Economists’ reliance on R&D and patent metrics distorts our understanding of productivity growth. Time to correct the conclusion: Here’s why these proxies fail to capture the forces that do drive it.
These are excellent and insightful observations about innovation, ignored by the neoclassical mainstream, which overlooks the patterns of long-term technological development and the GPT. We are working within this framework and have formulated a hypothesis for the synchronization of basic GPTs with Arrighi's long waves. The world has entered an era of a new industrial revolution, specifically in the field of production technologies and cyber-physical systems. The emergence of a new world order, where the US must contend with China's industrial ambitions, naturally requires a new protectionism. Foolish stories about the productivity of any innovation and patents should be left in the bygone era of globalism.
Exceptional breakdown of why patent counts mislead R&D strategy discussions. Your point about GPT emergence versus incremental improvements cuts to the core of why so many companies misallocate R&D budgets chasing patent volumes rather than foundational breakthroughs. The electric motor analogy is particulary sharp, it reminds me that even game-changing innovations need a full decade or more before they hit productivity statistics in measurable ways. When policymakers treat all R&D spending as equaly valuable, they miss the entire distinction between sustaining improvements and the kind of disruptive leap that actually reshapes industries.
These are excellent and insightful observations about innovation, ignored by the neoclassical mainstream, which overlooks the patterns of long-term technological development and the GPT. We are working within this framework and have formulated a hypothesis for the synchronization of basic GPTs with Arrighi's long waves. The world has entered an era of a new industrial revolution, specifically in the field of production technologies and cyber-physical systems. The emergence of a new world order, where the US must contend with China's industrial ambitions, naturally requires a new protectionism. Foolish stories about the productivity of any innovation and patents should be left in the bygone era of globalism.
Serge, thanks. good point about the neoclassical mainstream
Exceptional breakdown of why patent counts mislead R&D strategy discussions. Your point about GPT emergence versus incremental improvements cuts to the core of why so many companies misallocate R&D budgets chasing patent volumes rather than foundational breakthroughs. The electric motor analogy is particulary sharp, it reminds me that even game-changing innovations need a full decade or more before they hit productivity statistics in measurable ways. When policymakers treat all R&D spending as equaly valuable, they miss the entire distinction between sustaining improvements and the kind of disruptive leap that actually reshapes industries.
Thanks for the insightful note. Yep, Clay C got a lot right.