IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/egu/wpaper/2427.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The long-term evolution of technological complexity and its relationship with economic growth

Author

Listed:
  • Tom Broekel
  • Torben Klarl

Abstract

Innovations are widely accepted as fundamental drivers of economic growth by increasing productivity and creating new markets. However, empirical evidence on the long-term relationship between technological progress and economic growth remains scarce, with few studies considering shifts in technologies’ fundamental properties, such as their degree of complexity. Yet, higher levels of complexity are argued to increase technologies’ economic potential, and consequently, ignoring this dimension of technologies provides an incomplete picture of innovations’ growth effects. We address this research gap by exploring the relationship between economic growth and technological complexity over more than 170 years in the United States (US). Utilizing patent data, the concept of the complexity frontier, and partial wavelet analysis, we find that economic growth has not been driven by patented innovation and technological complexity for most of this period. However, since the beginning of the ICT revolution in the 1990s, it has significantly contributed to GDP growth.

Suggested Citation

  • Tom Broekel & Torben Klarl, 2024. "The long-term evolution of technological complexity and its relationship with economic growth," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2427, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Sep 2024.
    • Handle: RePEc:egu:wpaper:2427
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://econ.geo.uu.nl/peeg/peeg2427.pdf
    File Function: Version September 2024
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1992. "Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 383-397, August.
    2. Cesar A. Hidalgo & Ricardo Hausmann, 2009. "The Building Blocks of Economic Complexity," Papers 0909.3890, arXiv.org.
    3. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    4. William R. Kerr, 2010. "Breakthrough Inventions and Migrating Clusters of Innovation," NBER Chapters, in: Cities and Entrepreneurship, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. David J. TEECE, 2008. "Profiting from technological innovation: Implications for integration, collaboration, licensing and public policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 5, pages 67-87, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Rinaldo Evangelista & Valentina Meliciani & Antonio Vezzani, 2018. "Specialisation in key enabling technologies and regional growth in Europe," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(3), pages 273-289, April.
    7. Santiago Perez Balsalobre & Carlos Llano Verduras & Jorge Diaz-Lanchas, 2019. "Measuring subnational economic complexity: An application with Spanish data," JRC Working Papers on Territorial Modelling and Analysis 2019-05, Joint Research Centre.
    8. Nast, Carolin & Broekel, Tom & Entner, Doris, 2024. "Fueling the fire? How government support drives technological progress and complexity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(6).
    9. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    10. Gordon, Robert J., 2018. "Declining American economic growth despite ongoing innovation," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 1-12.
    11. Lee, Jong-Wha & Lee, Hanol, 2016. "Human capital in the long run," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 147-169.
    12. Paulo Gala & Igor Rocha & Guilherme Magacho, 2018. "The structuralist revenge: economic complexity as an important dimension to evaluate growth and development," Brazilian Journal of Political Economy, Center of Political Economy, vol. 38(2), pages 219-236.
    13. Alfonso Gambardella & Sohvi Heaton & Elena Novelli & David J. Teece, 2021. "Profiting from Enabling Technologies?," Strategy Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 75-90, March.
    14. Grimaldi, Rosa & Torrisi, Salvatore, 2001. "Codified-tacit and general-specific knowledge in the division of labour among firms: A study of the software industry," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(9), pages 1425-1442, December.
    15. Mastrogiorgio, Mariano & Gilsing, Victor, 2016. "Innovation through exaptation and its determinants: The role of technological complexity, analogy making & patent scope," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(7), pages 1419-1435.
    16. Olav Sorenson & Jan W. Rivkin & Lee Fleming, 2010. "Complexity, Networks and Knowledge Flows," Chapters, in: Ron Boschma & Ron Martin (ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, chapter 15, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Nelson, Richard R & Winter, Sidney G, 1982. "The Schumpeterian Tradeoff Revisited," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(1), pages 114-132, March.
    18. Torben Klarl, 2016. "The nexus between housing and GDP re-visited: A wavelet coherence view on housing and GDP for the U.S," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 36(2), pages 704-720.
    19. Mihaela Iulia Pintea & Peter Thompson, 2007. "Technological Complexity and Economic Growth," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 10(2), pages 276-293, April.
    20. Nelson, Richard R & Wright, Gavin, 1992. "The Rise and Fall of American Technological Leadership: The Postwar Era in Historical Perspective," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 30(4), pages 1931-1964, December.
    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. Tom Broekel, 2019. "Using structural diversity to measure the complexity of technologies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(5), pages 1-23, May.
    2. Mewes, Lars & Broekel, Tom, 2022. "Technological complexity and economic growth of regions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(8).
    3. Hezekiah Agwara & Philip Auerswald & Brian Higginbotham, 2013. "Algorithms and the Changing Frontier," NBER Chapters, in: The Changing Frontier: Rethinking Science and Innovation Policy, pages 371-410, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    4. Hezekiah Agwara & Philip Auerswald & Brian Higginbotham, 2014. "Algorithms and the Changing Frontier," NBER Working Papers 20039, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Balland, Pierre-Alexandre & Broekel, Tom & Diodato, Dario & Giuliani, Elisa & Hausmann, Ricardo & O'Clery, Neave & Rigby, David, 2022. "Reprint of The new paradigm of economic complexity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(8).
    6. Duranton, Gilles & Puga, Diego, 2014. "The Growth of Cities," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 5, pages 781-853, Elsevier.
    7. Tavassoli, Sam & Karlsson, Charlie, 2015. "Persistence of various types of innovation analyzed and explained," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(10), pages 1887-1901.
    8. Zoltán J. Ács & Pontus Braunerhjelm & David B. Audretsch & Bo Carlsson, 2015. "The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 7, pages 129-144, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Daniel Tzabbar & Alex Vestal, 2015. "Bridging the Social Chasm in Geographically Distributed R&D Teams: The Moderating Effects of Relational Strength and Status Asymmetry on the Novelty of Team Innovation," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(3), pages 811-829, June.
    10. Crass, Dirk & Schwiebacher, Franz, 2013. "Do trademarks diminish the substitutability of products in innovative knowledge-intensive services?," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-061, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    11. Fedderke, J.W. & Bogetic, Z., 2009. "Infrastructure and Growth in South Africa: Direct and Indirect Productivity Impacts of 19 Infrastructure Measures," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 37(9), pages 1522-1539, September.
    12. Tubiana, Matteo & Miguelez, Ernest & Moreno, Rosina, 2022. "In knowledge we trust: Learning-by-interacting and the productivity of inventors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    13. Dosi, Giovanni & Roventini, Andrea & Russo, Emanuele, 2019. "Endogenous growth and global divergence in a multi-country agent-based model," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 101-129.
    14. Choi, Mincheol & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2021. "Technological diversification and R&D productivity: The moderating effects of knowledge spillovers and core-technology competence," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    15. Fernandes, Leonardo H.S. & de Araújo, Fernando H.A. & Silva, Igor E.M. & Neto, Jusie S.P., 2021. "Macroeconophysics indicator of economic efficiency," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 573(C).
    16. Zakaryan, Arusyak, 2023. "Organizational knowledge networks, search and exploratory invention," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    17. Erik Stam, 2013. "Knowledge and entrepreneurial employees: a country-level analysis," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 41(4), pages 887-898, December.
    18. Dieter Ernst, 2002. "Global production networks and the changing geography of innovation systems. Implications for developing countries," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(6), pages 497-523.
    19. Peter Klimek & Ricardo Hausmann & Stefan Thurner, 2012. "Empirical Confirmation of Creative Destruction from World Trade Data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(6), pages 1-9, June.
    20. Voxi Heinrich Amavilah & Antonio Rodríguez Andrés, 2024. "Knowledge Economy and the Economic Performance of African Countries: A Seemingly Unrelated and Recursive Approach," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(1), pages 110-143, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation; Economic Growth; Technological Complexity; USA; Complexity Frontier; Wavelt Analysis;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • O47 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity - - - Empirical Studies of Economic Growth; Aggregate Productivity; Cross-Country Output Convergence
    • N10 - Economic History - - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics; Industrial Structure; Growth; Fluctuations - - - General, International, or Comparative

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:egu:wpaper:2427. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deguunl.html .

    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.