IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/h/elg/eechap/13101_4.html
   My bibliography  Save this book chapter

Some Significant Slips in Schumpeter’s Scenario

In: Innovation, Economic Growth and the Firm

Author

Listed:
  • William Baumol

Abstract

This book addresses the foundations of economic growth at the firm level, combining both theoretical and econometric contributions by established scholars. Challenging contributions revisit Marshall’s view on the management of innovation, investigate the decision of firms to venture into entrepreneurship and clarify some misunderstanding about Schumpeter’s ideas. The book goes on to shed light on the classical specialisation-flexibility trade-off and provides a vision on the role of the knowledge-based economy and firm networks in technology development. Firm survival and performance, price-cost margins and the determinants of research intensity are also investigated econometrically.

Suggested Citation

  • William Baumol, 2010. "Some Significant Slips in Schumpeter’s Scenario," Chapters, in: Jean-Luc Gaffard & Evens Salies (ed.), Innovation, Economic Growth and the Firm, chapter 4, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    • Handle: RePEc:elg:eechap:13101_4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.elgaronline.com/view/9781847208323.00013.xml
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Astebro, 2003. "The Return to Independent Invention: Evidence of Risk Seeking, Extreme Optimism or Skewness-Loving," Post-Print hal-00480030, HAL.
    2. David B. Audretsch (ed.), 2006. "Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Economic Growth," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 4130.
    3. William D. Nordhaus, 2004. "Schumpeterian Profits in the American Economy: Theory and Measurement," NBER Working Papers 10433, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Freeman, Richard B, 1978. "Job Satisfaction as an Economic Variable," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 68(2), pages 135-141, May.
    5. Thomas Astebro, 2003. "The Return to Independent Invention: Evidence of Unrealistic Optimism, Risk Seeking or Skewness Loving?," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 113(484), pages 226-239, January.
    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. Baumol, William J., 2007. "On income distribution and growth," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 545-548.
    2. Baumol William, 2011. "Innovation: Meager Private Gains, Enormous Social Gains," Entrepreneurship Research Journal, De Gruyter, vol. 1(4), pages 1-7, October.
    3. Henry Manne, 2014. "Resurrecting the ghostly entrepreneur," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 27(3), pages 249-258, September.
    4. George Norman & Lynne Pepall & Dan Richards, 2016. "Sequential Product Innovation, Competition and Patent Policy," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 48(3), pages 289-306, May.
    5. William Baumol, 2015. "Joseph Schumpeter: the long run, and the short," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 37-43, January.
    6. Davis, Lee N. & Davis, Jerome & Hoisl, Karin, 2009. "What Inspires Leisure Time Invention?," Discussion Papers in Business Administration 10457, University of Munich, Munich School of Management.
    7. George Norman & Lynne Pepall & Dan Richards, 2014. "Sequential Product Innovation, Competition and Patent Policy," Discussion Papers Series, Department of Economics, Tufts University 0786, Department of Economics, Tufts University.
    8. Frank M. Fossen, 2012. "Risk Attitudes and Private Business Equity," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1209, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    9. Ufuk Akcigit & John Grigsby & Tom Nicholas, 2017. "The Rise of American Ingenuity: Innovation and Inventors of the Golden Age," NBER Working Papers 23047, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    10. Meyer, Martin, 2006. "Are patenting scientists the better scholars?: An exploratory comparison of inventor-authors with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1646-1662, December.
    11. Gambardella, Alfonso, 2013. "The economic value of patented inventions: Thoughts and some open questions," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 626-633.
    12. Yong-Gil Lee & Ji-Hoon Lee, 2010. "Different characteristics between auctioned and non-auctioned patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 82(1), pages 135-148, January.
    13. Marius Tuft Mathisen & Einar Rasmussen, 2019. "The development, growth, and performance of university spin-offs: a critical review," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1891-1938, December.
    14. Alfonso Gambardella & Dietmar Harhoff & Bart Verspagen, 2017. "The economic value of patent portfolios," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 735-756, December.
    15. Koellinger, Ph.D. & Treffers, T., 2012. "Joy leads to Overconfidence, and a Simple Remedy," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2012-001-STR, Erasmus Research Institute of Management (ERIM), ERIM is the joint research institute of the Rotterdam School of Management, Erasmus University and the Erasmus School of Economics (ESE) at Erasmus University Rotterdam.
    16. repec:zbw:bofrdp:2012_020 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Parker, Simon C., 2007. "Entrepreneurial learning and the existence of credit markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(1), pages 37-46, January.
    18. Ingrid Verheul & Martin Carree & Roy Thurik, 2009. "Allocation and productivity of time in new ventures of female and male entrepreneurs," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 273-291, October.
    19. Mariassunta Giannetti & Andrei Simonov, 2009. "Social Interactions and Entrepreneurial Activity," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(3), pages 665-709, September.
    20. Martin Koudstaal & Randolph Sloof & Mirjam van Praag, 2015. "Are Entrepreneurs more Optimistic and Overconfident than Managers and Employees?," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 15-124/VII, Tinbergen Institute.
    21. Thomas Astebro & José Mata & Luis Santos-Pinto, 2009. "Preference for Skew in Lotteries: Evidence from the Laboratory," Cahiers de Recherches Economiques du Département d'économie 09.09, Université de Lausanne, Faculté des HEC, Département d’économie.

    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:elg:eechap:13101_4. 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: Darrel McCalla (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.e-elgar.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.