Tag: economic structure

  • Introduction to Economic Theory

     

    Introduction to Economic Theory

     

    It’s not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.

    Charles Darwin                                              

    Introduction and Summary

    Economic theory, generalizations about economies, and economic history began as attempts to understand the Industrial Revolution.

    The economic theory posts on this blog describe and analyze economic development and economic growth since the start of the Industrial Revolution in the late 1700s. 

    Some writers describe the current economic trends as the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Other observers and commentators believe that information and communication technology and applications have become so central to the economy that we are in the Information Revolution. And others believe that we are at the beginning of the Biotechnology Revolution. These posts will concentrate on the ongoing, underlying dynamics of economic change and, for simplicity, will use Industrial Revolution as the historic label. But it will stress the vital role that information plays in economic development and economic growth. 

    The Information revolution was an integral part of the Industrial revolution. Information, through electronic communication starting with the telegraph in the 1840s, and new internal management and control information systems in the second half of the 19th century, made large and complex economic organizations possible. 

    Any economic discussion should describe or explain the dynamics and the resulting organizational structure of the Industrial Revolution. Market structures are commonly oligopolies, concentrated industries dominated by a few large corporations. One reason is the economies of scale of production that are the result of power-driven machinery. Within these structures, large, established corporations and innovative newcomers compete in a process of “creative disruption.”

    Different types of information are a part of this process and affect different types of economic decisions. One process is central: new information and knowledge are applied to create new technology (“useful knowledge”), new products and services, and new types of economic organizations. Innovation is the central driver of competition and economic change.

    In a capitalist economic system, corporations attempt to turn the commercialization of knowledge, information, and invention into profitable innovation and, collectively over time, economic development. What economics should describe is the continuous  commercialization and application of information and knowledge, summarized as technology.

     

    Technological innovation and organizational innovation developed together; it was the combination of the two that made economic development and growth possible.

    This innovation process is the driver of economic development. Economic development is the dynamic driver of economic growth. Economic growth is the basis for higher standards of living, increases in real income per capita, lower prices, and a greater variety of goods and services. The innovation process is also mostly responsible for longer life expectancies, reduced infant mortality, and the explosion of drugs and medical technology to fight diseases and epidemics. 

    In summary, this book:

     

    o   Emphasizes the dynamic forces in an industrial capitalist economy and how they lead to economic growth and higher standards of living.

     

    o   Describes and analyzes the resulting industry and corporate structures and how they affect competition, market behavior, and prices. Emphasizes the central role played by innovation. Argues that innovation, not price, is central to competition. Feasible strategies of different types of corporations are discussed.

     

    o   Highlights the role of various types of information in the economy and how different types of information influence competition and market outcomes.

     

    Descriptions of market mechanisms are presented. After that, the book discusses a competitive, industrial/informational economy. It attempts to describe and explain the dynamics and structure of an economy dominated by large corporations and subject to ceaseless technological and organizational change.


    Economic theory and economic history are taught separately. Economic theory is “ahistorical,” supposedly valid over the 250 years of the Industrial Revolution. This is hard to believe given the incredible technological and organizational changes that have occurred and continue to occur. Theories that lead to equilibrium seem inadequate to explain the “permanent revolution” of ceaseless change and disruption. 

     

    Any discussion of economic dynamics – change over time – involves history. Here, economic dynamics and resulting structure are illustrated by case studies and examples from economic and business history.


    Most of this discussion assumes a relatively unregulated, private enterprise, capitalist economy.

     

    The Industrial/Informational economy is facing several crises. The core crisis is the exponentially rising social costs (negative externalities) of industrial production and consumption such as pollution and the effects of climate change. These costs are threatening the long-run survival of the underlying economic system. To survive, much of public and private investment in the future – investment in new technology and organizational structures – will be aimed at reducing the causes and effects of the social costs of the economic system. The also present new opportunities for companies and economies to innovate to reduce social costs.

     

    Economic growth and development are influenced by underlying long-run trends. Many long-term trends are in the process of slowing or reversing, particularly demographic trends. A stable or declining number of people in the labor force is one cause of the increased investment in capital-intensive and information-intensive production. On the other hand, greater research and investment in biotechnology is partly the result of an aging population.

     

    Macroeconomics focuses on theories and analysis as support for government economic programs such as monetary and fiscal policies. In addition, I would like to focus on the tensions and stresses between an expanding global economy and a political world of 200 nation-states: in particular, the conflicts between multinational corporations and national governments.  

    My experience as a corporate economist and strategic planning manager, small business manager and director, business consultant, and nonprofit board member has been in the American economy. As a college professor I have taught a wide variety of courses in economics, finance, management, international economics and politics, and economic history.

    Innovation and Entrepreneurs

    Economic theory emphasizes that companies compete on the basis of price. Yet surveys of industries, especially capital goods and input industries, indicate that companies compete primarily on the basis of innovation.

    Existing companies applying core knowledge to develop new products and processes. They also buy innovative capital goods, information systems, and inputs to reduce unit costs, increase efficiency, and improve management control.  

    New companies develop and improve new technology. These new companies are founded by combinations of entrepreneurs and investors.  Their motivation is to turn knowledge and information into commercial technology for profit. 

    There is a long tradition of successful companies being started by a combination of individuals with specialized knowledge and skills teaming up with other individuals with capital and management experience. One current model is research scientists, often molecular biologists, commercializing their research by starting companies with financing from venture capitalists. Venture capitalists often provide initial advice and guidance. As the company develops, new management is brought in, often from large biotechnology companies. Crucial inputs for growth and efficiency are purchased from other innovative companies with new technology.

    The result of this basic dynamic is “creative disruption,” not equilibrium.   

    The Structure of the Economy

    We can think of the modern real sector of the economy as consisting of three parts – digital, physical, and biotechnological. Much of current innovation results from the interaction of these three parts.

    An economy is divided between consumer goods and capital goods. Consumer goods are products and services sold to individual consumers. Most consumer goods are produced by large corporations and sold under either brand names or the name of the company. Producers usually do not sell directly to consumers, although ecommerce websites and digital platforms come close. Most consumer goods markets are mediated by market-makers, particularly retailers, that bring producers and consumers together. The internet version of market-makers such as Amazon, Etsy, Airbnb and Expedia have also reduced transaction costs for consumers; more product information is available to consumers at a reduction in the search costs of time and money. On the other hand, massive amounts of information on individual consumers have made more refined price discrimination possible. The idea that markets are undefined abstractions where producers and consumers come together and create a “market-clearing” equilibrium price does not explain how markets actually work.

    Market-makers may write software eliminating agents, other market-makers. Travel agents and stock brokers are two areas. Tesla sells cars directly to buyers, eliminating car dealerships.

    Much of the economy consists of markets for capital goods and inputs. Markets for capital goods are summarized as investment; markets for inputs are usually summarized as supply or value-added chains. In these markets, both buyers and sellers are usually corporations. Corporations are buyers in some input markets and sellers in others along the supply chain. Efficiency and profit may depend on how well companies can negotiate prices and transaction conditions, and coordinate buying and selling.

    Large corporations account for over half the economy. Most markets are oligopolies, with large corporations producing a large percent of total industry output. When industries dominated by large corporations buy and sell in markets with large corporations on the other side, the market structure is bilateral oligopoly. 

    Small and medium sized companies play vital roles. New, innovative companies start as small companies; they challenge the market dominance of the large, mature companies. Other small companies, somewhere between 20 and 30 million in the United States, add choice and “local knowledge” to the mass production and distribution of products and services from large corporations. They are also a major market for the products and services of large corporations.

    An economy can be divided into mature companies and innovative companies. The increase in sales of mature companies depends mostly on the growth of total nominal disposable income. Many also grow through mergers and acquisitions. 

    Innovative companies are often characterized by sales growth rates substantially higher than the growth rate of total income. Innovative companies provide much of the economic development, and thus economic growth, of an industrialized economy. Mature companies provide stability and structure. Many small companies provide variety and flexibility.

    Information has been an important input since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. Different types of information pervade all aspects of the economy. Mature companies spend large amounts on marketing and advertising. Capital goods and input companies provide information to their corporate customers. Information, a combination of hardware and software, is now an important output to final consumers and customers.

    Corporations turn public information into private information. Private or proprietary information is a source of corporate profit. Some of the impact of economic information is due to asymmetric information, where a company in an economic transaction has private knowledge or information not known to the other. This affects market outcomes. Some of the transaction costs are the costs of obtaining information to reduce asymmetric information. This creates opportunities for market-makers, organizations and individuals who reduce transaction costs partly by providing specialized information.

    The Economic Role of Government

    Government is a vital part of a modern economy. In the United States, all levels of government provide over 20% of all goods and services, a higher percent in Europe. The fund and manage public goods and services. They usually fund many programs that directly or indirectly contribute to economic development and economic growth. These programs, however, have to compete with funding national defense and social welfare and income distribution programs.

    Governments can provide stability and reduce transaction costs through laws and regulations. They can, directly or indirectly, reduce the social costs of production and consumption. 

    Advances in communication and transportation technology have expanded markets geographically and made them global. Large national corporations are becoming multinational corporations (MNCs) that sell globally and coordinate global supply chains. Through the internet, even small companies can potentially appeal to a global market. National and local companies now depend on global supply chains and information networks. All this is made possible by a dense global fiber optic network. 

    The expansion of the global economy has created new tensions and conflicts between national governments. It had also created tension between national governments and multinational corporations.

       

     The Themes of These Posts

    The Industrial Revolution is a break in human history.

    The Industrial Revolution, in its capitalist, private corporation version, is “permanent revolution.” It is based on unpredictable change caused by invention, innovation and disruption. Invention can occur anywhere but innovation occurs mostly inside corporations.

    Innovation is both technological and organizational. This determines industry structure, and through supply chains, market structure.

    Price competition is unstable and complicated. Market prices are not a single price determining equilibrium. Market prices and sales conditions are often determined by negotiation between large corporations. Prices (and competition) are influenced by asymmetric information. Proprietary information inside organizations is a source of competitive advantage.

    Information is both an input and an output.

    Companies in most industries compete on the basis of continuing innovation. This is true of the supply side of the economy – capital goods and inputs to other corporations.

    Economic growth is mostly a function of innovation. Innovative products and services turn potential demand into effective demand.

    An economy contains both innovative, disruptive forces, and stabilizing forces. Not all market and industry stabilizing forces are positive.

    An economy is a form of chaos. Part of the economy evolves from disruptive, unpredictable forces into more orderly, predictable structures. They, in turn, are disrupted by new rounds of innovation. Again, “permanent revolution.”

     

  • Bilateral Oligopoly

    Bilateral Oligopoly

    The best movie about the Gunfight at the O.K. Corral is titled My Darling Clementine.
    A great western – great cast, great photography. 

    DEFINITION OF A BILATERAL OLIGOPOLY


    Models of market structure assume that the demand side is
    represented by a large number of buyers. 
    The structure of the market, and the assumed market outcomes, depends on
    the number of suppliers and how they compete. 
    Suppliers either post one price or exploit their knowledge of buyer
    categories by using price discrimination. 
    Despite the comments about the key role of consumers in determining
    economic performance, consumers are fairly passive when the discussion focuses
    on imperfectly-competitive industries. 
    But many markets are not structured this way; the buyers are not passive
    consumers but large corporations that do not passively accept suppliers’
    prices.  Net prices are actively
    negotiated.  These markets are often
    bilateral oligopolies.



    In a bilateral oligopoly the buyers are not an
    undifferentiated mass of consumers but rather a small number of purchasing
    agents or professional buyers representing large purchasers.


     

    There are now a small number of large
    corporations on both sides of the market. 
    The same company could be on different sides of two bilateral
    oligopolistic markets.  For example,
    Boeing Aircraft is a major purchaser of jet engines from the three big engine
    producers and one of two major suppliers (with Airbus) of large commercial
    aircraft to a limited number of large airlines.
     

    THE MARKET FOR CAPITAL EQUIPMENT


    Economics textbooks talk about putting inputs together in
    the most cost-effective way possible to produce some level of output.  But if capital goods markets are not
    perfectly competitive, there is no mechanism on how this is done.



    Markets for capital goods and many other inputs are
    structured differently than the consumer products markets that are the usual
    examples in economics.  Capital goods,
    processed metals like steel and aluminum, chemicals and petrochemicals,
    packaging material, transportation equipment, IT hardware and software, and
    other inputs are often produced by large corporations in oligopolistic
    industries.  There are usually large
    economies of scale and scope compared to the size of the market.  Economies of scale producing differentiated
    products define the size of the market and the net price of the product for
    each customer.  Yet, contrary to the
    impression in economics textbooks that concentration leads to collusion,
    companies in these types of industries are very competitive, including fierce
    price competition.  Even duopolies, such
    as Coke and Pepsi or Boeing and Airbus, can be very price competitive markets.  Long-run economic profits (profits above the
    cost of capital) are surprisingly rare. 
    Outcomes in many of these industries approach the ideal outcomes as if
    these industries were perfectly competitive.



    One of the reasons for price competition and lack of market
    power by large sellers is the lack of asymmetric information.  Large corporations on the buy side of the
    market spend a great deal of resources to be well-informed about
    suppliers.  Size plus market information
    gives them countervailing market power.  The
    result is a bilateral oligopoly market structure.      

    DESCRIPTION OF A BILATERAL OLIGOPOLY

    Many producers sell intermediate goods and
    capital goods to final producers and assemblers.  Final producers often sell to large
    wholesalers, distributors and retailers. 
    Even small retailers often purchase through franchisors, buying offices
    or big coop distributors like True Value. 
    In all these situations, it is professional buyers who make the buying
    decision.  Purchasing agents and new
    product committees are well-informed about their suppliers.  They demand a great deal of information about
    products and services from potential suppliers but do not share actual price
    and product information with competing suppliers.


    Because they represent large customers, they have
    substantial market power, playing off one supplier against another.  They buy in large volume, often for their own
    private label, and are compensated for negotiating low prices.  In the extreme, retailers like Wal-Mart force
    suppliers to offer prices close to the suppliers’ marginal cost, the same
    prices that would prevail in a perfectly-competitive market. 


    In many bilateral oligopolistic markets, price is
    a primary consideration in the purchasing decision.  Professional buyers along the supply chain
    are not swayed by marketing or advertising. 
    Brand names are often unimportant or irrelevant in markets for raw
    materials, commodities, industrial products, intermediate goods, commodity
    chemicals, information technology, products made to buyer’s specifications,
    generic products, and private label products. 
    Price at or near marginal cost occurs when competing products are close
    or perfect substitutes in the eyes of the professional buyers.  When buyers view alternative sources of
    inputs as close substitutes, sellers can not charge a premium price based on
    perceived superior value.


    Corporate buyers have leverage if their company
    is a relatively big part of the market or if producers have large economies of
    scale.  One implication of large
    economies of scale is that producers are forced to run plants at a high percent
    of capacity to make a profit.  Industries
    with large economies of scale also often have industry overcapacity so that not
    all companies can run their plants at full capacity.  As long as price is above marginal cost, some
    companies would be willing to expand output to increase profit or reduce
    loss.  For example, auto company
    purchasing agents negotiate with large suppliers from the steel, aluminum,
    plastics, and tire industries, all of which currently have excess
    capacity. 


    There
    are a small number of producers in many markets for raw material,
    semi-processed goods or industrial products because of large economies of
    scale.  Scale economies create the
    “through-put problem” for suppliers. 
    Economies of scale are made possible by large up-front investment in
    fixed assets representing new technology. 
    Units of output have low variable cost. 
    But there is low average (unit) cost only if plants are run at high
    rates of capacity.  If producers have
    high fixed cost relative to variable costs and must operate plants at a high
    percent of capacity to make an adequate rate of return, or plant closing costs
    are high, then large buyers might be able to force the contract or negotiated
    price down close to marginal cost.


    Many
    large manufacturers face large assemblers or retailers as major customers.  If products are viewed as homogeneous by
    buyers, suppliers are chosen primarily on price.  Buyers use a number of bidding and contract
    negotiation procedures to maximize the amount of price competition among
    potential suppliers.  Anyone who has ever
    been a sales rep or purchasing agent knows how complicated this process can be.


    Much
    of the discussion of the Internet is a variation of this description.  Internet companies may have high development
    costs but the marginal cost of one more buyer on the site may be close to
    zero.  A common strategy is then to try
    to grab as much market share as quickly as possible. 


    For some products, like computer hardware and
    systems, the part of the market where computer companies sell computer systems
    to large institutions contains aspects of bilateral oligopoly.  About 40% of total demand for information
    technology comes from large companies, about 45% from midsize to small
    businesses, and only about 15% from individual consumers.  Large banks and other financial companies
    spend over $1 billion a year on information systems.  They have tremendous market power –
    negotiating power – when they decide which suppliers to choose.


    Buyers for assemblers and retailers typically
    face final consumers and competitors in their product markets.  So demand in intermediate markets is derived
    from the buyers’ forecasts of final consumer demand.  Professional buyers are actually negotiating
    part of the cost of the final product for the ultimate consumer.  They have a big incentive to try for the
    lowest cost of inputs, which will give their company a competitive advantage in
    the output market and determine profit margins. 
    Price competition in the final goods or retail market keeps profit
    margins down.


    Unlike other imperfectly-competitive markets,
    here we assume symmetric information.  We
    do not assume that sellers know more than buyers.  There are informed purchasing agents on the
    buy side who spend considerable resources to gather data on suppliers.  They develop technical expertise, force
    suppliers to share proprietary information, visit plants, and demand data from
    competing manufacturers. Sellers often lack valuable information that buyers
    have – the offering net prices and sales conditions of other sellers.


    Large corporations can be fiercely competitive
    for market share and increased profit. 
    Competitors also want to protect proprietary information, negotiating
    positions and marketing strategies from each other.


    Although products and services may be
    differentiated in the eyes of producers, in some intermediate markets the
    competing products may be almost undifferentiated (almost perfect substitutes)
    in the eyes of purchasing agents.  Tires
    and computers are examples.  Demand from
    professional buyers for each product is more elastic than assumed by the
    producers.  Producers misjudge the price
    elasticity of demand.  They offer to sell
    at a higher price than buyers are willing to pay.  Buyers then institute price competition by
    playing off one supplier against another, negating the market power of the
    large suppliers.  By such means as
    competitive or sealed bids, buyers decide mostly on the basis of price.  Final market price is indeterminate, partly
    dependent on negotiating skills. 


    Professional buyers and purchasing agents,
    following the self-interest of their company, are negotiating prices on behalf
    of the final consumer.  This is a major
    source of price competition in retail markets. 
    If buyers have elastic demand and can negate the supplier’s
    market power, the market price will probably be closer to the price reached in
    a perfectly-competitive market.


    MARKET SHARE AND MARKET POWER

    It is usually assumed that a large market share
    translates into market power, the ability of a company to charge prices
    substantially above marginal cost (and unit cost) and thus make above-average
    rates of return.  In a bilateral
    oligopoly market, however, large market shares of suppliers can be negated by
    large market shares of buyers.  In fact,
    if the main reason for a small number of big producers is economies of scale
    relative to the total size of the market, then market power typically swings
    over to the buyers’ side.  This is
    especially true if there is excess capacity in the industry, a common situation
    in manufacturing industries with large economies of scale.


    Large
    producers may also not have much market power if every sale is important.  This is the usually situation in
    transportation equipment – Boeing vs. Airbus selling jet aircraft in
    multi-billion dollar deals, large containerships and oil tankers, and diesel
    locomotives sold to the handful of railroads left in the
    United States or national railroads in other countries.  Other examples in large capital goods markets
    are electric power-generating equipment, oil rigs or large earth-moving equipment
    (Caterpillar vs. Komatsu). 
    Another possibility is large construction companies and their suppliers
    bidding on large construction projects.



    This implies that the heart of the strategy of a company in
    a bilateral oligopoly is to use its purchasing power and knowledge of the
    market to hold down the costs of inputs purchased from outside suppliers.  This strategy is crucial if the company is to
    be price-competitive in its output market. 
    In an output market of few suppliers, the company must be price
    competitive if it pursues a market share strategy.  Many companies believe that increasing market
    share in the short run is a tactic to increase profitability in the long run.


    When there are a small number of well-informed
    buyers, they can constantly and effectively monitor the market.  They will be especially sensitive to any
    attempts by suppliers to attempt collusion since the buyers’ companies are the
    immediate victims of supplier collusion. 
    Buyers may find it hard to pass on high input costs to their
    oligopolistic customers.  Buyers and
    purchasing agents can initiate “cheating”, that is, price competition
    among suppliers.  This is one reason for
    the small amount of overt or even tacit collusion in
    U.S. industry. 


    Even in a duopolistic retail market like that of
    cola, Coke and Pepsi compete for market share. 
    Supermarkets can often negotiate lower prices with one company in
    exchange for more shelf space and greater volume purchases.  This puts pressure on the other company to
    match the lower price.

    DUAL MARKETS:  SELLING INTO RETAIL AND BILATERAL OLIGOPOLISTIC INSTITUTIONAL MARKETS


    Corporate buyers are in a strong position if the
    same product, such as tires or personal computers, is sold in both retail and
    industrial markets.  Institutional buyers
    initiate a form of price discrimination, demanding lower prices than the
    wholesale prices to the retail market. 
    Price discrimination here works in favor of buyers if sellers are forced
    by competition or excess capacity to offer lower prices to large, well-informed
    corporate customers in the original equipment market.


    Only
    part of the total market, the industrial part, has to be price-sensitive –
    sheets sold to industrial users, tires to car manufacturers, cola bought by
    fast food chains, personal computers bought by corporate buyers. 


    BILATERAL OLIGOPOLY AND VERTICAL
    INTEGRATION


    Being a buyer in a bilateral oligopoly is a good
    reason why an assembler or retailer should not integrate backwards
    (backwards vertical integration).  In the
    short run, the market is characterized by fierce price competition.  In the long run, a company does not want to
    get locked into one development path based on one type of technology.  The examples of what happened to
    IBM (fell behind Intel in microprocessors), U.S.
    Steel (did not adopt minimill technology) and General Motors (lack of
    innovation, inefficient internal coordination), all depending almost entirely
    on in-house research and development, caution against vertical integration.  Of course, large corporate buyers in
    intermediate markets can threaten to produce some of the inputs
    themselves.  Given the dynamics of
    bilateral oligopolies, this may not be a credible threat.

     


    INDUSTRY STRUCTURE AND INTERNAL CORPORATE ORGANIZATION


    This brings up the issue of the relationship between
    industry structure and internal organization. 
    Companies that recognize they are in a bilateral oligopoly may be less
    likely to have a fully-developed divisional structure.  The reasons could be a small marketing
    function (supply side), since advertising and promotion have limited effect on
    professional buyers, or a small product development function (buy side).  The result could be a simpler management
    structure.  Supplier firms will tend to
    be production-oriented, not market-oriented. 
    Many of the functions of a self-contained division are not necessary or
    are performed elsewhere (by customers, by suppliers, or by specialized capital
    goods companies) or jointly with customers. 



    An important determinant of the internal structure of a firm
    will be the transaction costs to the firm as a buyer of inputs.  If transaction costs are low, possibly
    because of accumulated knowledge of the market, the firm will have low
    purchasing costs.  Internal coordination
    costs between purchasing and production, and related inventory costs, may be
    low if the purchaser can impose “just-in-time” delivery schedules on
    suppliers.  Also, net transaction
    costs may be low if the cost of accumulating knowledge about suppliers
    translates into lower prices for a large volume of inputs.



    CONCLUSION

    It is hard to find a market or industry, no
    matter how narrowly or broadly defined, that is not an oligopoly or tending to
    oligopoly.  These industries are usually
    part of a supply chain, most of which are structured as bilateral oligopolies.  This limits the market power of large
    corporations and constrains profit margins.

    As discussed in the post on Baldwin Locomotives, producers of complicated products like transportation systems, supplying large transportation companies,  tend to be in bilateral oligopoly markets.  Many health care markets are becoming bilateral oligopolies, mostly through mergers and acquisitions. As one side of the market becomes more concentrated, companies on the other side combine as a defensive strategy.  

    ___________________________________________________________________________________

    For Baldwin Locomotive and other examples of bilateral oligopoly, see Examples of Bilateral Oligopoly 

    For more examples of bilateral oligopoly, see The New York Times Discovers Bilateral Oligopoly.


    For a modern example, see Markets and Large Companies:  A Case Study of Parker Hannifin

    For a list of all posts, see Guide to Posts.

  • Introduction and Summary of Economic Theory Posts

    Introduction and Summary of Economic Theory Posts

     



    Adam Smith – Our Founding Father  

    It’s not the strongest of the species that survive, nor the most intelligent, but the one most responsive to change.

    Charles Darwin

    Introduction and Summary

    This blog describes and analyzes economic development and economic growth since the start of the Industrial Revolution in the late 1700s. 

    Some writers describe the current economic trends as the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Other observers and commentators believe that information and communication technology and applications have become so central to the economy that we are in the Information Revolution. And others believe that we are at the beginning of the Biotechnology Revolution. This book will concentrate on the ongoing, underlying dynamics of economic change and, for simplicity, will use Industrial Revolution as the historic label. But it will stress the vital role that innovation and information play in economic development and economic growth. 

    The information revolution was an integral part of the industrial revolution. Information, through electronic communication starting with the telegraph in the 1840s, and new internal management and control information systems in the second half of the 19th century, made large and complex economic organizations possible. The expansion of electricity in the early 1900s made the information revolution possible.

    Any economic discussion should describe or explain the dynamics and the resulting organizational structure of the Industrial Revolution. Market structures are commonly oligopolies (concentrated industries dominated by a few large corporations). Within these structures, large, established corporations and innovative newcomers compete in a process of “creative disruption.”

    Different types of information are a part of this process and affect different types of economic decisions. One process is central; new information and knowledge are applied to create new technologies (“useful knowledge”), new products and services, and new types of economic organizations. 

    In a capitalist economic system, corporations attempt to turn the profitable commercialization of knowledge, information and invention into innovation and, collectively over time, economic development. What economics should describe is the continuous application of information and knowledge, summarized as technology.

     

    Technological innovation and organizational innovation developed together; it was the combination of the two that made economic development and growth possible.

    This innovation process is the driver of economic development. Economic development is the dynamic driver of economic growth. Economic growth is the basis for higher standards of living, increases in real income per capita, lower prices, and a greater variety of goods and services.

    In summary, these posts: 

    o  Emphasize the dynamic forces in an industrial capitalist economy and how they lead to economic growth and higher standards of living.

     

    o   Describe and analyze the resulting industry and corporate structures and how they affect competition, market behavior, and prices. They emphasize the central role played by innovation. Feasible strategies of different types of corporations are discussed.

     

    o   Highlight the role of various types of information in the economy and how different types of information influence competition and market outcomes.

     

    Descriptions of market mechanisms are presented. After that, posts discuss a competitive, industrial/informational economy. They attempt to describe and explain the dynamics and structure of an economy dominated by large corporations and subject to ceaseless technological and organizational change.


    In colleges, economic theory and economic history are taught separately. Economic theory is “ahistorical,” supposedly valid over the 250 years of the Industrial Revolution. This is hard to believe given the incredible technological and organizational change that has occurred, and continues to occur. Theories that lead to equilibrium seem inadequate to explain the “permanent revolution” of ceaseless change and disruption. 

     

    Any discussion of economic dynamics – change over time – involves history. Here, economic dynamics and resulting structure are illustrated by case studies from economic and business history.


    Most of this discussion assumes a relatively unregulated, private enterprise, mature capitalist economy.

     

    The Industrial/Informational economy is facing several crises. The core crisis is the exponentially rising social costs of industrial production and consumption such as pollution and climate change. These costs are threatening the long-run survival of the underlying economic system.

     

    Economic growth and development are influenced by underlying long-run trends. Many long-term trends are in the process of slowing or reversing, particularly demographic trends. A stable or declining number of people in the labor force is one cause of the increased investment in capital-intensive and information-intensive production. On the other hand, greater research and investment in biotechnology is partly the result of an aging population.

     

    Macroeconomics focuses on theories and analysis as support for government economic programs such as monetary and fiscal policies. Here, however, I would like to focus on the tensions and stresses between an expanding global economy and a political world of 200 nation-states: in particular, the conflicts between multinational corporations and national governments.  

    My experience as a corporate economist and strategic planning manager, small business manager and director, business consultant, and nonprofit board member has been in the American economy. As a college professor I have taught a wide variety of courses in economics, finance, management, international economics and politics, and economic history.

    ============================================================


    Go to Production Function, Cost Curve and Supply, and Equilibrium