IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/nos/social/y2016i4p29-37.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Innovation Systems In The Terms Of Schumpeterian Crea-Tive Destruction

Author

Listed:
  • Ciborowski, Robert

    (University of Bialystok, Poland)

Abstract

‘Creative destruction’ is one of the most important analytical tools, taking into consideration both the economic and sociological characteristics of capitalist society. According to Schumpeter, in the long term, evolution gives rise to economic develo-pment resulting from batches of innovative solutions, leading to improvements in the standard of living. The innovation activity of firms is based on supply-side factors, hence it is large en-terprises that excel in innovation since they strive to achieve a monopoly market posi-tion and above-average profits. Schumpeter attempts to combine two elements: the spread of monopolies and the con-tinuation of economic development, both occurring through innovation, which is far more important than price competition. The Schumpeterian ‘creative destruction’ permeates the main aspects of macroeconomic activity, not only in the long term, but also in the area of economic fluctuations, structural changes, or the functioning of markets. As a result, it becomes a factor determining changes in the economic order.

Suggested Citation

  • Ciborowski, Robert, 2016. "Innovation Systems In The Terms Of Schumpeterian Crea-Tive Destruction," EUREKA: Social and Humanities, Scientific Route OÜ, issue 4, pages 29-37.
    • Handle: RePEc:nos:social:y:2016:i:4:p:29-37
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eu-jr.eu/social/article/viewFile/114/136.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erik Reinert & Arno Daastøl, 1997. "Exploring the Genesis of Economic Innovations: The Religious Gestalt-Switch and the Duty to Invent as Preconditions for Economic Growth," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 4(2), pages 233-283, May.
    2. E. S. Phelps, 1966. "Models of Technical Progress and the Golden Rule of Research," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 33(2), pages 133-145.
    3. Robert J. Gordon, 2000. "Does the "New Economy" Measure Up to the Great Inventions of the Past?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 49-74, Fall.
    4. Rosenberg,Nathan, 1983. "Inside the Black Box," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521273671, October.
    5. Chris Freeman, 2003. "A Schumpeterian Renaissance?," SPRU Working Paper Series 102, SPRU - Science Policy Research Unit, University of Sussex Business School.
    6. Arthur M. Diamond, Jr., 2006. "Schumpeter's Creative Destruction: A Review of the Evidence," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 22(Fall 2006), pages 120-146.
    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. Pupiales, Luis Eduardo Benavides & Delgado, Sandra Lucía Bolaños, 2020. "Barreras de innovación en PYMES: una aproximación a través de una revisión sistemática de literatura," Revista Tendencias, Universidad de Narino, vol. 21(1), pages 221-237, January.

    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. Anuraag Singh & Giorgio Triulzi & Christopher L. Magee, 2020. "Technological improvement rate estimates for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Papers 2004.13919, arXiv.org.
    2. Stefano Lucarelli & Daniela Palma & Roberto Romano, 2013. "Quando gli investimenti rappresentano un vincolo. Contributo alla discussione sulla crisi italiana nella crisi internazionale," Moneta e Credito, Economia civile, vol. 66(262), pages 167-203.
    3. Karl Whelan, 2002. "Computers, Obsolescence, And Productivity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 84(3), pages 445-461, August.
    4. Jonathan Temple, 2002. "The Assessment: The New Economy," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 18(3), pages 241-264.
    5. Kiley, Michael T., 2001. "Computers and growth with frictions: aggregate and disaggregate evidence," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 171-215, December.
    6. Szalavetz, Andrea, 2002. "Az informatikai szektor és a felzárkózó gazdaságok [The informatics sector and the advancing economies]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(9), pages 794-804.
    7. Teresa Serra & Barry K. Goodwin & José M. Gil & Anthony Mancuso, 2006. "Non‐parametric Modelling of Spatial Price Relationships," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(3), pages 501-522, September.
    8. Haydar Akyazi & Seyfettin Artan, 2006. "Reflections of the New Economy on the Monetary Policy and Central Banking," Papers of the Annual IUE-SUNY Cortland Conference in Economics, in: Oguz Esen & Ayla Ogus (ed.), Proceedings of the Conference on Human and Economic Resources, pages 373-387, Izmir University of Economics.
    9. Singh, Anuraag & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2021. "Technological improvement rate predictions for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    10. Basu, Susanto & Fernald, John G. & Shapiro, Matthew D., 2001. "Productivity growth in the 1990s: technology, utilization, or adjustment?," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(1), pages 117-165, December.
    11. Kahn, James A. & Rich, Robert W., 2007. "Tracking the new economy: Using growth theory to detect changes in trend productivity," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(6), pages 1670-1701, September.
    12. Razin, Assaf & Sadka, Efraim & Coury, Tarek, 2003. "Trade openness, investment instability and terms-of-trade volatility," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 285-306, December.
    13. J. Bradford DeLong, 2002. "Do We Have a "New" Macroeconomy?," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 2, pages 163-184, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. Francesco Venturini, 2009. "The long-run impact of ICT," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 37(3), pages 497-515, December.
    15. Jörg Mayer & Arunas Butkevicius & Ali Kadri & Juan Pizarro, 2004. "Dynamic products in world exports," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer;Institut für Weltwirtschaft (Kiel Institute for the World Economy), vol. 140(3), pages 762-795, September.
    16. Boucekkine, Raouf & Crifo, Patricia, 2008. "Human Capital Accumulation And The Transition From Specialization To Multitasking," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 12(3), pages 320-344, June.
    17. Eugene N. White, 2004. "Bubbles and Busts: The 1990s in the Mirror of the 1920s," FRU Working Papers 2004/09, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. Finance Research Unit.
    18. Tiff Macklemr & James Yetman, 2001. "Productivity growth and prices in Canada: what can we learn from the US experience?," BIS Papers chapters, in: Bank for International Settlements (ed.), Empirical studies of structural changes and inflation, volume 3, pages 29-48, Bank for International Settlements.
    19. Lee Branstetter & Kwon Hyeog Ug, 2004. "The Restructuring Of Japanese Research And Development: The Increasing Impact Of Science On Japanese R&D," Discussion papers 04021, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    20. Stine Labes & Nicolai Hanner & Ruediger Zarnekow, 2017. "Successful Business Model Types of Cloud Providers," Business & Information Systems Engineering: The International Journal of WIRTSCHAFTSINFORMATIK, Springer;Gesellschaft für Informatik e.V. (GI), vol. 59(4), pages 223-233, August.

    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:nos:social:y:2016:i:4:p:29-37. 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: Helen Klimashevska (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://eu-jr.eu/social .

    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.