Modeling the Transition to a New Economy: Lessons from Two Technological Revolutions

Article, Preprint OPEN
Andrew Atkeson ; Patrick J. Kehoe (2007)
  • Journal: American Economic Review, volume 97, issue 1 March, pages 64-88
  • Related identifiers: doi: 10.1257/aer.97.1.64
  • Subject: Technological innovations
    acm: ComputingMilieux_GENERAL

Many view the period after the Second Industrial Revolution as a paradigmatic example of a transition to a new economy following a technological revolution and conjecture that this historical experience is useful for understanding other transitions, including that after the Information Technology Revolution. We build a model of diffusion and growth to study transitions. We quantify the learning process in our model using data on the life cycle of U.S. manufacturing plants. This model accounts quantitatively for the productivity paradox, the slow diffusion of new technologies, and the ongoing investment in old technologies after the Second Industrial Revolution. The main lesson from our model for the Information Technology Revolution is that the nature of transition following a technological revolution depends on the historical context: transition and diffusion are slow only if agents have built up through learning a large amount of knowledge about old technologies before the transition begins.
  • References (13)
    13 references, page 1 of 2

    Aghion, Philippe, and Howitt, Peter. 1998. Endogenous growth theory. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

    Argote, Linda, and Epple, Dennis. 1990. Learning curves in manufacturing. Science 247 (February): 920-24.

    Atack, Jeremy; Bateman, Fred; and Weiss, Thomas. 1980. The regional diffusion and adoption of the steam engine in American manufacturing. Journal of Economic History 40 (June): 281-308.

    Atkeson, Andrew, and Kehoe, Patrick J. 2001. The transition to a new economy after the Second Industrial Revolution. Working Paper 8676, National Bureau of Economic Research.

    . 2005. Modeling and measuring organization capital. Journal of Political Economy 113 (October): 1026-53.

    Atkeson, Andrew; Khan, Aubhik; and Ohanian, Lee. 1996. Are data on industry evolution and gross job turnover relevant for macroeconomics? Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy 44 (June): 215-50.

    Bahk, Byong-Hyong, and Gort, Michael. 1993. Decomposing learning by doing in new plants. Journal of Political Economy 101 (August): 561-83.

    Baily, Martin Neil; Hulten, Charles; and Campbell, David. 1992. Productivity dynamics in manufacturing plants. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity: Microeconomics: 187-249.

    Bartelsman, Eric J., and Dhrymes, Phoebus J. 1998. Productivity dynamics: U.S. manufacturing plants, 1972-1986. Journal of Productivity Analysis 9 (January): 5-34.

    Basu, Susanto. 1996. Procyclical productivity: Increasing returns or cyclical utilization? Quarterly Journal of Economics 111 (August): 719-51.

  • Metrics
    No metrics available
Share - Bookmark