Yang, Hu ao; Yang, Mingxuan
A icle
Why he g ea su ges o de elopmen s a e di e en : A
coupling analysis o he socio-poli ical pa adigm and he
echno-economic pa adigm
China Poli ical Economy (CPE)
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
School o Economics, Nanjing Uni e si y
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Yang, Hu ao; Yang, Mingxuan (2024) : Why he g ea su ges o de elopmen s a e
di e en : A coupling analysis o he socio-poli ical pa adigm and he echno-economic pa adigm,
China Poli ical Economy (CPE), ISSN 2516-1652, Eme ald, Leeds, Vol. 7, Iss. 1, pp. 15-32,
h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/CPE-06-2024-038
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/319472
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
Why he g ea su ges
o de elopmen s a e di e en :
a coupling analysis
o he socio-poli ical pa adigm
and he echno-economic pa adigm
Hu ao Yang
Chinese Academy o Social Sciences, Ins i u e o Economics, Beijing, China, and
Mingxuan Yang
China In e na ional Capi al Co po a ion Limi ed, Beijing, China
Abs ac
Pu pose –The “p oblem- idden p esen ” is indubi ably ela ed o he p e alence o neolibe alism, bu i is
also when he i h echnological e olu ion ook place. In his special ime, wha should be done o achie e he
coupling o Socio-poli ical Pa adigmand Technoeconomic Pa adigm h ough he adap i e ans o ma ion o
socio-poli ical pa adigm o a oid he esu acing o he “p oblem- idden p esen ”?
Design/me hodology/app oach –The ob ious di e ence be ween he e icacy o he i h echnological
e olu ion and he p e ious ou indica es ha he Techno-economic Pa adigm o Neo-Schumpe e ian school
is no su icien enough o explain he ins i u ional obs acles. No ma e ins i u ional o echnological, any
single pe spec i e would no be adequa e o explain he undamen al cause o he “p oblem- idden p esen ”.
Findings –F om a his o ical ma e ialism s andpoin , he s uc u e and p og ess o he echno-economic
pa adigm a e ine i ably in luenced by he socio-poli ical pa adigm, and only when he echno-economic
pa adigm and he socio-poli ical pa adigm a e coupled, he po en ial o he wa e o echnological e olu ion
can be “sha ed elease.”
O iginali y/ alue –The coupling analysis o he Socio-poli ical Pa adigm and he Technoeconomic
Pa adigm is o g ea enligh ening alue o he unde s anding o he economic de elopmen in he Digi al
Economy e a.
Keywo ds Neo-Schumpe e ian heo y, Kond a ie ’s long wa es heo y, Technoeconomic Pa adigm,
Social-poli ical Pa adigm
Pape ype T ansla ed pape
In ega ds o he long- e m analysis o he echnological e olu ion luc ua ions, Ca lo a
Pe ez belie es ha he analysis o his o ical p og ess should be ee o he adi ional iew
ha he cycle is only a ise and a decline in GDP. The e o e, Kond a ie ’s long-wa e heo y
should be eplaced by he g ea su ges o de elopmen . The s uc u e o each echnological
e olu ion is wha he analysis should ocus upon, pa icula ly he s udies o i s pa e n in
di usion and assimila ion h oughou he economy and socie y. The g ea su ges o
China Poli ical
Economy
15
© Hu ao Yang and Mingxuan Yang. O iginally published in Simpli ied Chinese in Economic Re iew in
2020: Yang, H. (2020), “Coupling Analysis o Social-Poli ical Pa adigm and Techno-Economic
Pa adigm-Also on he Social-Poli ical Pa adigm in he Digi al Economy E a”, Economic Re iew, Vol.
2020 No.11, pp 1-11þ136. DOI: 10.16528/j.cnki.22-1054/ .202011001
This s udy was unded by he phase achie emen s o he Na ional Social Science Fund’s Majo
P ojec “Resea ch on he Basic Economic Sys em o Socialism wi h Chinese Cha ac e is ics and he
Mode niza ion o S a e Go e nance” (No: 20ZDA014).
This is a ansla ion o an a icle o iginal pos a : h ps://doi.o g/10.16528/j.cnki.22-1054/ .202011001
The cu en issue and ull ex a chi e o his jou nal is a ailable on Eme ald Insigh a :
h ps://www.eme ald.com/insigh /2516-1652.h m
Recei ed 30 Sep embe 2024
Accep ed 30 Sep embe 2024
China Poli ical Economy
Vol. 7 No. 1, 2024
pp. 15-32
Eme ald Publishing Limi ed
2516-1652
DOI 10.1108/CPE-06-2024-038
de elopmen a e a p ocess o echnological e olu ion and i s pa adigm sp eading in he
whole economy, and i leads o no only s uc u al changes in p oduc ion, dis ibu ion,
exchange and consump ion bu also p o ound quali a i e changes in he socie y.
Al hough each su ge is oughly he same leng h in ime, no all wa es ha e he same
socio-economic e icacy. On Oc obe 18, 2017, Na u e published he wo k by he economic
his o ian, Robe C. Ellen, Lessons om His o y o he Fu u e o Wo k. In his a icle, Ellen
poin s o he ac ha compa ed wi h Engel’s Pause in B i ain du ing he i s indus ial
e olu ion, he si ua ion in he Uni ed S a es o Ame ica has been much wo se since he
1970s. B i ain expe ienced a 60-yea hia us in wages despi e he labo p oduc i i y g ow h
since 1770, while he Uni ed S a es o Ame ica expe ienced a much la ge di e gence
be ween wage g ow h and labo p oduc i i y g ow h. This has also been accompanied by a
much highe deg ee o inequali y in income dis ibu ion. This implies ha he Ame icans
ha e no enjoyed he bene i s o economic g ow h o nea ly hal a cen u y since he 1970s,
and hus, Ellen e e s o he 1970s as he “p oblem- idden p esen ” and he pe iod be ween
1830 and he 1970s as he “Wes e n ascen o a luence” (Allen, 2017).
In con as o he h ee decades o pos -wa coo dina ed g ow h in p o i s (accumula ion),
eal wages (consump ion) and labo p oduc i i y ( echnological p og ess), Ellen only poin s
o he gap be ween eal wages and labo p oduc i i y. In ac , whe he we look a he a e o
p o i , he a e o in es men , he a e o employmen o he g ow h o eal wages, since he
mid o la e 1970s, he Wes e n de eloped coun ies, ep esen ed by he Uni ed S a es o
Ame ica, a e inc easingly showing signs o inc easing inancializa ion, sluggish economic
g ow h, low in es men and social inequali y. The e ms G ea S agna ion, G ea
Mode a ion, G ea Failu e, G ea Dep ession and Decoupling a e widely used o desc ibe
he pos -golden age o Wes e n economies. The ise o neo-libe alism since he la e 1970s and
ea ly 1980s and he ensuing policies o inancializa ion, libe aliza ion and p i a iza ion a e
widely belie ed o be he oo cause o he “p oblem- idden p esen .” Why did he economies
o he de eloped wo ld, ep esen ed by he Uni ed S a es o Ame ica, g ow so apidly in he
middle o he 20 h cen u y? Why did g ow h slow om he 1960s o he ea ly 1970s? These
a e he mos undamen al ques ions in mode n economic his o y acco ding o Robe J.
Go don. In Go don’s iew, economic g ow h is no as elen less as Solow en isioned bu is
likely o be a one-o e en in human economic his o y. The ques ion since he end o he pos -
wa golden 30 yea s is no how long g ow h will las , bu how a i will decline. Go don
p edic ed ha he USA economy aces six long- e m headwinds: demog aphy, educa ion,
inequali y, globaliza ion, ene gy and en i onmen al issues and excess consume and
go e nmen deb . These will push he long- e m g ow h a e o he economy o hal o less
compa ed o he 1.9% annual g ow h a e om 1860 o 2007, while pe capi a consump ion
g ow h in he bo om 99% o he income dis ibu ion is likely o be below 0.5%. Mullen
a gues ha since he 1970s, he Wes has been in a “long dep ession” simila o he G ea
Dep ession o he 1920 and 1930s and ha many o he p oblems ha e been caused by wha
Mullen calls a “dep ession dep ession,” in which go e nmen s ha e been ying o con ain
and alle ia e he dep ession wi h sho - e m policies a he han ocusing on long- e m
economic g ow h, and he e o e supp essed he c ea i e des uc ion e ec s. In addi ion, Hal
B enne desc ibed he pe iod as a long slump, and Cohen desc ibed i as a g ea s agna ion
(Tyle Cowen, 2011) and a g ea ailu e.
The ise o neo-libe alism pa alleled wi h he “p oblem- idden p esen ,” bu i canno be
igno ed ha he “p oblem- idden p esen ” also co ela ed wi h he i h echnological
e olu ion, whe e he in o ma ion and communica ions echnology (ICT) e olu ion played a
majo ole. Why is i ha he i s ou echnological e olu ions co esponded o he “age o
p ospe i y,” while he i h wa e o echnological e olu ion was ela ed o “p oblem- idden?”
Wha caused he di e ence be ween hese pe iods o ad ancemen s? This ce ainly p esen s
some challenges o neo-Schumpe e ian economics, as i s ands by he p inciple ha
CPE
7,1
16
inno a ion is he d i ing o ce o economic g ow h. I ollowing he s ages o he
echnological e olu ion o neo-Schumpe e ians, he in oduc ion pe iod o he echnological
e olu ion will ine i ably encoun e a inancial c isis, which will be ollowed by he “ u ning
poin ” pe iod o ins i u ional es uc u ing and hen lead o an expansion pe iod. Howe e ,
he wo successi e g ea inancial c ises since he 21s cen u y, he Nasdaq s o m a he
beginning o he 20 h cen u y and he g ea c isis du ing 2008, did no es ablish a u ning
poin . Al hough o a ce ain ex en , he adi ional heo y o he echno-economic pa adigm
swayed away om he echnological de e minism endency and achie ed ins i u ional
analysis, i s ill ails o explain he s uc u al in luence and he o ma ion o ins i u ional
obs acles du ing he di e en wa es o echnological e olu ion.
Conside ing he ma e ialis ic concep ion o his o y, he elease o he economic po en ial
o any echnological e olu ion could no be di ec ly measu ed by he echnological
ad ancemen i sel : i is closely ela ed o he socie y’s poli ical en i onmen , p inciples and
policies. As he p ocess o any echnological e olu ion is a con inuous and p og essi e
p ocess, i s economic alue is no na u al elease, bu i ’s a he es ic ed by he socio-
poli ical pa adigm. I is gene ally ag eed ha he wo ld economy is now in a pe iod o o e lap
be ween he end o he i h and ea ly s ages o he six h echnological e olu ion. The digi al
economy (he eina e e e ed o as digi al economy 1.0) based on he In e ne , compu e s and
o he ICTs is g owing owa d a new gene a ion o digi al economy (he eina e e e ed o as
digi al economy 2.0) ep esen ed by a i icial in elligence (he eina e e e ed o as AI). In
his special ime, wha should be done o achie e he coupling o socio-poli ical pa adigm and
echno-economic pa adigm h ough he adap i e ans o ma ion o socio-poli ical pa adigm
o a oid he esu acing o he “p oblem- idden p esen ”?
1. F om he echnological pa adigm o he echnological economic pa adigm: he
ins i u ional analysis app oach o neo-Schumpe e ian economics
Fo he neo-Schumpe e ians, Joseph Schumpe e ’s heo y is mo e enligh ening han
explana o y in e ms o s udying he unde lying mechanics o he long wa e o he “g ea
su ge.” Al hough Joseph Schumpe e is ecognized as he o igina o o he inno a ion heo y,
his con ibu ion is simply o poin ou inno a i e echnologies as he main o ce d i ing
economic g ow h. His wo k didn’ p o ide any sa is ac o y explana ions in ega ds o how
his o ce is acqui ed, how i occu s and how i a ec s long- e m economic luc ua ions.
F eeman poin s ou ha Joseph Schumpe e ’s Business Cycles: A Theo e ical, His o ical, And
S a is ical Analysis o he Capi alis P ocess was conside ed a majo heo e ical con ibu ion
a he ime; hal a cen u y la e , i canno be said ha Business Cycles occupies a place in he
his o y o economic hough compa able o he majo wo ks o Ma x, Keynes o Rica do, o
e en o he wo ks o Schumpe e himsel : “Schumpe e emains he ogue elephan amongs
20 h-cen u y economis s, and al hough he has commanded he espec o he p o ession, he
ce ainly has no won hei allegiance” (F eeman, 1990).
The e a e mainly wo ace s o he c i icism in ega ds o Joseph Schumpe e ’s business
cycle heo y. The i s is how o explain he scale and du a ion o inno a ion. Simon
Kuzne s’s known e iew o he business cycle in he Ame ican Economic Re iew ep esen ed
some o he ypical ques ions: Which inno a ions we e so big in hei scale ha hey could
possibly d i e long cycles o he en i e wo ld economy? The e a e ens o housands o
in en ions and inno a ions e e y yea . Su ely some heo y o he clus e ing o inno a ions
would be necessa y o ela e inno a ions o majo wa es o in es men and long cycles o
de elopmen . Also, why should a long cycle las abou hal a cen u y? I i is en ep eneu ial
ene gy which d i es he whole sys em, hen Kuzne s asked i onically: did he he oic
en ep eneu s ge i ed e e y 50 yea s (Kuzne s, 1940)? The second is Ve non W. Ru an’s
challenge o he clus e s o inno a ions hypo hesis. “Nei he in Business Cycles no in
China Poli ical
Economy
17
Schumpe e ’s o he wo k is he e any hing ha can be iden i ied as a heo y o inno a ion.
The business cycle in Schumpe e ’s sys em is a di ec consequence o he appea ance o
clus e s o inno a ions. Bu no eal explana ion is p o ided as o why inno a ions appea in
clus e s o why he clus e s possess he pa icula ypes o pe iodici y which Schumpe e
iden i ied [. . ..]” (Ru an, 1961). Joseph Schumpe e was unable o answe he ques ion o
Simon Kuzne s un il his dea h. A e Joseph Schumpe e , Mensch and o he s ha e ied o
p o e ha dep essions cause inno a ion o swa m, bu hey ha e also ailed o p o ide a
good explana ion o he cyclical na u e o he swa m.
A e Mensch, neo-Schumpe e ians ha e been ying o make up o he laws in Joseph
Schumpe e ’s heo y, such as F eeman’s new echnology sys ems, Dosi’s echnological s yles
and echnological pa adigms p oposed by Cluck and Su e . These all aimed a elucida ing he
mechanism o he occu ence and di usion o echnological inno a ion. Pe ez’ s udies
sys ema ically esponded o Ru an and Simon Kuzne s’s c i icisms (F eeman, 1990). Based
on Dosi’s concep o echnological pa adigm, Pe ez came up wi h he concep o me a-
pa adigm and de eloped he heo y o echno-economic pa adigm. While based on he
concep o Joseph Schumpe e ’s inno a ion as an economic d i ing o ce, Pe ez a gues ha
he wa e o echnological e olu ion is no s ic ly an economic phenomenon bu a he a
ans o ma ional p ocess o he en i e socio-economic and ins i u ional sys em. The e o e, in
he heo y o echno-economic pa adigm shi s, Pe ez s i es o ge id o he endency o
echnological de e minism o he ea ly neo-Schumpe e ians such as Mensch. Pe ez colo ed
he long-wa e heo y o neo-Schumpe e ian an ob ious in o ins i u ional analysis: Fi s ,
Pe ez in oduced he concep o ins i u ional eo ganiza ion in he pe iodic luc ua ion o
echnological e olu ion and ega ded i as a key ac o in he ansi ion om ough o peak.
Second, Pe ez belie es ha he ansi ion be ween inancial capi al and he dominance o
p oduc i e capi al is he only pa hway om he in oduc ion pe iod o he echnological
e olu ion o he expansion pe iod. When Pe ez sugges ed ha he luc ua ing p ocess o he
echnology wa e wi h he dominance o inancial capi al and indus ial capi al and
exp essed he iew ha he po en ial o he old echnological economic pa adigm would no
be eplaced be o e i was exhaus ed, she was ac ually aligning wi h Ma xism. And ew
Tyleco e hus desc ibed Pe ez’s heo y as “This is a mos elegan syn hesis o he bes o he
Ma xis and Schumpe e ian adi ions” (Tyleco e, 1992, p. 18).
In he heo y o echno-economic pa adigm, he echnological e olu ion, echno-economic
pa adigm and he g ea su ges cons i u e an insepa able o ganic whole ha ad ances
sequen ially and logically. Al hough he echnological e olu ion i s occu ed in some
economic sec o s, i lacks he e icacy o ans o m he social economy as a whole. Howe e ,
i ’s di e en o he echno-economic pa adigm accompanying he echnological e olu ion,
which possesses an exempla y signi icance o he whole socie y. “A echno-economic
pa adigm is, hen, a bes -p ac ice model made up o a se o all-pe asi e gene ic
echnological and o ganiza ional p inciples, which ep esen he mos e ec i e way o
applying a pa icula echnological e olu ion and o using i o mode nizing and
eju ena ing he whole o he economy. When gene ally adop ed, hese p inciples become he
common-sense basis o o ganizing any ac i i y and o s uc u ing any ins i u ion (Pe ez,
2003, p. 21). Whe he a po en ial echnological e olu ion can become eali y la gely depends
on he deg ee o which he echno-economic pa adigm is gene ally accep ed. When such a
pa adigm is sp ead ou in a comp ehensi e manne , he “g ea su ge o de elopmen ” will
ake place, leading o s uc u al changes in p oduc ion, dis ibu ion, communica ion and
consump ion as well as o p o ound and quali a i e changes in socie y” (Pe ez, 2003, p. 25).
The e is an inhe en consis ency be ween Pe ez’s echnological economic pa adigm and
Dosi’s echnological pa adigm. Jus as he e is a Thomas Kuhn Communi y Pa adigm o
Scien i ic Resea ch, he e is a de elopmen al pa adigm o echnology, Dosi a gues: “The
echnological pa adigm can be de ined as a model o he solu ion o selec ed echnoeconomic
CPE
7,1
18
p oblems based on he p inciples o he na u al sciences” (Dosi e al., 1988, p. 276).
Essen ially, Dosi’s echnological pa adigm is a kind o logic ollowed in he p ocess o
de elopmen o echnological ac i i ies, bu i does no imply a consis en s a e. This
pa adigm ollows p og essi e, e olu iona y and heu is ic logic, and wi hin his logical
amewo k, he collec i e embodimen o echnology and i s p oduc s would lead o a se o
pa icula echnological ajec o ies.
On he su ace, Dosi’s echnological pa adigm is mo e abou he e olu ion o echnology
solu ions, so i is o en ega ded as a kind o echnical analysis, which is ob iously a
misunde s anding. We can ha e a clea e unde s anding o he ins i u ional a ibu e o he
echnological pa adigm h ough Dosi’s classi ica ion o knowledge. F om Dosi’s pe spec i e,
echnological p og ess in ol es di e en ypes o knowledge: uni e sal and encoded
knowledge, non-public and aci knowledge o knowledge ha is p o ec ed by pa en s. In he
p ocess o cons uc ing and u ilizing his knowledge, he subjec will be a ec ed by he
o iginally exis ing cumula i e knowledge o he en e p ise and he e o e o m a speci ic
solu ion. Thus, “inno a i e knowledge is bound by a pa adigm and appea s along a
pa icula ajec o y” (Dosi e al., 1988, p. 278). In his sense, inno a i e knowledge is
specialized and sec o -speci ic, ye knowledge is a cumula i e asse a each single en e p ise.
An en e p ise ha ollows he echnological pa adigm o sol e p oblems would end up wi h
esul ing p oduc s and echnological ajec o y wi h a high deg ee o he e ogenei y, and so
we could obse e each di e en en e p ise wi h a unique inno a ion ajec o y. This
app oach o unde s anding echnology h ough amilia i y wi h knowledge is also a key
di e ence be ween neo-Schumpe e ian economics and mains eam economics, which
ex apola es echnology om ou pu o ou come, ega dless o he na u e o he
echnology. When i comes o neo-Schumpe e ian economics, a echnological change is
based on scien i ic p inciples, di ec ed by needs and p oblems and is subjec o he
in e ac ion o cumula i e knowledge. This is ce ainly di e en om he neoclassical
economic iew o echnology as a widely applicable, easily ep oducible and eusable
concep o in o ma ion.
The echnological pa adigm is a mic o-concep ha discusses wha echnology is and
how i is cons uc ed. The echno-economic pa adigm is a mac o- echnological concep ,
which exp esses he gene al cha ac e is ics, di usion p ocess and mac o-exp ession o
echnology in he economic sys em. Ne e heless, bo h he echnological pa adigm and he
echnological economic pa adigm ha e ob ious ins i u ional meanings, and hey jus
desc ibe he o ma ion o “common knowledge” in ins i u ional economics a di e en le els.
Whe he i is Dosi’s emphasis on he need o echnological inno a ion o ollow speci ic
p ocedu es and be subjec o speci ic cons ain s o Pe ez’ s a emen ha “each echnological
e olu ion b ings wi h i , no only a ull e amping o he p oduc i e s uc u e bu e en ually
also a ans o ma ion o he ins i u ions o go e nance, o socie y and e en o ideologies and
cul u e” (Pe ez, 2003, p. 30), he key is o emphasize he blending and con igu a ion o
“common knowledge” a di e en le els. F om he o m o p oduc ion o ganiza ion o he
mode o ci cula ion and consump ion, as well as he o m o o ganiza ion and he s uc u e o
sys em, he echno-economic pa adigm embodies he uni e sali y o economic ac i i ies as a
esul o echnological e olu ions. In a sense, i is an equi alen se o analy ical concep s
wi h ano he impo an concep o neo-Schumpe e ian economics, gene al pu pose
echnology; he la e e e s o widely used echnical a angemen s, while he o me
implies a widely accep ed ins i u ional s uc u e.
The o ma ion o he echno-economic pa adigm indica es ha he neo-Schumpe e ians,
such as F eeman, Luzan, Taylo Co e and Pe ez, ha e shi ed hei ocus om echnology-
d i en economic g ow h o a eas such as he in e ela ionship o di e en echnologies, hei
di usion pa e ns and hei impac on inno a i e di ec ions. Exempla y opics include: how
does echnology lead o changes in co po a e and ins i u ional o ganiza ions? How would
China Poli ical
Economy
19
echnology a ec employmen , li es yle and ma ke s uc u e? The concep o “g ea su ge o
de elopmen ” no only emo ed he limi a ions o adi ional long cycle analysis bu also
ep esen ed neo-Schumpe e ians’ e o s o be e modi y Joseph Schumpe e ’s legacy
h ough a ional his o ical analysis. This modi ica ion om echnological pa adigm o
echno-economic pa adigm is ela i ely success ul. Dosi’s echnological pa adigm heo y, as
a knowledge gene a ion heo y, is widely used in inno a ion economics and can p o ide
heo e ical basis o business he e ogenei y heo y and dynamic capabili y heo y. Pe ez’
heo y o echno-economic pa adigm can no only include he p ocess o echnological change
bu also he elemen s o ins i u ional compe i ion and ins i u ional ine ia, so i is possible o
become a mo e mac o-his o ical pa e n o he s age o capi alis de elopmen heo y. As a
ype o long- e m his o ical ins i u ional analysis, he echno-economic pa adigm is no only
a b eak h ough o he ea ly echnological de e minism bu also an upg aded ex ension o he
echnological pa adigm. Un o una ely, echno-economic pa adigm s ill unde es ima es he
impo ance o ideas, in e es g oups, social policies and so on, and his g ea ly weakened he
scope o applica ion and in e p e a ion o his heo y – i judges a u ning poin pe iod oo
quick and ma ks a sys em eo ganiza ion oo easily.
2. B ie u ning poin and easy ins i u ional eo ganiza ion: he inhe en
de iciency o he heo y o echnological economy pa adigm
A e Mensch, neo-Schumpe e ians such as F eeman, Louca and Pe ez ha e been ying o
a oid echnological de e minism and mo e as a as possible owa ds a co-e olu iona y
heo y. The echno-economic pa adigm is he exac embodimen o his endea o . Howe e ,
his pa adigm is s ill ega ded as echnology de e minism o some c i ics. Gu i�
e ez-
Ba ba usa a gues ha while bo h he Neo-Schumpe e ian School and he Social
Accumula ion S uc u e School (SSA) iew p o i ma gin as a cen al de e minan o he
accumula ion p ocess, he e a e s ill undamen al di e ences on he ela ionship be ween he
wo. The social accumula ion s uc u e school a gues ha he e ec s o echnological change
a e la gely media ed by he ins i u ion, bu o neo-Schumpe e ians, he ins i u ional
en i onmen is c ea ed by he long wa e, and i ’s he esul o social and economic
ans o ma ions unleashed by echnological p og ess. The eason o his di e ence lies in
he ac ha he neo-Schumpe e ian mainly ocuses on mic o-le el analysis, while he SSA
ocuses on mac o-economic analysis, which esul s in “ e e sal o causali ies be ween he
wo heo ies” (Gu i�
e ez-Ba ba usa, 2019).
Tom�
as Gu i�
e ez-Ba ba usa’s assessmen applies only o he ea ly Schumpe e ians,
such as Mensch, bu o he neo-Schumpe e ians a e he 1980s, such as Pe ez, F eeman and
Dosi, i may no be en i ely app op ia e o conside i s heo e ical iew as “ he ins i u ional
en i onmen is s ill c ea ed by he long wa e.” The neo-Schumpe e ian echno-economic
pa adigm is no a kind o echnological de e minism. I is wo h discussing whe he he
heo y o he echno-economic pa adigm lea es enough heo e ical space o ins i u ional
ans o ma ion analysis. In ac , F eeman and Louc~
a conclude ha he app op ia e me hod is
“. . . easoned his o y: o an app oach o economic his o y including echnological
inno a ions, s uc u al changes, and he co-e olu ion o economic and social mo emen s
wi hin he amewo k o ins i u ional se ings and modes o egula ion” (F eeman and Louc~
a,
2001, p. 123). Thus, he main on ology is ha o co-e olu ion. Fi e subsys ems in socie y a e
iden i ied: science, echnology, economy, poli ics and cul u e. Subsys em cycles, lags and
eedbacks “ . . . a e combined in some bands o luc ua ion by speci ic coo dina ion p ocesses
eme ging a e s uc u al c ises. These coo dina ion p ocesses a e he e o e he c ucial
causal de e mina ion o he business cycles and he long-wa e mo emen s in eal his o ical
de elopmen . . .” (F eeman and Louc~
a, 2001, p. 121) [1]. This clea ly shows ha he neo-
Schumpe e ian iew o he long wa e is he esul o he co-e olu ion o h ee subsys ems:
CPE
7,1
20
echnology, economy and socie y, wi h he peak being hei bes coupling pe iod and he
ough being he wo s . Al hough F eeman and Pe ez did exp ess ha ins i u ions ans o m
along wi h he echnological p og ess, “a pa icula ype o echnological p og ess, de ined as
a ‘ echnological economic model’, has such a b oad impac on all sec o s o he economy ha
hei di usion is accompanied by a s uc u al c isis o adjus men , in which case he
ans o ma ion o he social and ins i u ional sys em necessa ily leads o a be e ma ch
be ween he new echnology and he sys em o socio-economic managemen o he sys em o
ules” (Dosi e al., 1988, p. 49), i does no mean ha hey pu echnological inno a ion in a
decisi e posi ion. In he analysis o he al e na ion be ween he new and he old echno-
economic pa adigm, Pe ez emphasized ha “ he su ges e e o he eme gence and p ocess o
di usion and socio-economic assimila ion o successi e (and o e lapping) echnological
e olu ions” (Pe ez, 2013). Nelson also poin s ou ha Ch is ophe F eeman and Ca lo a
Pe ez ha e p oposed ha he key echnologies and indus ies o di e en e as gene ally
equi e di e en se s o suppo ing ins i u ions. Thei a gumen is ha he na ions ha end
o be leade s in he di e en e as a e hose ha had, o managed o build, he app op ia e se
o ins i u ions (Nelson, 2011).
The eal de iciency o he echno-economic pa adigm lies in he di icul y o adjus ing he
sys em, and he c i ics ook his chance. Fo a heo y o long- e m luc ua ions in capi alis
de elopmen , he co e issue is no how o explain he occu ence o peak and ough bu how
o esol e he s uc u al c isis and push he economy om ough o peak. Pe ez ealized he
impo ance o oughs ge ing he needed upwa d momen um, and so in he ansi ion pe iod
be ween he in oduc ion and expansion, he e mus be a pe iod o adjus men , i.e. he u ning
poin , whe e he eo ganiza ion o he sys em can be accomplished. Howe e , Pe ez is o e ly
simplis ic and op imis ic. In he opinion, he u ning poin ep esen s a undamen al shi
om a mad model based on inancial s anda ds o a coo dina ed model based on he
p oduc ion logic, wi h p oduc i e capi al seizing powe om inancial capi al. This is a
p ocess deemed ela i ely easy by Pe ez: “i is a p ocess o con ex ual change. I can ake any
amoun o ime, om a ew mon hs o se e al yea s” (Pe ez, 2003, p. 52). In he depic ion o
he i e echnological e olu ions, he u ning poin o he i s echnological e olu ion
las ed only ou yea s (1793–1797), he second las ed i e yea s (1848–1850) and he hi d
las ed only wo yea s (1893–1895). Due o wa a e a he ime, he u ning poin o he ou h
echnological e olu ion las ed ou yea s in Eu ope (1929–1933) bu 14 yea s in he Uni ed
S a es o Ame ica (1929–1943). In he book published in 2002, Pe ez iden i ied he u ning
poin o he i h echnological e olu ion as he beginning o 2001 (Pe ez, 2003, p. 52), and
his p edic ion clea ly does no co espond o he la e economic de elopmen since 1995–
2004 was he golden decade o he ICT e olu ion (Go don, 2018). This means ha he 2001
Nasdaq c isis did no ha e he des uc i e epai unc ion o he inancial c isis desc ibed in
he echno-economic pa adigm, and 2001 was no he beginning o he u ning poin . A e
he onse o he inancial c isis in 2008, Pe ez had o e ise he ea lie iew ha 2007–2008
ma ked he end o he phase o ascen o consolida ion and ha we we e once again a a
u ning poin (Gu i�
e ez-Ba ba usa, 2019).
The u ning poin was sho -li ed o a la ge ex en because Pe ez a ibu ed he
ins i u ional eo ganiza ion o his pe iod o he ug-o -wa be ween he new and old echno-
economic pa adigms as well as he al e na ion o p oduc i e capi al and inancial capi al. In
ega ds o he al e na ing dominance o inancial capi al and p oduc i e capi al, Pe ez only
emphasizes he lexibili y o inancial capi al and he esul ing posi i e impac on he
di usion o inno a ion, a guing ha once p o i expec a ions a e no me , inancial capi al
would su ende dominance o p oduc i e capi al, which clea ly unde s a es he complexi y
o he mode n capi al sys em. I is ue ha inancial capi al p o ides he necessa y inancing
mechanisms o he de elopmen o new echnologies and plays a undamen al ole in
achie ing long- e m economic expansion, bu when new echnologies do no p o ide he
China Poli ical
Economy
21
p o i p ospec s ha inancial capi al expec s, he bu s ing o he inancial bubble does no
au oma ically pu inancial capi al in o hibe na ion. The p ocess o inancializa ion is no
limi ed o he inancial indus y i sel bu pe mea es he eal economy and he daily li e o
each indi idual. In he gene al inancial sys em o economic li e, he specula i e p o i s o
inancial ac i i ies always cons i u e a di e sion and es ain o he p oduc i e in es men
o en e p ises. On he one hand, co po a es can make money by aking equi y s akes in
inancial ins i u ions, me ge s and acquisi ions o managemen buyou s. On he o he hand,
inancialized non- inancial co po a es mus also in es a sizeable specula i e po ion in he
inancial ma ke s o main ain he necessa y liquidi y o isks and unce ain ies. This
equi ed liquidi y objec i ely educes he amoun o capi al ha i ms can in es in new
echnologies, equipmen and esea ch and de elopmen . In ac , widesp ead and pe asi e
inancializa ion has blu ed he bounda ies be ween he p oduc i e capi al and he inancial
capi al, which makes Pe ez’s concep ion o he powe dynamics be ween he p oduc i e
capi al and he inancial capi al seem oo idealis ic.
Despi e an e o o emphasize he co-e olu ion o echnology, economics and ins i u ions,
as he c i ics poin ou , “A weakness o he neo-Schumpe e ian heo y is a lack o heo y o
agency, which limi s i s abili y o p o ide explana ions o he mechanisms o g ow h
p ocesses (K€
ohle , 2012).” Geels and Scho (2010) a gue ha i is oo “ ... ocused on he
mac o-en i onmen o socio- echnical sys ems . . . and does no p o ide many insigh s in o
how hese ansi ions happen” Geels and Scho (2010, p. 17) [2]. Due o such disad an ages o
non-ac ion subjec and ocusing oo much on mac o-en i onmen analysis o echnological
sys ems, he echno-economic pa adigm o he neo-Schumpe e ian has only won he sys em
magni icence in ins i u ional analysis bu los he s uc u al de ails. The o m o p oduc ion
o ganiza ion and he change o dominan pa adigm is mo e like a b ie ins i u ional cos -
bene i analysis han an ins i u ional e olu ion analysis. In he heo y o he echno-economic
pa adigm, he pa adigm accompanying wi h echnological e olu ion has been o uni e sal
exempla y signi icance since i s incep ion. In ac , he e canno be a clea and de ensible
ins i u ional pa adigm un il he po en ial o a echnological e olu ion has been ully
ealized.
As a esul o he co-e olu ion o echnology, economy and ins i u ion, i is impossible o
his pa adigm o ha e an ideal and balanced pa e n – i can only be a combina ion o
ins i u ions wi h his o ical speci ici y. I is he con inuous in e ac ion and co-e olu ion ha
o med a kind o “uni e sal” economic o m. This co-e olu ion p ocess also wi nessed
con lic s and comp omises among di e en classes and social o ces, un il inally “one
poli ical-economic p og am is able o de ea i s i als o an his o ic comp omise migh be
eached” (McDonough, 2011, p. 1241). The ansi ion o echno-economic pa adigm is no
only he powe al e na ion o inancial capi al and p oduc i e capi al, bu i also co e s many
aspec s such as labo -capi al ela ions, in e na ional sys em, e c., and he p ocess o he su ge
include he con en ion, con on a ions and comp omise o di e en classes o in e es g oups.
Igno ing he complexi y o ins i u ional adjus men in he ansi ion pe iod makes i di icul
o he echno-economic pa adigm o cope wi h such a long “p oblem- idden p esen ”
accompanying he i h su ge.
3. The dual bubbles and he ins i u ional bias o he su ge o echnological
e olu ion
The ou b eak o he inancial c isis in 2008 shows he de ec s o he echno-economic
pa adigm. Fi s , acco ding o he heo y o “ inancial c isis in he pe iod o in oduc ion,” he
ad anced economies, such as he Uni ed S a es o Ame ica, ha e al eady expe ienced he
collapse and elease o he Nasdaq c isis in 2001, bu hey expe ienced an e en mo e in ense
inancial c isis only se en yea s la e and hen en e ed an e a o mo e equen c ises a e
CPE
7,1
22
no longe exis , and such se ices could be globally deployed. Thi d, he use o AI in
con en ional cogni i e wo k will no only eplace adi ional jobs based on s anda dized da a
such as lawye s and inance posi ions wi h “whi e-colla obo s” bu machine lea ning will
also eplace adi ional scien i ic esea ch based on ial-and-e o expe imen s, i.e.
mechanized knowledge p oduc ion. I he i s digi al economy, symbolized by he
In e ne and he compu e , simply led o he pola iza ion o jobs – he explosion o bo h
he high- ech labo and low-end se ice jobs and he diminishing o middle-skilled wo k
posi ions – he new gene a ion o digi al economy, ep esen ed by AI and 5G echnology, will
ha e a g ea e impac on he exis ing wo poles. In sho , he widesp ead use o a new
gene a ion o digi al economy leads o no only a adical change o in e na ional p oduc ion
and ade’s wha s and hows bu also a d ama ic change in he way in which labo lows and
he job ma ke . F om he ea u e o p oduc ion ac o s, he co e p oduc ion ac o o he new
gene a ion digi al economy is da a. F om p oduc ion da a o daily li ing da a, he o me
suppo s sma manu ac u ing, while he la e acili a es a ious ypes o pla o m-based
daily se ices. Da a a e cha ac e ized by eusabili y, ze o ma ginal cos o ep oduc ion,
s ong economies o scale and ne wo k e ec s. Howe e , he e is an inhe en con adic ion
o da a u iliza ion. On he one hand, capi al always has he endency o s eng hen hei da a
monopoly, and da a p oduc ion possesses he pa h dependence and he beehi e e ec , i.e. he
mo e we use and “con ibu e” da a o a pla o m, he easie i is o s ick o he pla o m and
con inue o use and “con ibu e” da a, which makes i easie o monopolize he da a. On he
o he hand, da a can only achie e i s economies o scale and ne wo k economy e ec s by
maximizing sha ing. Whe he i is indus ial p oduc ion da a o consump ion da a, only he
comp ehensi e use o mul i-dimensional sou ce da a can p oduce he g ea es social wel a e
h ough he da a scale e ec and ne wo k e ec . The con adic ion be ween da a monopoly
and da a sha ing means ha capi al can mo e easily con ol wo ke s and consume s h ough
da a monopoly and implemen s ic digi al con ol, acking and moni o ing in he
p oduc ion, se ice and consump ion p ocesses. No only is capi al no equi ed o p o ide
da a, bu e en he in es men cos s o p oduc ion ma e ials and labo ools can be
appo ioned among and p o ided by wo ke s, o ming wha is known as Tu bo-Taylo ism.
On he o he hand, his kind o con adic ion means ha socie y canno ge he e iciency
op imiza ion and wel a e imp o emen o da a sha ing, al hough da a sha ing and da a
opening will also allow da a monopoly capi als each o highe comp ehensi e u iliza ion
e iciency; howe e , his sha ing and opening will weaken i s ma ke posi ion and lose i s
con ol o e wo ke s and consume s.
The cha ac e is ics o echnology and ac o s o p oduc ion in he digi al e a equi e a new
socio-poli ical pa adigm o cope wi h. In iew o he echnological and o he essen ial
ea u es o he new ound o he digi al economy, he social go e nance and policy dilemma
exposed in he ICT e a will no be alle ia ed in he AI e a bu will likely be u he
agg a a ed. Recen open legisla i e discussions abou he Robo ax, Bi Coin ax and AI
algo i hms a e a social policy esponse o he new digi al economy. In he long un, he new
ound o he digi al economy will ine i ably ha e a huge impac on income dis ibu ion,
labo -capi al ela ions, indus ial s uc u e and mode o p oduc ion o ganiza ion; he e o e,
he policy guidance should be conside ed comp ehensi ely om many aspec s including ax
legisla ion, labo ela ions, social equi y, social mobili y and so on. Howe e , ac oss a wide
ange o policy a eas, he e is a pa icula need o ocus on da a go e nance and labo
ela ions. As he goals o a benign coupling o socio-poli ical and echno-economic
pa adigms a e o elease a he han con ain echnological po en ial and sha e a he han
pola ize echnological bene i s. The e o e, in he di ec ion o social and poli ical policies, on
he one hand, we should s a wi h da a go e nance h ough he es ablishmen o p ope y
igh s sys ems and ax sys ems ela ed o da a elemen s, as well as he cons uc ion o da a
s anda d sys ems and da a secu i y sys ems, imp o ing he ne wo k and scale e ec s o da a
China Poli ical
Economy
29
elemen s o encou age inno a i e da a p oduc ion and use while a oiding da a monopolies.
On he o he hand, d as ic adjus men s o he labo ma ke may be equi ed. The go e nmen
should p epa e o a bu e be ween in es men in educa ion and employmen and
edis ibu e he bene i s o echnological p og ess h ough income policies. While
implemen ing ac i e employmen policies such as lowe ing he h eshold o
en ep eneu ship, p o iding ax incen i es and sys ema ic educa ion, aining and e-
skills measu es, he e is also a need o guide and supe ise in olun a y pa - ime wo k and
non-s anda d o ms o employmen con ac s o p o ec wo ke s’ igh s and in e es s. In
imes o majo labo ma ke shocks and social ins abili y, i is necessa y o he go e nmen
o implemen Minsky’s Employe o Las Reso (ELR), pa icula ly h ough inc eased hi ing
in he public se ice sec o . Since he new ound o digi al economy will lead o he global and
ans- egional dis ibu ion o se ice wo ke s, i is pa icula ly necessa y o es ablish an
e ec i e and long- e m in e na ional go e nance and coo dina ion mechanism, which is he
ocus o he new ound o socio-poli ical pa adigm, and i is also whe e he challenges and
p essu es a e mos concen a ed and mos o midable.
In he p ocess o he new wa e o echnological e olu ion, he cause and in e nal mechanism
o he “p oblem- idden p esen ” dese e ou igilance and a en ion, and he necessi y and
impo ance o he coupling o he socio-poli ical pa adigm and he echno-economic pa adigm
also has he ob ious enligh enmen alue. The ise o he six h echnological e olu ion,
ep esen ed by AI, big da a, nano echnology and bio echnology, sugges s ha p o ound
changes will ake place in he social pa e ns o labo p oduc ion and economic ac i i ies. How
p oduc ion ac i i ies a e o ganized and su plus p oduc ion is dis ibu ed will also be di e en
om p e ious imes, which will ine i ably b ing abou adap i e challenges in he social and
poli ical ields, and he e o e concep s, no ms and policies in he social and poli ical sphe e
should also adap . As Dosi poin s ou , a p esen , human socie y is acing a his o ic junc u e o
echnological de elopmen and socio-economic o ganiza ion, which can possibly lead o some
o m o echnological eudalism and a se e ely di ided socie y bu also has he po en ial o
ans o m in o a socie y whe e he bene i s o echnological p og ess a e sha ed. The ul ima e
ou come la gely depends on he policies we design and implemen .
6. Conclusion
Since he 1990s, he esea ch on long-wa e heo y has been concen a ed in wo di ec ions: one
is he neo-Schumpe e ian, which inhe i s he adi ion o Joseph Schumpe e ’s inno a ion; he
o he is he adi ional Ma xis school o social accumula ion and adjus men (Gu i�
e ez-
Ba ba usa, 2019). In he neo-Schumpe e ian school, he heo y o he echno-economic
pa adigm o Pe ez, F eeman and o he s is ega ded as he mos ep esen a i e long-wa e
heo y, and i is also seen as a ea u e o he ins i u ional analysis o he neo-Schumpe e ian.
A e he inancial c isis in 2008, no only he heo e ical hypo hesis o an “in oduc ion pe iod
inancial c isis” in he echno-economic pa adigm was challenged, bu he mu ual
ein o cemen o in o ma ion and communica ion echnology e olu ion and inancializa ion
has also made he economic and social pe o mance o he i h echnological e olu ion
di e en om ha o he p e ious echnological e olu ions. Neo-Schumpe e ian schola s,
such as Lundwall and Dosi, came up wi h he concep o he socio-poli ical pa adigm, which
s a es ha he coupling p ocess o socio-poli ical pa adigm and echno-economic pa adigm is
accompanied and de e mined by he un olding p ocess o a echnological e olu ion. Wi h he
in oduc ion o socio-poli ical pa adigm, he neo-Schumpe e ian go id o he suspicion o
echnological de e minism, and i s long-wa e heo y became a eal ins i u ional echnological
co-analysis. The coupling ela ionship be ween he echno-economic pa adigm and he socio-
poli ical pa adigm is o g ea signi icance o unde s anding he new wa e o echnological
e olu ion ep esen ed by he digi al economy.
CPE
7,1
30
No es
1. As ime goes by: om he indus ial e olu ions o he in o ma ion e olu ion
C F eeman, F Louç~
a, - 2001 - Ox o d Uni e si y P ess.
2. 新插入引文 Geels, F.W., Scho , J., 2010. In: G in, J., Ro mans, J., Scho , J. (Eds.), T ansi ions o
Sus ainable De elopmen : New Di ec ions in he S udy o Long Te m T ans o ma i e Change.
Rou ledge, London; New Yo k, pp. 9–101.
Re e ences
Allen, R.C. (2017), “Lessons om his o y o he u u e o wo k”, Na u e, Vol. 550 No. 7676,
pp. 321-324, doi: 10.1038/550321a.
A chibugi, D. (2017a), “Blade unne economics: will inno a ion lead he economic eco e y?”,
Resea ch Policy, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 535-543, doi: 10.1016/j. espol.2016.01.021.
A chibugi, D. (2017b), “The social imagina ion needed o an inno a ion-led eco e y”, Resea ch
Policy, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 554-556, doi: 10.1016/j. espol.2016.09.018.
Dosi, G. and Vi gilli o, M.E. (2019), “Whi he he e olu ion o he con empo a y social ab ic? New
echnologies and old socio-economic ends”, In e na ional Labou Re iew, Vol. 158 No. 4,
pp. 593-625, doi: 10.1111/il .12145.
Dosi, G., F eeman, C., Nelson, R., Sil e be g, G. and Soe e, L. (1988), Technical Change and Economic
Theo y, Labo a o y o Economics and Managemen (LEM), San ’Anna School o Ad anced
S udies, Pisa.
F eeman, C. (1990), “Schumpe e ’s business cycles e isi ed”, in E ol ing Technology and Ma ke
S uc u e—S udies in Schumpe e ian Economics, pp. 17-38.
Go don, R.J. (2018), “Why has economic g ow h slowed when inno a ion appea s o be accele a ing?”,
No. w24554, Na ional Bu eau o Economic Resea ch.
Gu i�
e ez-Ba ba usa, T. (2019), “The in e p e a ion o he cyclical his o y o capi alism. A
compa ison be ween he neo-Schumpe e ian and social s uc u e o accumula ion (SSA)
app oaches in ligh o he long wa e heo y”, Jou nal o E olu iona y Economics, Vol. 29 No. 4,
pp. 1285-1314, doi: 10.1007/s00191-019-00631-0.
K€
ohle , J. (2012), “A compa ison o he neo-Schumpe e ian heo y o Kond a ie wa es and he mul i-
le el pe spec i e on ansi ions”, En i onmen al Inno a ion and Socie al T ansi ions, Vol. 3,
pp. 1-15, doi: 10.1016/j.eis .2012.04.001.
Kuzne s, S. (1940), “Schumpe e ’s business cycles”, The Ame ican Economic Re iew, Vol. 30 No. 2,
pp. 257-271.
Lund all, B.�
A. (2017), “Is he e a echnological ix o he cu en global s agna ion?: A esponse o
Daniele A chibugi, Blade Runne economics: will inno a ion lead he economic eco e y?”,
Resea ch Policy, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 544-549, doi: 10.1016/j. espol.2016.06.011.
McDonough, T. (2011), “Social s uc u es o accumula ion: a ‘punc ua ed’ iew o embeddedness”,
The Ame ican Jou nal o Economics and Sociology, Vol. 70 No. 5, pp. 1234-1247, doi: 10.1111/j.
1536-7150.2011.00805.x.
Nelson, R.R. (2011), “Economic de elopmen as an e olu iona y p ocess”, Inno a ion and
De elopmen , Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 39-49, doi: 10.1080/2157930x.2010.551055.
OECD (2019), “T ade in he digi al e a”.
Pe ez, C. (2003), Technological Re olu ions and Financial Capi al, Edwa d Elga Publishing.
Pe ez, C. (2009), “The double bubble a he u n o he cen u y: echnological oo s and s uc u al
implica ions”, Camb idge Jou nal o Economics, Vol. 33 No. 4, pp. 779-805, doi: 10.1093/cje/bep028.
Pe ez, C. (2013), “Unleashing a golden age a e he inancial collapse: d awing lessons om his o y”,
En i onmen al Inno a ion and Socie al T ansi ions, Vol. 6, pp. 9-23, doi: 10.1016/j.eis .2012.
12.004.
China Poli ical
Economy
31
Ru an, V. (1961), “Ushe and schumpe e on in en ion, inno a ion and echnological change: eply”,
Qua e ly Jou nal o Economics, Vol. 75 No. 1, p. 154, doi: 10.2307/1883212.
Tyleco e, A. (1992), The Long Wa e in he Wo ld Economy: The Cu en C isis in His o ical
Pe spec i e, Rou ledge, London.
Co esponding au ho
Hu ao Yang can be con ac ed a : [email p o ec ed]
Fo ins uc ions on how o o de ep in s o his a icle, please isi ou websi e:
www.eme aldg ouppublishing.com/licensing/ ep in s.h m
O con ac us o u he de ails: [email p o ec ed]
CPE
7,1
32
