Role of Technology in Economic Development: With Special Reference to India

Kishore G. Kulkarni
{"title":"Role of Technology in Economic Development: With Special Reference to India","authors":"Kishore G. Kulkarni","doi":"10.56902/irbe.2020.4.1.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Traditional models (presented before 1980s) which claimed to explain the reasons and process of economic growth had rarely considered improvement in quality of technology (or innovation) as the main reason for economic growth. Most of the traditional models such as Harrod-Domar, Lewis etc focused on Capital (K) as the famous factor of production that individually suffered from the diminishing marginal productivity. In fact, the famous Neoclassical model of economic growth (Solow version) assumed that both traditional factors of production such as Labor (L) and Capital (K) go through decreasing returns to scale, which means by just applying more capital, or more labor alone, the economies would experience slower rather than higher rate of growth. Therefore in that model we thought the growth is basically coming from “outside factors” such as increased international trade, lower taxation or reduced regulation. This assertion also promoted the argument that growth is “exogenous” rather than “endogenous”. The whole picture of endogenous growth was further drastically changed when Paul Romer (Nobel Prize winner of 2018) arrived on the horizon in 1990s to promote the argument that technological change as against mere Capital (K) can in fact be the prime driver of economic growth. This paper will analyze the traditional arguments of growth and compare them with what Paul Romer’s contribution is to the growth dilemma. The present paper is structured as follows: Section 1 surveys the neoclassical model that claims that growth is exogenous and Section 2 is used to make the main point that innovation, technological growth and entrepreneurship all contribute to economy in a serious way and the growth can be endogenous too. Section 3 points out the main features of this argument as applied to India’s case in a limited sense of the term.","PeriodicalId":415549,"journal":{"name":"International Review of Business and Economics","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Review of Business and Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.56902/irbe.2020.4.1.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Traditional models (presented before 1980s) which claimed to explain the reasons and process of economic growth had rarely considered improvement in quality of technology (or innovation) as the main reason for economic growth. Most of the traditional models such as Harrod-Domar, Lewis etc focused on Capital (K) as the famous factor of production that individually suffered from the diminishing marginal productivity. In fact, the famous Neoclassical model of economic growth (Solow version) assumed that both traditional factors of production such as Labor (L) and Capital (K) go through decreasing returns to scale, which means by just applying more capital, or more labor alone, the economies would experience slower rather than higher rate of growth. Therefore in that model we thought the growth is basically coming from “outside factors” such as increased international trade, lower taxation or reduced regulation. This assertion also promoted the argument that growth is “exogenous” rather than “endogenous”. The whole picture of endogenous growth was further drastically changed when Paul Romer (Nobel Prize winner of 2018) arrived on the horizon in 1990s to promote the argument that technological change as against mere Capital (K) can in fact be the prime driver of economic growth. This paper will analyze the traditional arguments of growth and compare them with what Paul Romer’s contribution is to the growth dilemma. The present paper is structured as follows: Section 1 surveys the neoclassical model that claims that growth is exogenous and Section 2 is used to make the main point that innovation, technological growth and entrepreneurship all contribute to economy in a serious way and the growth can be endogenous too. Section 3 points out the main features of this argument as applied to India’s case in a limited sense of the term.
技术在经济发展中的作用:特别以印度为例
传统模型(在20世纪80年代之前提出)声称解释经济增长的原因和过程,很少考虑技术(或创新)质量的提高是经济增长的主要原因。传统模型如Harrod-Domar、Lewis等,大多将资本(K)作为个体遭受边际生产率递减的著名生产要素。事实上,著名的新古典经济增长模型(索洛版本)假设,传统的生产要素,如劳动(L)和资本(K),都会经历规模报酬递减的过程,这意味着仅仅投入更多的资本或更多的劳动力,经济增长速度就会减慢,而不是提高。因此,在该模型中,我们认为增长基本上来自“外部因素”,如国际贸易增加、税收降低或监管减少。这一论断还推动了增长是“外生”而非“内生”的观点。当保罗·罗默(2018年诺贝尔奖获得者)在20世纪90年代提出技术变革而不仅仅是资本(K)实际上可以成为经济增长的主要驱动力这一论点时,内生增长的整体图景进一步发生了巨大变化。本文将分析传统的增长论点,并将其与保罗·罗默对增长困境的贡献进行比较。本文的结构如下:第1节概述了新古典经济增长是外生的模型,第2节主要阐述了创新、技术增长和企业家精神对经济的贡献都是重要的,并且增长也可以是内生的。第3节指出了在有限意义上适用于印度案例的这一论点的主要特征。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信