IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/wpaper/halshs-00721657.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The New Economy in Germany and the United States: Policy Challenges and Solutions

Author

Listed:
  • David Audretsch

    (AICGS New Economy Study Group - JHU - Johns Hopkins University)

  • Matthias Bank

    (AICGS New Economy Study Group - JHU - Johns Hopkins University)

  • Martin Carree

    (AICGS New Economy Study Group - JHU - Johns Hopkins University)

  • Marcus Dejardin

    (AICGS New Economy Study Group - JHU - Johns Hopkins University)

  • Julie Elston

    (AICGS New Economy Study Group - JHU - Johns Hopkins University)

  • Harmut Fest

    (AICGS New Economy Study Group - JHU - Johns Hopkins University)

  • Andre Jungmittag

    (AICGS New Economy Study Group - JHU - Johns Hopkins University)

  • Georg Licht

    (AICGS New Economy Study Group - JHU - Johns Hopkins University)

  • Gerald Mcdermott

    (AICGS New Economy Study Group - JHU - Johns Hopkins University)

  • Margaret Polski

    (AICGS New Economy Study Group - JHU - Johns Hopkins University)

  • Scott Shane

    (AICGS New Economy Study Group - JHU - Johns Hopkins University)

  • Paul Welfens

    (AICGS New Economy Study Group - JHU - Johns Hopkins University)

  • Juergen Weigand

    (AICGS New Economy Study Group - JHU - Johns Hopkins University)

  • Charles Wessner

    (AICGS New Economy Study Group - JHU - Johns Hopkins University)

Abstract

The American Institute of Contemporary German Studies (AICGS) assembled a group of researchers and policy makers in Germany and the United States to identify research and policy issues posed by the transformation we have come to call the new economy. This paper, which is the product of their collaboration, focuses on three issues. The first relates to defining what exactly constitutes the New Economy. The second issue involves identifying the forces driving the expansion of the New Economy. The third issue pertains to research and policy questions posed by the New Economy. In addressing these issues, the authors generate several key findings. While a common myth is that the Internet and e-commerce constitute the New Economy, we suggest that what is new about the New Economy involves the shift to knowledge and ideas as the source of competitive advantage. There are at least four central aspects that, when taken together, constitute what we mean by the New Economy--(1) globalization, (2) the shift to knowledge and ideas as the source of competitive advantage, (3) the increased importance of regional agglomerations and clusters, and (4) the emergence of entrepreneurship as an engine of growth and development. The forces facilitating the expansion of the New Economy are technological change, especially ICT, but also institutional change, such as reforms in the financial sector. New government policies are required in the New Economy. They enable the creation and commercialization of knowledge. While this study is able to identify the importance that New Economy plays in Germany and the United States, it raises many more questions than it answers. In particular, this study argues for a research agenda that explicitly compares both the similarities and differences that shifting to a New Economy has impacted Germany and the United States, and which types of policies have proven to be the most effective in generating and coping with the New Economy.

Suggested Citation

  • David Audretsch & Matthias Bank & Martin Carree & Marcus Dejardin & Julie Elston & Harmut Fest & Andre Jungmittag & Georg Licht & Gerald Mcdermott & Margaret Polski & Scott Shane & Paul Welfens & Juer, 2002. "The New Economy in Germany and the United States: Policy Challenges and Solutions," Working Papers halshs-00721657, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:wpaper:halshs-00721657
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00721657
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://shs.hal.science/halshs-00721657/document
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bresnahan, Timothy F. & Trajtenberg, M., 1995. "General purpose technologies 'Engines of growth'?," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 83-108, January.
    2. Fagerberg, Jan, 2000. "Technological progress, structural change and productivity growth: a comparative study," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 393-411, December.
    3. Kortum, Samuel & Lerner, Josh, 1998. "Stronger protection or technological revolution: what is behind the recent surge in patenting?," Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 247-304, June.
    4. Stephen D. Oliner & Daniel E. Sichel, 2000. "The Resurgence of Growth in the Late 1990s: Is Information Technology the Story?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(4), pages 3-22, Fall.
    5. N. Berger, Allen & F. Udell, Gregory, 1998. "The economics of small business finance: The roles of private equity and debt markets in the financial growth cycle," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 22(6-8), pages 613-673, August.
    6. Irwin Feller, 1997. "Federal and State Government Roles in Science and Technology," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 11(4), pages 283-295, November.
    7. Audretsch, David B, 1997. "Technological Regimes, Industrial Demography and the Evolution of Industrial Structures," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 6(1), pages 49-82.
    8. 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.
    9. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(3), pages 577-598.
    10. David B. Audretsch & A. Roy Thurik, 2000. "Capitalism and democracy in the 21st Century: from the managed to the entrepreneurial economy," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 17-34.
    11. Eli Bekman & John Bound & Stephen Machin, 1998. "Implications of Skill-Biased Technological Change: International Evidence," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 113(4), pages 1245-1279.
    12. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Cooke, Philip & Wills, David, 1999. "Small Firms, Social Capital and the Enhancement of Business Performance through Innovation Programmes," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 219-234, November.
    14. Ark, Bart van, 2000. "Therenewal of th old economy: Europe in an internationally comparative perspective," CCSO Working Papers 200012, University of Groningen, CCSO Centre for Economic Research.
    15. Klodt, Henning, 1990. "Industrial policy and repressed structural change in West Germany," Open Access Publications from Kiel Institute for the World Economy 1417, Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel).
    16. Ellison, Glenn & Glaeser, Edward L, 1997. "Geographic Concentration in U.S. Manufacturing Industries: A Dartboard Approach," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(5), pages 889-927, October.
    17. Klepper, Steven, 1996. "Entry, Exit, Growth, and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 562-583, June.
    18. Marcus DEJARDIN, 2001. "Entrepreneurship and Economic Growth: An Obvious Conjunction?," Development and Comp Systems 0110010, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    19. Zoltan J. Acs, 1992. "Small Business Economics: A Global Perspective," Challenge, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(6), pages 38-44, November.
    20. David, Paul A, 1990. "The Dynamo and the Computer: An Historical Perspective on the Modern Productivity Paradox," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 355-361, May.
    21. Dale W. Jorgenson & Kevin J. Stiroh, 2000. "Raising the Speed Limit: U.S. Economic Growth in the Information Age," Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Economic Studies Program, The Brookings Institution, vol. 31(1), pages 125-236.
    22. Baumol, William J., 1996. "Entrepreneurship: Productive, unproductive, and destructive," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 3-22, January.
    23. Ann Markusen, 1996. "Sticky Places in Slippery Space: A Typology of Industrial Districts," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 72(3), pages 293-313, July.
    24. Hall, Bronwyn H, 1987. "The Relationship between Firm Size and Firm Growth in the U.S. Manufacturing Sector," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(4), pages 583-606, June.
    25. Cohen, Wesley M & Levinthal, Daniel A, 1989. "Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of R&D," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 99(397), pages 569-596, September.
    26. Zoltán J. Ács (ed.), 1996. "Small Firms And Economic Growth," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, volume 0, number 524.
    27. David B. Audretsch, 1995. "Innovation and Industry Evolution," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262011468, April.
    28. Bruce Kogut, 2000. "The network as knowledge: generative rules and the emergence of structure," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(3), pages 405-425, March.
    29. Henderson, Vernon, 1997. "Externalities and Industrial Development," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(3), pages 449-470, November.
    30. Audretsch,David B. & Thurik,Roy (ed.), 1999. "Innovation, Industry Evolution and Employment," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521641661, September.
    31. Audretsch, David B, 1998. "Agglomeration and the Location of Innovative Activity," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 14(2), pages 18-29, Summer.
    32. repec:dgr:rugccs:200012 is not listed on IDEAS
    33. M. Carree & A. Thurik, 1998. "Small firms and economic growth in europe," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 26(2), pages 137-146, June.
    34. Audretsch, David B & Stephan, Paula E, 1996. "Company-Scientist Locational Links: The Case of Biotechnology," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 641-652, June.
    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. Audretsch, D.B. & Thurik, A.R., 2000. "What's New About the New Economy? Sources of growth in the managed and entrepreneurial economies," ERIM Report Series Research in Management ERS-2000-45-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.
    2. Roy Thurik & David Audretsch & Isabel Grilo, 2012. "Globalization, entrepreneurship and the region," Scales Research Reports H201201, EIM Business and Policy Research.
    3. Cohen, Wesley M., 2010. "Fifty Years of Empirical Studies of Innovative Activity and Performance," 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 129-213, Elsevier.
    4. 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.
    5. Delgado, Mercedes & Porter, Michael E. & Stern, Scott, 2014. "Clusters, convergence, and economic performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(10), pages 1785-1799.
    6. Liao, Hailin & Wang, Bin & Li, Baibing & Weyman-Jones, Tom, 2016. "ICT as a general-purpose technology: The productivity of ICT in the United States revisited," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 10-25.
    7. D.B. Audretsch & A.R. Thurik, 2010. "Unraveling the Shift to the Entrepreneurial Economy," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 10-080/3, Tinbergen Institute, revised 02 Apr 2011.
    8. David B. Audretsch & Max Keilbach, 2006. "Entrepreneurship, Growth and Restructuring," Papers on Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy 2006-13, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy Group.
    9. Wilson, Daniel J., 2009. "IT and Beyond: The Contribution of Heterogeneous Capital to Productivity," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 27, pages 52-70.
    10. Consoli, Davide & Patrucco, Pierpaolo, 2004. "The Knowledge Trade-Off: Circulation, Growth and the Role of Knowledge-Intensive Business Services in Urban Innovation Systems," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 200402, University of Turin.
    11. David B. Audretsch & Martin A. Carree & Adriaan J. Van Stel & A. Roy Thurik, 2002. "Impeded Industrial Restructuring: The Growth Penalty," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(1), pages 81-98.
    12. David B. Audretsch & A. Roy Thurik, 1999. "Innovation, Industry Evoluation and Employment," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 99-068/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    13. Roy Thurik & Sander Wennekers & Ingrid Verheul & David Audretsch, 2001. "An eclectic theory of entrepreneurship: policies, institutions and culture," Scales Research Reports H200012, EIM Business and Policy Research.
    14. 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).
    15. Harald Edquist & Magnus Henrekson, 2006. "Technological Breakthroughs and Productivity Growth," Research in Economic History, in: Research in Economic History, pages 1-53, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
    16. David Audretsch & Taylor Aldridge & Adam Lederer, 2010. "SMEs, Industry Dynamics and Economic Growth," Chapters, in: Jean-Luc Gaffard & Evens Salies (ed.), Innovation, Economic Growth and the Firm, chapter 3, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Lach, Saul & Trajtenberg, Manuel & Shiff, Gil, 2008. "Together but Apart: ICT and Productivity Growth in Israel," CEPR Discussion Papers 6732, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Braunerhjelm, Pontus, 2010. "Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Economic Growth - past experience, current knowledge and policy implications," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 224, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    19. Joern Block & Roy Thurik & Haibo Zhou, 2013. "What turns knowledge into innovative products? The role of entrepreneurship and knowledge spillovers," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 693-718, September.
    20. Feldman, Maryann P. & Audretsch, David B., 1996. "Location, location, location: The geography of innovation and knowledge spillovers," Discussion Papers, various Research Units FS IV 96-28, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.

    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:hal:wpaper:halshs-00721657. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.