), pages 464-483.
    11. Frank, Joshua, 2005. "Technological lock-in, positive institutional feedback, and research on laboratory animals," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 557-575, December.
    12. Albert Faber & Koen Frenken, 2008. "Models in evolutionary economics and environmental policy: Towards an evolutionary environmental economics," Innovation Studies Utrecht (ISU) working paper series 08-15, Utrecht University, Department of Innovation Studies, revised Apr 2008.
    13. Cohen, Stephen & Fields, Gary, 1998. "Social Capital and Capital Gains, or Virtual Bowling in Silicon Valley," UCAIS Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy, Working Paper Series qt200968vh, UCAIS Berkeley Roundtable on the International Economy, UC Berkeley.
    14. Porfírio, José & Jacquinet, Marc & Carrilho, Tiago, 2009. "The Concept of Agricultural District and the Question of Rural Development," Spatial and Organizational Dynamics Discussion Papers 2009-3, CIEO-Research Centre for Spatial and Organizational Dynamics, University of Algarve.
    15. Thrane, Sof & Blaabjerg, Steen & Møller, Rasmus Hannemann, 2010. "Innovative path dependence: Making sense of product and service innovation in path dependent innovation processes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(7), pages 932-944, September.
    16. Khalil, Elias L., 2013. "Lock-in institutions and efficiency," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 27-36.
    17. Martin Henning & Erik Stam & Rik Wenting, 2013. "Path Dependence Research in Regional Economic Development: Cacophony or Knowledge Accumulation?," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(8), pages 1348-1362, September.
    18. Jaffe, Adam B. & Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2003. "Chapter 11 Technological change and the environment," Handbook of Environmental Economics, in: K. G. Mäler & J. R. Vincent (ed.), Handbook of Environmental Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 11, pages 461-516, Elsevier.
    19. Kenneth Arrow, 2000. "Increasing returns: historiographic issues and path dependence," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(2), pages 171-180.
    20. GÖNCZI József, 2020. "Approaches To The Concept Of Sustainability In Ecological And Environmental Economy," Annals of Faculty of Economics, University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics, vol. 1(2), pages 74-85, December.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:ajarec:v:47:y:2003:i:3:p:367-388. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aaresea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.