Journal of Technology Innovation (기술혁신연구)

Korea Society for Innovation Managemetn & Economics (기술경영경제학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

A New way of the Measuring of Innovative Growth: Growth Accounting Model vs Schumpeterian Technological Change Model

혁신성장 측정에 관한 연구: 성장회계모형 vs 슘페테리안 기술변화 모형

  • 권명중 (연세대학교 미래캠퍼스 글로벌창의융합대학 경제학과) ;
  • 조상혁 (연세대학교 미래캠퍼스 글로벌창의융합대학 경제학과) ;
  • 윤미경 (가톨릭대학교 국제학부)
  • Received : 2022.11.04
  • Accepted : 2022.12.26
  • Published : 2023.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

This paper provides a new method of measuring the degree of technological progress which contributes to real economic growth based on Schumpeter's Trilogy. Using Microdata of Statistics Korea, the results of measuring and comparing the actual growth contribution of technological progress during the period 2003-2018 by the total factor productivity growth rate(growth accounting method), the R&D investment contribution rate, and the Schumpeterian innovation growth rate, respectively are as follows. First, the measurement of the real growth contribution of technological progress by the growth rate of total factor productivity and the growth rate of Schumpeterian innovation shows contradictory results. Second, when the growth rate of production is in a decreasing trend, the difference between the growth rate of production and the growth rate of total factor productivity increases compared to when it is in an increasing trend. Conversely, when there is an increasing trend, the difference between the growth rate of production and the growth rate of total factor productivity becomes smaller compared to when it is in a decreasing trend.. Third, the technological opportunity that affects the innovation growth rate, i.e., the contribution of R&D incentives to innovative growth is only 3.3%. The reason why this result is different from the existing perception of the contribution of technological progress to growth is that different entities are being measured while measuring the same term of technological progress. Therefore, the growth rate of total factor productivity should be used to measure macroeconomic efficiency, R&D investment should be used to measure the effectiveness of new technology supply, and the Schumpeterian innovation rate should be used to measure the economic impact of technological progress. The policy implications of the research results of this thesis are as follows: ① Transition from a policy of one-sided technology supply to a policy of convergence of technology supply and new technology demand support, ② Mission-oriented R&D policy and R&D policy that links national R&D with private R&D, ③ Reclassification of capital goods reflecting the degree of new knowledge.

본 논문은 Schumpeter의 기술변화 3단계 개념에 기초해서 기술진보가 실질경제성장에 기여하는 정도를 측정하는 새로운 방법을 제시한다. 통계청 광업제조업조사 마이크로데이터를 이용해서 2003-2018년 기간 동안 기술진보의 실질 성장기여 정도를 총요소 생산성 성장률(성장회계방법), R&D투자 기여율, 슘페테리안 혁신성장률로 각각 측정하고 비교한 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 성장회계의 총요소생산성 성장률과 슘페테리안 혁신 성장률에 의한 기술진보의 실질 성장기여에 대한 측정에서 상반된 결과를 나타낸다. 둘째, 생산성장률이 감소추세에 있으면 증가추세에 있을 때와 비교해서 생산성장률과 총요소생산성성장률 차이가 커지고, 반대로 증가추세에 있으면 감소추세에 있을 때와 비교에서 생산성장률과 총요소생산성성장률의 차이가 작아진다. 셋째, 혁신성장률에 영향을 미치는 기술기회, 즉, 어느 한 분야의 연구개발과 그 인접분야까지의 연구개발 유인이 혁신성장에 미치는 기여도는 3.3%에 불과하다. 이 결과가 기존의 기술진보의 성장기여에 대한 인식과 다른 이유는 기술진보라는 동일한 용어를 측정하면서 서로 다른 실체를 측정하고 있는 것에 기인한다. 따라서 총요소생산성 성장률은 거시적 경제효율성, R&D투자는 신기술공급의 효과성, 슘페테리안 혁신성장률은 기술진보의 경제적 영향을 측정하는 데 사용해야 한다. 본 논문 연구 결과의 정책적 함의는 다음과 같다: ① 기술공급일변도의 정책에서 기술공급과 신기술수요지원의 융합정책으로 전환, ② 임무지향형 R&D 정책과 국가 R&D와 민간 R&D가 연계되는 R&D 정책, ③ 신지식체화 정도를 반영한 자본재의 재분류.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

이 논문은 2020년 대한민국 교육부와 한국연구재단의 일반공동연구지원사업의 지원을 받아 수행된 연구임 (NRF-2020S1A5A2A03046038)

References

  1. 통계청 MDIS. 「광업제조업조사」
  2. 통계청. 「경제활동인구조사」
  3. ECOS, 한국은행 경제통계시스템, https://ecos.bok.or.kr
  4. NTIS, 국가과학기술지식정보서비스, https://www.ntis.go.kr
  5. 권명중(2018), 「기술혁신의 경제학 - 4차 산업혁명의 사례와 적용」, 나무.
  6. 권명중.윤미경(2019), "기술확산과 경제성장의 변동성", 「산업조직연구」, 제27권, 제4호, pp. 1-43.
  7. 권명중.조상혁(2021), "Solow 성장모형을 통한 한국제조업 성장특성에 대한 연구: 1994-2018 기간을 중심으로", 「지역발전연구」, 제30권, 제1호, pp. 189-215. https://doi.org/10.22739/IPAID.2021.30.1.189
  8. 송위진.성지은(2019), "'임무지향적 혁신정책'의 관점에서 본 사회문제 해결형 연구개발 정책 - '제2차 과학기술기반 사회문제 해결 종합계획' 사례분석-", 「기술혁신연구」, 제27권, 제4호, pp. 85-110.
  9. 정준호(2017), "기술혁신과 경제성장 연구의 현황과 과제: 한국에 대한 논의를 중심으로", 「기술혁신연구」, 제25권, 제4호, pp. 47-77.
  10. Abramovitz, M(1956), "Resource and Output Trends in the United States since 1870", NBER Occasional paper No. 52.
  11. Arellano, M and S. Bond(1991), "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations", Review of Economic Studies, Vol. 58, pp. 277-297. https://doi.org/10.2307/2297968
  12. Arellano, M and O. Bover(1995), "Another Look at the Instrumental Variable Estimation of Erro-Components Models", Journal of Econometrics, Vol. 68, pp. 29-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4076(94)01642-D
  13. Crafts, N(2018), "The Productivity Slowdown: is it the new normal?", Oxford Review of Economics Policy, Vol. 32, No. 3, pp. 443-460. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxrep/gry001
  14. Gordon J, R(2014), "The Demise of U.S. Economic Growth: Restatement, Rebuttal, and Reflections", NBER Working Paper No. 19895.
  15. Grossman M, G and E. Helpman(1991), "Trade, knowledge spillovers, and growth", European Economic Review, Vol. 35, Issues. 2-3, pp. 517-526. https://doi.org/10.1016/0014-2921(91)90153-A
  16. Ireland, N and P. Stoneman(1986), "Technological Diffusion, Expectations and Welfare", Oxford Economic Papers, Vol. 38, No. 2, pp. 283-304. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.oep.a041741
  17. Lach, S and M. Schankerman(1989), "Dynamics of R&D and Investment in the Scientific Sector", Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 97, Issue. 4, pp. 880-904. https://doi.org/10.1086/261632
  18. Keynes J. M(1936), "The General Theory of Employment Interest and Money", Macmillan, London.
  19. Mazzucato, M.(2018a), Mission-oriented Research and Innovation in the European Union, European Commission.
  20. Mazzucato, M.(2018b), "Mission-oriented innovation policies challenges and opportunities", Industrial and Corporate Change, Vol. 27, No. 5, pp. 803-815. https://doi.org/10.1093/icc/dty034
  21. Meijers, H(1994), "On the Diffusion of Technology in a Vintage Framework", Maastrich: Maastricht University Press, pp. 271-297.
  22. Nickell, S and D. Nicolitas(1996), "Does Innovation encourage Investment in Fixed Capital?", Mimeo, Institute of Economics and Statistics, University of Oxford.
  23. Romer, P(1986), "Increasing Returns and Long run Growth", Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 95, pp. 12-37. https://doi.org/10.1086/261420
  24. Romer, P(1990), "Endogenous Technological Change", Journal of Political Economy Part 2: The Problem of Development: A Conference of the Institute for the Study of Free Enterprise Systems, Vol. 98, No. 5, pp. S71-S102.
  25. Schumpeter, J(1912), "The Theory of Economic Development", Cambridge, Havard University Press.
  26. Solow, R(1956), "A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth", The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 70, No. 1, pp. 65-94. https://doi.org/10.2307/1884513
  27. Solow, R(1987), "We'd Better Watch Out", New York Times Book Review.
  28. Stoneman, P(1983), "The Economic Analysis of Technological Change", Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  29. Stoneman, P and M. J. Kwon(1994), "The Diffusion of Multiple Process Technologies", The Economic Journal, Vol. 104, No. 423, pp. 420-431. https://doi.org/10.2307/2234761
  30. Stoneman, P and M. J. Kwon(1996), "Technology Adoption and Firm Profitability", The Economic Journal, Vol. 106, No. 437, pp. 952-962. https://doi.org/10.2307/2235366
  31. Stoneman, P and M. J. Kwon(1998), "Gross Investment and Technological Change", Economics of Innovation and New Technology. Vol. 7, Issue. 3, pp. 221-243. https://doi.org/10.1080/10438599800000035