IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/treure/v27y2021i4p527-539.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Transformations of advanced capitalist democracies in the digital era

Author

Listed:
  • David Soskice

    (London School of Economics, London, UK)

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • David Soskice, 2021. "Transformations of advanced capitalist democracies in the digital era," Transfer: European Review of Labour and Research, , vol. 27(4), pages 527-539, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:treure:v:27:y:2021:i:4:p:527-539
    DOI: 10.1177/10242589211064175
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10242589211064175
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/10242589211064175?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. Lee G. Branstetter & Britta Glennon & J. Bradford Jensen, 2019. "The IT Revolution and the Globalization of R&D," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 19(1), pages 1-37.
    2. Wendy Carlin & David Soskice, 2018. "Stagnant productivity and low unemployment: stuck in a Keynesian equilibrium," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 34(1-2), pages 169-194.
    3. Breschi, Stefano & Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2000. "Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 388-410, April.
    4. Carlota Perez, 2010. "Technological revolutions and techno-economic paradigms," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(1), pages 185-202, January.
    5. David Soskice, 2020. "The ICT revolution and neo-liberalism: Its major pathologies and a Polanyian second movement," Stato e mercato, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 1, pages 17-39.
    6. Lee Branstetter & Britta Glennon & J. Bradford Jensen, 2018. "Knowledge Transfer Abroad: The Role of U.S. Inventors within Global R&D Networks," NBER Working Papers 24453, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Pietro Moncada-Paternò-Castello & Nicola Grassano, 2022. "The EU vs US corporate R&D intensity gap: investigating key sectors and firms [A primer on innovation and growth]," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 31(1), pages 19-38.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Costa, Rodrigo Morem da & Horn, Carlos Henrique, 2021. "The co-evolution of technology and employment relations: Institutions, innovation and change," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 313-324.
    5. Marianna Epicoco, 2021. "Technological Revolutions and Economic Development: Endogenous and Exogenous Fluctuations," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(3), pages 1437-1461, September.
    6. Matteo Laffi & Ron Boschma, 2022. "Does a local knowledge base in Industry 3.0 foster diversification in Industry 4.0 technologies? Evidence from European regions," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 101(1), pages 5-35, February.
    7. Chang-Yang Lee & Ji-Hwan Lee & Ajai S. Gaur, 2017. "Are large business groups conducive to industry innovation? The moderating role of technological appropriability," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 34(2), pages 313-337, June.
    8. Federico Guglielmo Morelli & Michael Benzaquen & Marco Tarzia & Jean-Philippe Bouchaud, 2020. "Confidence collapse in a multihousehold, self-reflexive DSGE model," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117(17), pages 9244-9249, April.
    9. Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Maria Chiara Guardo & Bo Cowgill, 2017. "Multiplicative-innovation synergies: tests in technological acquisitions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(5), pages 1212-1233, October.
    10. Mark Knell & Simone Vannuccini, 2022. "Tools and concepts for understanding disruptive technological change after Schumpeter," Jena Economics Research Papers 2022-005, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    11. Pietro Moncada-Paternò-Castello, 2022. "Top R&D investors, structural change and the R&D growth performance of young and old firms," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 12(1), pages 1-33, March.
    12. 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).
    13. Emanuele Bacchiocchi & Fabio Montobbio, 2010. "International Knowledge Diffusion and Home‐bias Effect: Do USPTO and EPO Patent Citations Tell the Same Story?," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 112(3), pages 441-470, September.
    14. Emanuele Giovannetti & Claudio Piga, 2023. "The multifaceted nature of cooperation for innovation, ICT and innovative outcomes: evidence from UK Microdata," Eurasian Business Review, Springer;Eurasia Business and Economics Society, vol. 13(3), pages 639-666, September.
    15. Valérie Revest & Alessandro Sapio, 2012. "Financing technology-based small firms in Europe: what do we know?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 179-205, July.
    16. Massimiliano Mazzanti & Valeria Costantini & Susanna Mancinelli & Massimilano Corradini, 2011. "Environmental and Innovation Performance in a Dynamic Impure Public Good Framework," Working Papers 201117, University of Ferrara, Department of Economics.
    17. Eric Kemp‐Benedict, 2020. "Convergence of actual, warranted, and natural growth rates in a Kaleckian–Harrodian‐classical model," Metroeconomica, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 71(4), pages 851-881, November.
    18. Klaus Friesenbichler & Michael Peneder, 2016. "Innovation, competition and productivity," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 24(3), pages 535-580, July.
    19. Archibugi, Daniele & Filippetti, Andrea & Frenz, Marion, 2013. "Economic crisis and innovation: Is destruction prevailing over accumulation?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 303-314.
    20. Rita Strohmaier & Marlies Schuetz & Simone Vannuccini, 2019. "A systemic perspective on socioeconomic transformation in the digital age," Economia e Politica Industriale: Journal of Industrial and Business Economics, Springer;Associazione Amici di Economia e Politica Industriale, vol. 46(3), pages 361-378, September.

    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:sae:treure:v:27:y:2021:i:4:p:527-539. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.