IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/jeczfn/v115y2015i1p1-23.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dynamic analysis of wage inequality and creative destruction

Author

Listed:
  • Keiichi Kishi

Abstract

This paper investigates the transitional dynamics of a basic Schumpeterian growth model under constant relative risk aversion. In this model, there are three patterns governing the evolution of wage inequality, but only if the intertemporal elasticity of substitution in consumption is sufficiently low: (a) skill-biased technological change, i.e., technological progress leads to a widening of wage inequality; (b) unskill-biased technological change, i.e., technological progress leads to a contraction of wage inequality; and (c) unbiased technological change, i.e., technological progress is independent of wage inequality. By conducting comparative dynamics of an unexpected permanent increase in research productivity in any sector, which we interpret as the arrival of new general purpose technologies, we show that the property of technological change shifts entirely from unskill-biased to skill-biased. The evolution of wage inequality in the model is then consistent with the shift in the trend in wage inequality beginning in the 1970s in the US economy. Copyright Springer-Verlag Wien 2015

Suggested Citation

  • Keiichi Kishi, 2015. "Dynamic analysis of wage inequality and creative destruction," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 115(1), pages 1-23, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:jeczfn:v:115:y:2015:i:1:p:1-23
    DOI: 10.1007/s00712-014-0403-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s00712-014-0403-7
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s00712-014-0403-7?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philippe Aghion & Diego Comin & Peter Howitt & Isabel Tecu, 2016. "When Does Domestic Savings Matter for Economic Growth?," IMF Economic Review, Palgrave Macmillan;International Monetary Fund, vol. 64(3), pages 381-407, August.
    2. Bresnahan, Timothy F. & Trajtenberg, M., 1995. "General purpose technologies 'Engines of growth'?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 83-108, January.
    3. Nahuis, Richard & Smulders, Sjak, 2002. "The Skill Premium, Technological Change and Appropriability," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 137-156, June.
    4. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    5. Daron Acemoglu, 1998. "Why Do New Technologies Complement Skills? Directed Technical Change and Wage Inequality," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 113(4), pages 1055-1089.
    6. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter & Violante, Giovanni L, 2002. "General Purpose Technology and Wage Inequality," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 315-345, December.
    7. Howitt, Peter & Mayer-Foulkes, David, 2005. "R&D, Implementation, and Stagnation: A Schumpeterian Theory of Convergence Clubs," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 37(1), pages 147-177, February.
    8. David H. Autor & Lawrence F. Katz & Melissa S. Kearney, 2008. "Trends in U.S. Wage Inequality: Revising the Revisionists," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(2), pages 300-323, May.
    9. Guvenen, Fatih, 2006. "Reconciling conflicting evidence on the elasticity of intertemporal substitution: A macroeconomic perspective," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(7), pages 1451-1472, October.
    10. Jacobs, Bas & Nahuis, Richard, 2002. "A general purpose technology explains the Solow paradox and wage inequality," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 243-250, January.
    11. Gene M. Grossman & Elhanan Helpman, 1991. "Quality Ladders in the Theory of Growth," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(1), pages 43-61.
    12. Jovanovic, Boyan & Rousseau, Peter L., 2005. "General Purpose Technologies," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 18, pages 1181-1224, Elsevier.
    13. Stephen Machin & John Van Reenen, 1998. "Technology and Changes in Skill Structure: Evidence from Seven OECD Countries," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 113(4), pages 1215-1244.
    14. Van Reenen, John, 2011. "Wage inequality, technology and trade: 21st century evidence," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(6), pages 730-741.
    15. Fang, Chen-ray & Huang, Li-hsuan & Wang, Ming-cheng, 2008. "Technology spillover and wage inequality," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 137-147, January.
    16. Jones, Charles I, 1995. "R&D-Based Models of Economic Growth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 103(4), pages 759-784, August.
    17. Been-Lon Chen & Angus Chu, 2010. "On R&D spillovers, multiple equilibria and indeterminacy," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 100(3), pages 247-263, July.
    18. Boucekkine, Raouf & de la Croix, David, 2003. "Information technologies, embodiment and growth," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 27(11), pages 2007-2034.
    19. Oded Galor & Omer Moav, 2000. "Ability-Biased Technological Transition, Wage Inequality, and Economic Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 115(2), pages 469-497.
    20. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    21. Zeng, Jinli & Zhang, Jie, 2002. "Long-run growth effects of taxation in a non-scale growth model with innovation," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 75(3), pages 391-403, May.
    22. Daron Acemoglu & Philippe Aghion & Fabrizio Zilibotti, 2006. "Distance to Frontier, Selection, and Economic Growth," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 4(1), pages 37-74, March.
    23. Philippe Aghion & Peter Howitt, 2009. "The Economics of Growth," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262012634, April.
    24. Minniti, Antonio, 2010. "Product market competition, R&D composition and growth," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 417-421, January.
    25. Ricardo J. Caballero & Adam B. Jaffe, 1993. "How High Are the Giants' Shoulders: An Empirical Assessment of Knowledge Spillovers and Creative Destruction in a Model of Economic Growth," NBER Chapters, in: NBER Macroeconomics Annual 1993, Volume 8, pages 15-86, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    26. Benhabib, Jess & Spiegel, Mark M., 1994. "The role of human capital in economic development evidence from aggregate cross-country data," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 143-173, October.
    27. Richard Nahuis, 2004. "Learning for Innovation and the Skill Premium," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 83(2), pages 151-179, November.
    28. Segerstrom, Paul S, 2000. "The Long-Run Growth Effects of R&D Subsidies," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 277-305, September.
    29. Jérôme Vandenbussche & Philippe Aghion & Costas Meghir, 2006. "Growth, distance to frontier and composition of human capital," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 11(2), pages 97-127, June.
    30. Peter Howitt, 2000. "Endogenous Growth and Cross-Country Income Differences," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(4), pages 829-846, September.
    31. Zeng, Jinli, 2003. "Reexamining the interaction between innovation and capital accumulation," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 541-560, December.
    32. Peter Howitt, 1999. "Steady Endogenous Growth with Population and R & D Inputs Growing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(4), pages 715-730, August.
    33. Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), 2005. "Handbook of Economic Growth," Handbook of Economic Growth, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1.
    34. Walde, Klaus, 1999. "A Model of Creative Destruction with Undiversifiable Risk and Optimising Households," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 109(454), pages 156-171, March.
    35. Mattalia, Claudio, 2013. "Embodied technological change and technological revolution: Which sectors matter?," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 249-264.
    36. Philippe Aghion, 2002. "Schumpeterian Growth Theory and the Dynamics of Income Inequality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 70(3), pages 855-882, May.
    37. Cozzi, Guido & Spinesi, Luca, 2006. "Intellectual Appropriability, Product Differentiation, And Growth," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(1), pages 39-55, February.
    38. Cozzi, Guido, 2005. "Animal spirits and the composition of innovation," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 49(3), pages 627-637, April.
    39. Howitt, Peter & Aghion, Philippe, 1998. "Capital Accumulation and Innovation as Complementary Factors in Long-Run Growth," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 3(2), pages 111-130, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Keiichi Kishi, 2014. "A patentability requirement and industries targeted by R&D," Discussion Papers in Economics and Business 14-27-Rev., Osaka University, Graduate School of Economics, revised Oct 2014.
    2. Óscar Afonso & Ana Maria Bandeira & Manuela Magalhães, 2017. "Effect of the Tax System ON R&D Intensity, Growth, Wages and Consumption Share," Australian Economic Papers, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 56(4), pages 271-291, December.
    3. Knoblach, Michael, 2019. "Skill-biased technological change, endogenous labor supply, and the skill premium," CEPIE Working Papers 03/19, Technische Universität Dresden, Center of Public and International Economics (CEPIE).

    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. Aghion, Philippe & Akcigit, Ufuk & Howitt, Peter, 2014. "What Do We Learn From Schumpeterian Growth Theory?," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 515-563, Elsevier.
    2. Cem Ertur & Wilfried Koch, 2008. "A Contribution to the Schumpeterian Growth Theory and Empirics," Post-Print halshs-00327641, HAL.
    3. Cem Ertur & Wilfried Koch, 2011. "A contribution to the theory and empirics of Schumpeterian growth with worldwide interactions," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 215-255, September.
    4. Gray, Elie & Grimaud, André, 2016. "Using the Salop Circle to Study Scale Effects in Schumpeterian Growth Models: Why Inter-sectoral Knowledge Diffusion Matters," TSE Working Papers 16-676, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    5. Gray, Elie & Grimaud, André, 2014. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models: Knowledge diffusion, social value of innovations and optimal R&D incentives," TSE Working Papers 14-469, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    6. Elie Gray & André Grimaud, 2016. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 101-142, March.
    7. Gray, Elie & Grimaud, André, 2014. "The Lindahl equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models: Knowledge diffusion, social value of innovations and optimal R&D incentives," IDEI Working Papers 821, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    8. Elie Gray & André Grimaud, 2016. "Using the Salop Circle to Study Scale Effects in Schumpeterian Growth Models: Why Inter-sectoral Knowledge Diffusion Matters," CESifo Working Paper Series 6021, CESifo.
    9. T. Gries & R. Grundmann & I. Palnau & M. Redlin, 2017. "Innovations, growth and participation in advanced economies - a review of major concepts and findings," International Economics and Economic Policy, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 293-351, April.
    10. Raphael Auer & Philip Sauré, 2011. "Spatial Competition in Quality, Demand Induced Innovation, and Schumpeterian Growth," DEGIT Conference Papers c016_067, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    11. Capolupo, Rosa, 2009. "The New Growth Theories and Their Empirics after Twenty Years," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 3, pages 1-72.
    12. Gros, Daniel & Alcidi, Cinzia, 2014. "The Global Economy in 2030: Trends and Strategies for Europe," CEPS Papers 9142, Centre for European Policy Studies.
    13. Grimaud, André & Gray, Elie, 2024. "Inter-Sectoral Knowledge Diffusion and Scale Effects in Schumpeterian Growth Models," TSE Working Papers 24-1577, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
    14. Elie Gray & André Grimaud, 2014. "The Lindahl Equilibrium in Schumpeterian Growth Models: Knowledge Diffusion, Social Value of Innovations and Optimal R&D Incentives," CESifo Working Paper Series 4678, CESifo.
    15. Steven Bond‐Smith, 2022. "Discretely innovating: The effect of limited market contestability on innovation and growth," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 69(3), pages 301-327, July.
    16. Pozzolo, Alberto Franco, 2004. "Endogenous Growth in Open Economies - A Survey of Major Results," Economics & Statistics Discussion Papers esdp04020, University of Molise, Department of Economics.
    17. Peter Howitt, 2007. "Innovation, Competition and Growth: A Schumpeterian Perspective on Canada’s Economy," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 246, February.
    18. Gianluca Benigno & Luca Fornaro, 2018. "Stagnation Traps," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 85(3), pages 1425-1470.
    19. Дементьев В.Е., 2013. "Структурные Факторы Технологического Развития," Журнал Экономика и математические методы (ЭММ), Центральный Экономико-Математический Институт (ЦЭМИ), vol. 49(4), pages 33-46, октябрь.
    20. Guido Cozzi & Silvia Galli, 2009. "Upstream Innovation Protection: Common Law Evolution and the Dynamics of Wage Inequality," Working Papers 2009_20, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Endogenous growth; Innovation; Creative destruction; Wage inequality; Factor-biased technological change; General purpose technologies; O31; O40; O41; O51;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O40 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - General
    • O41 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - One, Two, and Multisector Growth Models

    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:kap:jeczfn:v:115:y:2015:i:1:p:1-23. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.