IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1912.11250.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Predicting one type of technological motion? A nonlinear map to study the 'sailing-ship' effect

Author

Listed:
  • G. Filatrella
  • N. De Liso

Abstract

In this work we use a proven model to study a dynamic duopolistic competition between an old and a new technology which, through improved technical performance - e.g. data transmission capacity - fight in order to conquer market share. The process whereby an old technology fights a new one off through own improvements has been named 'sailing-ship effect'. In the simulations proposed, intentional improvements of both the old and the new technology are affected by the values of three key parameters: one scientific-technological, one purely technological and the third purely economic. The interaction between these components gives rise to different outcomes in terms of prevalence of one technology over the other.

Suggested Citation

  • G. Filatrella & N. De Liso, 2019. "Predicting one type of technological motion? A nonlinear map to study the 'sailing-ship' effect," Papers 1912.11250, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1912.11250
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1912.11250
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ron Adner & Daniel Snow, 2010. "Old technology responses to new technology threats: demand heterogeneity and technology retreats," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 19(5), pages 1655-1675, October.
    2. Henderson, Rebecca, 1995. "Of life cycles real and imaginary: The unexpectedly long old age of optical lithography," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 631-643, July.
    3. Nicola De Liso & Giovanni Filatrella, 2008. "On Technology Competition: A Formal Analysis Of The 'Sailing-Ship Effect'," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(6), pages 593-610.
    4. Davide Valenti & Giorgio Fazio & Bernardo Spagnolo, 2017. "The stabilizing effect of volatility in financial markets," Papers 1708.08695, arXiv.org.
    5. Nicola De Liso & Giovanni Filatrella, 2011. "On delayed technological shifts," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(6), pages 563-580, October.
    6. Gerald S. Graham, 1956. "The Ascendancy Of The Sailing Ship 1850-85," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 9(1), pages 74-88, August.
    7. 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.
    8. Nicola De Liso & Giovanni Filatrella, 2002. "Econophysics: The Emergence of a New Field?," Economia politica, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 2, pages 297-332.
    9. Imad A. Moosa, 2017. "Econometrics as a Con Art," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 17257.
    10. Debreu, Gerard, 1991. "The Mathematization of Economic Theory," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 81(1), pages 1-7, March.
    11. Christian Berggren & Thomas Magnusson & Dedy Sushandoyo, 2009. "Hybrids, diesel or both? The forgotten technological competition for sustainable solutions in the global automotive industry," International Journal of Automotive Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 9(2), pages 148-173.
    12. Francesco Schiavone, 2014. "Innovation Approaches For Old Products Revitalisation After Technological Change: The Rise Of Technology Reverse," International Journal of Innovation Management (ijim), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(02), pages 1-21.
    13. Ruttan, Vernon W, 1997. "Induced Innovation, Evolutionary Theory and Path Dependence:," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 107(444), pages 1520-1529, September.
    14. Coles, Anne-Marie & Piterou, Athena & Sentić, Anton, 2017. "Is small really beautiful? A review of the concept of niches in innovation," Greenwich Papers in Political Economy 18221, University of Greenwich, Greenwich Political Economy Research Centre.
    15. Walrave, Bob & Raven, Rob, 2016. "Modelling the dynamics of technological innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1833-1844.
    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. Mirzadeh Phirouzabadi, Amir & Blackmore, Karen & Savage, David & Juniper, James, 2022. "Modelling and simulating a multi-modal and multi-dimensional technology interaction framework: The case of vehicle powertrain technologies in the US market," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    2. Ciarli, Tommaso & Ràfols, Ismael, 2019. "The relation between research priorities and societal demands: The case of rice," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(4), pages 949-967.
    3. Stavins, Robert & Jaffe, Adam & Newell, Richard, 2000. "Technological Change and the Environment," Working Paper Series rwp00-002, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    4. Murmann, Johann Peter & Frenken, Koen, 2006. "Toward a systematic framework for research on dominant designs, technological innovations, and industrial change," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(7), pages 925-952, September.
    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. Cantner, Uwe & Vannuccini, Simone, 2021. "Pervasive technologies and industrial linkages: Modeling acquired purposes," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 386-399.
    8. Ron Adner & Daniel Levinthal, 2001. "Demand Heterogeneity and Technology Evolution: Implications for Product and Process Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(5), pages 611-628, May.
    9. Agarwal, Rajshree & Gort, Michael, 2001. "First-Mover Advantage and the Speed of Competitive Entry, 1887-1986," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(1), pages 161-177, April.
    10. Loschel, Andreas, 2002. "Technological change in economic models of environmental policy: a survey," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(2-3), pages 105-126, December.
    11. 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.
    12. 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.
    13. Wang, I. Kim & Seidle, Russell, 2017. "The degree of technological innovation: A demand heterogeneity perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 125(C), pages 166-177.
    14. Rietveld, G.J. & Eggers, J.P., 2016. "Demand Heterogeneity and the Adoption of Platform Complements," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2016-003-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.
    15. Brian Wu & Zhixi Wan & Daniel A. Levinthal, 2014. "Complementary assets as pipes and prisms: Innovation incentives and trajectory choices," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(9), pages 1257-1278, September.
    16. 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.
    17. Berggren, Christian & Magnusson, Thomas & Sushandoyo, Dedy, 2015. "Transition pathways revisited: Established firms as multi-level actors in the heavy vehicle industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(5), pages 1017-1028.
    18. 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.
    19. 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.
    20. Walrave, Bob & Raven, Rob, 2016. "Modelling the dynamics of technological innovation systems," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(9), pages 1833-1844.

    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:arx:papers:1912.11250. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.