IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zag/wpaper/0610.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Historical Perspective of the Role of Technology in Economic Development

Author

Listed:
  • Jurica Šimurina

    (Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb)

  • Josip Tica

    (Faculty of Economics and Business, Unviersity of Zagreb)

Abstract

The focus of this paper is to investigate technology changes and influence on economies since the First Industrial Revolution. The First Industrial Revolution was the first point in time when both increase of GDP per capita and population occurred at the same time (avoiding the Malthusian trap). Thus the selected point in time. Furthermore, developments of the late 18th and 19th centuries have some common properties with development of new technologies today. Even though the process of technological change changed during this time, there are still some lessons to be learned from distant and near history on how to gauge policies for fostering successful technological advances. Changes that occurred are relevant for respective economies, industries, companies and individuals. On all these levels changes occurred that were unprecedented in history before the First Industrial Revolution. It is not suggested that technological progress of centuries before the First Industrial Revolution was insignificant, but it certainly did not have such a profound impact in all areas of human life and existence.

Suggested Citation

  • Jurica Šimurina & Josip Tica, 2006. "Historical Perspective of the Role of Technology in Economic Development," EFZG Working Papers Series 0610, Faculty of Economics and Business, University of Zagreb.
    • Handle: RePEc:zag:wpaper:0610
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://web.efzg.hr/RePEc/pdf/Clanak%2006-10.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2006
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Romer, Paul, 1993. "Idea gaps and object gaps in economic development," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 543-573, December.
    2. Julian Hoppit, 1990. "Counting the industrial revolution," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 43(2), pages 173-193, May.
    3. Young, Alwyn, 1993. "Invention and Bounded Learning by Doing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(3), pages 443-472, June.
    4. Crafts, Nicholas F R, 1996. "The First Industrial Revolution: A Guided Tour for Growth Economists," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(2), pages 197-201, May.
    5. Abramovitz, Moses, 1986. "Catching Up, Forging Ahead, and Falling Behind," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 46(2), pages 385-406, June.
    6. Landes,David S., 2003. "The Unbound Prometheus," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521826662, October.
    7. Lewis, Frank D., 1979. "Explaining the Shift of Labor from Agriculture to Industry in the United States: 1869 to 1899," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(3), pages 681-698, September.
    8. Landes,David S., 2003. "The Unbound Prometheus," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521534024, October.
    9. Crafts, N. F. R. & Mills, Terence C., 1997. "Endogenous Innovation, Trend Growth, and the British Industrial Revolution: Reply to Greasley and Oxley," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 57(4), pages 950-956, December.
    10. Maxine Berg & Pat Hudson, 1992. "Rehabilitating the industrial revolution," Economic History Review, Economic History Society, vol. 45(1), pages 24-50, February.
    11. Nicholas Crafts, 1998. "Forging Ahead and Falling Behind: The Rise and Relative Decline of the First Industrial Nation," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 12(2), pages 193-210, Spring.
    12. Parente, Stephen L & Prescott, Edward C, 1994. "Barriers to Technology Adoption and Development," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(2), pages 298-321, April.
    13. Crafts, N. F. R., 1995. "Exogenous or Endogenous Growth? The Industrial Revolution Reconsidered," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(4), pages 745-772, December.
    14. Chris Freeman & Luc Soete, 1997. "The Economics of Industrial Innovation, 3rd Edition," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 3, volume 1, number 0262061953, April.
    15. Nef, John U., 1943. "The Industrial Revolution Reconsidered1," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 3(1), pages 1-31, May.
    16. 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.
    17. Abramovitz, Moses, 1993. "The Search for the Sources of Growth: Areas of Ignorance, Old and New," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 53(2), pages 217-243, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ron W. NIELSEN, 2016. "Industrial Revolution did not Boost Economic Growth and the Growth of Population even in the United Kingdom," Journal of Economics Bibliography, KSP Journals, vol. 3(4), pages 577-589, December.

    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. Rensman, Marieke, 1996. "Economic growth and technological change in the long run : a survey of theoretical and empirical literature," Research Report 96C10, University of Groningen, Research Institute SOM (Systems, Organisations and Management).
    2. repec:dgr:rugsom:96c10 is not listed on IDEAS
    3. Kemeny, Tom & Petralia, Sergio & Storper, Michael, 2022. "Disruptive innovation and spatial inequality," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 115953, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Simplice A. Asongu & Paul N. Acha-Anyi, 2020. "Enhancing ICT for productivity in sub-Saharan Africa: Thresholds for complementary policies," African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(7), pages 831-845, November.
    5. Crafts, Nicholas, 1999. "Quantitative economic history," Economic History Working Papers 22390, London School of Economics and Political Science, Department of Economic History.
    6. Nicholas Crafts, 2010. "Cliometrics and technological change: a survey," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(5), pages 1127-1147.
    7. McLean, Ian W., 2007. "Why was Australia so rich?," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 44(4), pages 635-656, October.
    8. Iancu, Aurel, 2009. "Real Economic Convergence," Working Papers of National Institute for Economic Research 090104, Institutul National de Cercetari Economice (INCE).
    9. Crafts, Nicholas, 2004. "Productivity Growth in the Industrial Revolution: A New Growth Accounting Perspective," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 64(2), pages 521-535, June.
    10. Becker, Sascha O. & Hornung, Erik & Woessmann, Ludger, 2009. "Catch Me If You Can: Education and Catch-up in the Industrial Revolution," IZA Discussion Papers 4556, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    11. Greasley, David & Oxley, Les, 1998. "Comparing British and American Economic and Industrial Performance 1860-1993: A Time Series Perspective," Explorations in Economic History, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 171-195, April.
    12. Crafts, Nicholas, 2010. "The contribution of new technology to economic growth: lessons from economic history," Revista de Historia Económica / Journal of Iberian and Latin American Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(3), pages 409-440, December.
    13. Crafts, Nicholas & O’Rourke, Kevin Hjortshøj, 2014. "Twentieth Century Growth*This research has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union’s Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) / ERC grant agreement no. 249546.," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 6, pages 263-346, Elsevier.
    14. Klingenberg, Cristina Orsolin & Borges, Marco Antônio Viana & Antunes, José Antônio do Vale, 2022. "Industry 4.0: What makes it a revolution? A historical framework to understand the phenomenon," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    15. Leandro Prados de la Escosura & Tamás Vonyó & Ilya B. Voskoboynikov, 2021. "Accounting For Growth In History," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(3), pages 655-669, July.
    16. Silva, Ester G. & Teixeira, Aurora A.C., 2008. "Surveying structural change: Seminal contributions and a bibliometric account," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 273-300, December.
    17. de la Fuente, Angel, 1997. "The empirics of growth and convergence: A selective review," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 23-73, January.
    18. Ruttan, Vernon W., 1998. "Growth Economics And Development Economics: What Should Development Economists Learn (If Anything) From The New Growth Theory?," Bulletins 12972, University of Minnesota, Economic Development Center.
    19. Aurora A.C. Teixeira & Natércia Fortuna, 2006. "Human capital, trade and long-run productivity. Testing the technological absorption hypothesis for the Portuguese economy, 1960-2001," FEP Working Papers 226, Universidade do Porto, Faculdade de Economia do Porto.
    20. Amavilah, Voxi Heinrich, 2014. "Knowledge = Technology + Human Capital and the Lucas and Romer Production Functions," MPRA Paper 58847, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. repec:ilo:ilowps:366690 is not listed on IDEAS
    22. Block, Joern H. & Hirschmann, Mirko & Kranz, Tobias & Neuenkirch, Matthias, 2023. "Public family firms and economic inequality across societies," Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Elsevier, vol. 19(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    development; economic history; technology;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • N70 - Economic History - - Economic History: Transport, International and Domestic Trade, Energy, and Other Services - - - 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:zag:wpaper:0610. 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: WPS (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fefzghr.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.