voprecotestВопросы экономикиVoprosy Ekonomiki0042-8736Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP10.32609/0042-8736-2019-7-95-118voprecotest-2313Research ArticleВОПРОСЫ ТЕОРИИISSUES OF THEORYФактор созидательного разрушения в современных моделях и политике экономического ростаThe factor of creative destruction in modern economic growth models and growth policyhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-3839-5979КатуковД. Д.KatukovDaniel D.

Катуков Даниил Дмитриевич, м. н. с. 

Москва

Moscow

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0545-6456МалыгинВ. Е.MalyginViacheslav E.

Малыгин Вячеслав Евгеньевич, с. н. с.

Москва

Moscow

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4741-9197СмородинскаяН. В.SmorodinskayaNataliya V.

Смородинская Наталия Вадимовна, к. э. н., вед. н. с.

Москва

Moscow

smorodinskaya@gmail.comИнститут экономики РАНРоссияInstitute of Economics, Russian Academy of SciencesRussian Federation2019030720190795118Copyright © Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP, 20192019Voprosy Ekonomiki, NPVoprosy Ekonomiki, NPhttps://www.vopreco.ru/jour/about/submissions#copyrightNoticehttps://www.vopreco.ru/jour/article/view/2313

Рассматриваются место шумпетерианской идеи созидательного разрушения в эндогенных моделях роста и актуальность этой идеи для укрепления национальной конкурентоспособности. Выявлено отличие моделей шумпетерианского направления от модели Ромера. Проанализировано современное понимание созидательного разрушения, в частности связь этого процесса с динамизмом конкурентного вытеснения низкоэффективных фирм высокоэффективными, а старых технологий и продуктов — инновационными. Подчеркнута важность поддержания динамического баланса между стимулированием инновационной активности на уровне компаний и мерами по созданию безбарьерной среды для эффективной реаллокации ресурсов в масштабах экономики. На примере ряда развитых и развивающихся стран показаны издержки недоиспользования рыночных механизмов созидательного разрушения и риски политики селективной поддержки исключительно быстрорастущих предприятий. Сделан вывод, что без перезапуска механизмов созидательного разрушения в российской экономике любые государственные усилия по стимулированию инноваций и экономического роста могут оказаться непродуктивными.

The paper examines the place of Schumpeterian idea of creative destruction in endogenous growth models, as well as its relevance for national competitive strategies under the ‘new normal’ situation. The difference between Schumpeterian growth models and the model elaborated by P. Romer is revealed. The paper analyzes modern interpretation of creative destruction as a process displacing low-performing firms by high-performing ones, as well as old products and technologies by more innovative ones through a market competition. It is shown that this process accelerates the dynamics of firms and the turnover of resources in an economy, thus leading to reallocation of investments and knowledge to the most productive agents. The paper highlights the importance of sustaining a dynamic balance between measures stimulating a firm-level innovation activity and measures supporting a barrier-free environment for an effective resource allocation in the economy. We consider cases of several developed and developing countries, which demonstrate negative implications of underutilized advantages of creative destruction and the risks of selective supporting policies towards exclusively high-growing firms. We conclude that without restarting the process of creative destruction in the Russian economy the national efforts to enhance competitiveness and growth may turn unproductive.

оборот фирминновационный тип ростасозидательное разрушениенациональная конкурентоспособностьреаллокация ресурсовшумпетерианская теория ростаэндогенная модель Ромераcreative destructionfirm dynamicsinnovation-driven growthnational competitivenessresource reallocationSchumpeterian growth theoryRomer’s endogenous growth modelСтатья подготовлена в рамках государственного задания Центра инновационной экономики и промышленной политики Института экономики РАН на тему «Структурная модернизация российской экономики в контексте формирования новой модели развития».ReferencesГоликова В. В., Гончар К. Р., Кузнецов Б. В., Яковлев А. А. (2007). Российская промышленность на перепутье: Что мешает нашим фирмам стать конкурентоспособными. М.: Изд. дом ВШЭ.Golikova V. V., Gonchar K. R., Kuznetsov B. V., Yakovlev A. A. (2007). Russian industry at the crossroads: What hinders our firms from becoming competitive. Moscow: HSE Publishing. (In Russian).Дробышевский С. М., Трунин П. В., Божечкова А. В. (2018). Долговременная стагнация в современном мире // Вопросы экономики. № 11. С. 125—141. https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2018-11-125-141Drobyshevsky S. M., Trunin P. V., Bozhechkova A. V. (2018). Secular stagnation in the modern world. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 11, pp. 125—141. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2018-11-125-141Замулин О. А., Сонин К. И. (2019). Экономический рост: Нобелевская премия 2018 года и уроки для России // Вопросы экономики. № 1. С. 11—36. https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2019-1-11-36Zamulin O. A., Sonin K. I. (2019). Economic growth: Nobel prize in economic sciences 2018 and the lessons for Russia. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 1, pp. 11—36. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2019-1-11-36Миронов В. В., Коновалова Л. Д. (2019). О взаимосвязи структурных изменений и экономического роста в мировой экономике и России // Вопросы экономики. № 1. С. 54—78. https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2019-1-54-78Mironov V. V., Konovalova L. D. (2019). On the relationship of structural changes and economic growth in the world economy and Russia. Voprosy Ekonomiki, No. 1, pp. 54—78. (In Russian). https://doi.org/10.32609/0042-8736-2019-1-54-78Симачев Ю. В. и др. (2019). Структурные аспекты торговой политики России. М.: Изд. дом ВШЭ.NRU HSE (2019). Structural aspects of Russia’s trade policy. Moscow: HSE Publishing House. (In Russian).Смородинская Н. В. (2017). Усложнение организации экономических систем в условиях нелинейного развития // Вестник Института экономики РАН. № 5. С. 104—115.Smorodinskaya N. V. (2017). Growing organizational complexity of economic systems under non-linear development. Vestnik Instituta Еkonomiki RAN, No. 5, pp. 104—115. (In Russian).Смородинская Н. В., Катуков Д. Д. (2017). Распределенное производство и «умная » повестка национальных экономических стратегий // Экономическая политика. Т. 12, № 6. С. 72—101.Smorodinskaya N. V., Katukov D. D. (2017). Dispersed model of production and smart agenda of national economic strategies. Ekonomicheskaya Рolitika, Vol. 12, No. 6, pp. 72—101. (In Russian).Смородинская Н. В., Малыгин В. Е., Катуков Д. Д. (2015). Как укрепить конкурентоспособность в условиях глобальных вызовов: кластерный подход. М.: Институт экономики РАН.Smorodinskaya N. V., Malygin V. E., Katukov D. D. (2015). How to upgrade competitiveness under the global challenges: The cluster approach. Moscow: Institute of Еconomics, RAS. (In Russian).ТехУспех (2018). Актуальные тренды развития российских быстрорастущих технологических компаний. М.: ТехУспех.TekhUspekh (2018). Relevant trends of Russian high-growth tech firms’ development. Moscow: TekhUspekh. (In Russian).Acemoglu D., Akcigit U., Alp H., Bloom N., Kerr W. (2018). Innovation, reallocation, and growth. American Economic Review, Vol. 108, No. 11, pp. 3450—3491. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20130470Acemoglu D., Akcigit U., Alp H., Bloom N., Kerr W. (2018). Innovation, reallocation, and growth. American Economic Review, Vol. 108, No. 11, pp. 3450—3491. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20130470Adler G., Duval R., Furceri D., Çelik S. K., Koloskova K., Poplawski-Ribeiro M. (2017). Gone with the headwinds: Global productivity. IMF Staff Di scussion Note, No. 17/04.Adler G., Duval R., Furceri D., Çelik S. K., Koloskova K., Poplawski-Ribeiro M. (2017). Gone with the headwinds: Global productivity. IMF Staff Discussion Note, No. 17/04.Agénor P.-R. (2017). Caught in the middle?: The economics of middle-income traps. Journal of Economic Surveys, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 771—791. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12175Agénor P.-R. (2017). Caught in the middle?: The economics of middle-income traps. Journal of Economic Surveys, Vol. 31, No. 3, pp. 771—791. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12175Aghion P., Akcigit U., Howitt P. (2015). The Schumpeterian growth paradigm. Annual Review of Economics, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 557—575. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-080614-115412Aghion P., Akcigit U., Howitt P. (2015). The Schumpeterian growth paradigm. Annual Review of Economics, Vol. 7, No. 1, pp. 557—575. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-080614-115412Aghion P., Bloom N., Blundell R., Griffith R., Howitt P. (2005). Competition and innovation: An inverted-U relationship. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 120, No. 2, pp. 701—728. https://doi.org/10.1162/0033553053970214Aghion P., Bloom N., Blundell R., Griffith R., Howitt P. (2005). Competition and innovation: An inverted-U relationship. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 120, No. 2, pp. 701—728. https://doi.org/10.1162/0033553053970214Aghion P., Howitt P. (1992). A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica, Vol. 60, No. 2, pp. 323—351. https://doi.org/10.2307/2951599Aghion P., Howitt P. (1992). A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica, Vol. 60, No. 2, pp. 323—351. https://doi.org/10.2307/2951599Aghion P., Howitt P. (1998). Endogenous growth theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Aghion P., Howitt P. (1998). Endogenous growth theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Aghion P., Roulet A. (2014). Growth and the smart state. Annual Review of Economics, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 913—926. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-080213-040759Aghion P., Roulet A. (2014). Growth and the smart state. Annual Review of Economics, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 913—926. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-economics-080213-040759Ahmad N., Schreyer P. (2016). Are GDP and productivity measures up to the challenges of the digital economy? International Productivity Monitor, No. 30, pp. 4—27.Ahmad N., Schreyer P. (2016). Are GDP and productivity measures up to the challenges of the digital economy? International Productivity Monitor, No. 30, pp. 4—27.Aiyar S., Duval R. A., Puy D., Wu Y., Zhang L. (2013). Growth slowdowns and the middle-income trap. IMF Working Papers, 13/71.Aiyar S., Duval R. A., Puy D., Wu Y., Zhang L. (2013). Growth slowdowns and the middle-income trap. IMF Working Papers, 13/71.Akcigit U., Alp H., Peters M. (2018). Lack of selection and limits to delegation: Firm dynamics in developing countries. NBER Working Papers, No. 21905.Akcigit U., Alp H., Peters M. (2018). Lack of selection and limits to delegation: Firm dynamics in developing countries. NBER Working Papers, No. 21905.Akcigit U., Kerr W. R. (2018). Growth through heterogeneous innovations. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 126, No. 4, pp. 1374—1443. https://doi.org/10.1086/697901Akcigit U., Kerr W. R. (2018). Growth through heterogeneous innovations. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 126, No. 4, pp. 1374—1443. https://doi.org/10.1086/697901Alon T., Berger D., Dent R., Pugsley B. (2018). Older and slower: The startup deficit’s lasting effects on aggregate productivity growth. Journal of Monetary Economics, Vol. 93, pp. 68—85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2017.10.004Alon T., Berger D., Dent R., Pugsley B. (2018). Older and slower: The startup deficit’s lasting effects on aggregate productivity growth. Journal of Monetary Economics, Vol. 93, pp. 68—85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmoneco.2017.10.004Andrews D., Criscuolo C., Gal P. N. (2015). Frontier firms, technology diffusion and public policy: Micro evidence from OECD countries. OECD Productivity Working Papers, No. 2.Andrews D., Criscuolo C., Gal P. N. (2015). Frontier firms, technology diffusion and public policy: Micro evidence from OECD countries. OECD Productivity Working Papers, No. 2.Barro R. J., Sala-i-Martin X. (1995). Economic growth. New York: McGraw-Hill.Barro R. J., Sala-i-Martin X. (1995). Economic growth. New York: McGraw-Hill.Bergeaud A., Lecat R., Cette G. (2017). Total factor productivity in advanced countries: A long-term perspective. International Productivity Monitor, No. 32, pp. 6—24.Bergeaud A., Lecat R., Cette G. (2017). Total factor productivity in advanced countries: A long-term perspective. International Productivity Monitor, No. 32, pp. 6—24.Bianchini S., Bottazzi G., Tamagni F. (2017). What does (not) characterize persistent corporate high-growth? Small Business Economics, Vol. 48, No. 3, pp. 633—656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-016-9790-1Bianchini S., Bottazzi G., Tamagni F. (2017). What does (not) characterize persistent corporate high-growth? Small Business Economics, Vol. 48, No. 3, pp. 633—656. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-016-9790-1Bloom N., Eifert B., Mahajan A., McKenzie D., Roberts J. (2013). Does management matter? Evidence from India. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 128, No. 1, pp. 1—51. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjs044Bloom N., Eifert B., Mahajan A., McKenzie D., Roberts J. (2013). Does management matter? Evidence from India. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 128, No. 1, pp. 1—51. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjs044Bloom N., Sadun R., van Reenen J. (2017). Management as a technology? NBER Working Papers, No. 22327.Bloom N., Sadun R., van Reenen J. (2017). Management as a technology? NBER Working Papers, No. 22327.Brandt L., van Biesebroeck J., Zhang Y. (2012). Creative accounting or creative destruction? : Firm-level productivity growth in Chinese manufacturing. Journal of Development Economics, Vol. 97, No. 2, pp. 339—351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2011.02.002Brandt L., van Biesebroeck J., Zhang Y. (2012). Creative accounting or creative destruction? : Firm-level productivity growth in Chinese manufacturing. Journal of Development Economics, Vol. 97, No. 2, pp. 339—351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdeveco.2011.02.002Brynjolfsson E., McAfee A. (2014). The second machine age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. New York: Norton.Brynjolfsson E., McAfee A. (2014). The second machine age: Work, progress, and prosperity in a time of brilliant technologies. New York: Norton.Byrne D. M., Fernald J. G., Reinsdorf M. B. (2016). Does the United States have a productivity slowdown or a measurement problem? Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Vol. 2016, No. 1, pp. 109—182.Byrne D. M., Fernald J. G., Reinsdorf M. B. (2016). Does the United States have a productivity slowdown or a measurement problem? Brookings Papers on Economic Activity, Vol. 2016, No. 1, pp. 109—182.Calligaris S., Del Gatto M., Hassan F., Ottaviano G. I., Schivardi F., Monacelli T. (2018). The productivity puzzle and misallocation: An Italian perspective. Economic Policy, Vol. 33, No. 96, pp. 635—684. https://doi.org/10.1093/epolic/eiy014Calligaris S., Del Gatto M., Hassan F., Ottaviano G. I., Schivardi F., Monacelli T. (2018). The productivity puzzle and misallocation: An Italian perspective. Economic Policy, Vol. 33, No. 96, pp. 635—684. https://doi.org/10.1093/epolic/eiy014Cowen T. (2011). The great stagnation. New York: Dutton.Cowen T. (2011). The great stagnation. New York: Dutton.Crespo Rodríguez A., Pérez-Quirуs G., Segura Cayuela R. (2012). Competitiveness indicators: The importance of an efficient allocation of resources. Banco de Espaсa Economic Bulletin, Vol. January, pp. 103—111.Crespo Rodríguez A., Pérez-Quirуs G., Segura Cayuela R. (2012). Competitiveness indicators: The importance of an efficient allocation of resources. Banco de Espaсa Economic Bulletin, Vol. January, pp. 103—111.Decker R. A., Haltiwanger J., Jarmin R. S., Miranda J. (2017). Declining dynamism, allocative efficiency, and the productivity slowdown. American Economic Review, Vol. 107, No. 5, pp. 322—326. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20171020Decker R. A., Haltiwanger J., Jarmin R. S., Miranda J. (2017). Declining dynamism, allocative efficiency, and the productivity slowdown. American Economic Review, Vol. 107, No. 5, pp. 322—326. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20171020Easterly W., Levine R. (2001). It’s not factor accumulation: Stylized facts and growth models. The World Bank Economic Review, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 177—219. https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/15.2.177Easterly W., Levine R. (2001). It’s not factor accumulation: Stylized facts and growth models. The World Bank Economic Review, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 177—219. https://doi.org/10.1093/wber/15.2.177EBRD (2017). Transition report 2017-18: Sustaining growth. London: European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.EBRD (2017). Transition report 2017-18: Sustaining growth. London: European Bank for Reconstruction and Development.Eichengreen B., Park D., Shin K. (2012). When fast-growing economies slow down: International evidence and implications for China. Asian Economic Papers, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 42—87. https://doi.org/10.1162/ASEP_a_00118Eichengreen B., Park D., Shin K. (2012). When fast-growing economies slow down: International evidence and implications for China. Asian Economic Papers, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 42—87. https://doi.org/10.1162/ASEP_a_00118European Commission (2017). Economic challenges of lagging regions. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.European Commission (2017). Economic challenges of lagging regions. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.Felipe J., Abdon A., Kumar U. (2012). Tracking the middle-income trap: What is it, who is in it, and why? Levy Economics Institute of Bard College Working Paper, No. 715.Felipe J., Abdon A., Kumar U. (2012). Tracking the middle-income trap: What is it, who is in it, and why? Levy Economics Institute of Bard College Working Paper, No. 715.Garicano L., Lelarge C., van Reenen J. (2016). Firm size distortions and the productivity distribution: Evidence from France. American Economic Review, Vol. 106, No. 11, pp. 3439—3479. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20130232Garicano L., Lelarge C., van Reenen J. (2016). Firm size distortions and the productivity distribution: Evidence from France. American Economic Review, Vol. 106, No. 11, pp. 3439—3479. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20130232Gordon R. J. (2016). The rise and fall of American growth: The U.S. standard of living since the Civil War. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Gordon R. J. (2016). The rise and fall of American growth: The U.S. standard of living since the Civil War. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Grifell-TatjéE., Lovell C. A. K., Sickles R. C. (2018). Overview of productivity analysis: History, issues, and perspectives. In: E. Grifell-Tatjé, C. A. K. Lovell, R. C. Sickles (eds.). The Oxford handbook of productivity analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 3—73.Grifell-TatjéE., Lovell C. A. K., Sickles R. C. (2018). Overview of productivity analysis: History, issues, and perspectives. In: E. Grifell-Tatjé, C. A. K. Lovell, R. C. Sickles (eds.). The Oxford handbook of productivity analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 3—73.Grossman G. M., Helpman E. (1991). Innovation and growth in the global economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Grossman G. M., Helpman E. (1991). Innovation and growth in the global economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Grover Goswami A., Medvedev D., Olafsen E. (2018). High-growth firms: Facts, fiction, and policy options for emerging economies. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Grover Goswami A., Medvedev D., Olafsen E. (2018). High-growth firms: Facts, fiction, and policy options for emerging economies. Washington, DC: The World Bank.Gurvich E. (2016). Institutional constraints and economic development. Russian Journal of Economics, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 349—374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ruje.2016.11.002Gurvich E. (2016). Institutional constraints and economic development. Russian Journal of Economics, Vol. 2, No. 4, pp. 349—374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ruje.2016.11.002Hsieh C.-T., Klenow P. J. (2009). Misallocation and manufacturing TFP in China and India. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 124, No. 4, pp. 1403—1448. https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.2009.124.4.1403Hsieh C.-T., Klenow P. J. (2009). Misallocation and manufacturing TFP in China and India. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 124, No. 4, pp. 1403—1448. https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.2009.124.4.1403Iwasaki I., Maurel M., Meunier B. (2016). Firm entry and exit during a crisis period: Evidence from Russian regions. Russian Journal of Economics, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 162—191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ruje.2016.06.005Iwasaki I., Maurel M., Meunier B. (2016). Firm entry and exit during a crisis period: Evidence from Russian regions. Russian Journal of Economics, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 162—191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ruje.2016.06.005Kuznetsov Y., Sabel C. (2011). New open economy industrial policy: Making choices without picking winners. PREM Notes, No. 161.Kuznetsov Y., Sabel C. (2011). New open economy industrial policy: Making choices without picking winners. PREM Notes, No. 161.Lardy N. R. (2019). The state strikes back: The end of economic reform in China? Washington, DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics.Lardy N. R. (2019). The state strikes back: The end of economic reform in China? Washington, DC: Peterson Institute for International Economics.McGahan A. M., Porter M. E. (1999). The persistence of shocks to profitability. Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 81, No. 1, pp. 143—153. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465399767923890McGahan A. M., Porter M. E. (1999). The persistence of shocks to profitability. Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 81, No. 1, pp. 143—153. https://doi.org/10.1162/003465399767923890Melitz M. J. (2003). The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity. Econometrica, Vol. 71, No. 6, pp. 1695—1725. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00467Melitz M. J. (2003). The impact of trade on intra-industry reallocations and aggregate industry productivity. Econometrica, Vol. 71, No. 6, pp. 1695—1725. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0262.00467Mokyr J. (2018). The past and the future of innovation: Some lessons from economic history. Explorations in Economic History, Vol. 69, pp. 13—26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eeh.2018.03.003Mokyr J. (2018). The past and the future of innovation: Some lessons from economic hi stor y. Explorations in Economic History, Vol. 69, pp. 13—26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eeh.2018.03.003Moschella D., Tamagni F., Yu X. (2019). Persistent high-growth firms in China’s manufacturing. Small Business Economics, Vol. 52, No. 3, pp. 573—594. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9973-4Moschella D., Tamagni F., Yu X. (2019). Persistent high-growth firms in China’s manufacturing. Small Business Economics, Vol. 52, No. 3, pp. 573—594. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-017-9973-4OECD (2014). Industry and technology policies in Korea. Paris: OECD Publishing.OECD (2014). Industry and technology policies in Korea. Paris: OECD Publishing.OECD (2015). The future of productivity. Paris: OECD Publishing.OECD (2015). The future of productivity. Paris: OECD Publishing.OECD (2017a). Debate the issues: Complexity and policy making. Paris: OECD Publishing.OECD (2017a). Debate the issues: Complexity and policy making. Paris: OECD Publishing.OECD (2017b). The next production revolution: Implications for governments and business. Paris: OECD Publishing.OECD (2017b). The next production revolution: Implications for governments and business. Paris: OECD Publishing.Park B.-G., Hill R. C., Saito A. (eds.) (2012). Locating neoliberalism in East Asia: Neoliberalizing spaces in developmental states. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Park B.-G., Hill R. C., Saito A. (eds.) (2012). Locating neoliberalism in East Asia: Neoliberalizing spaces in developmental states. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Porter M. E., Delgado M., Ketels C. H., Stern S. (2008). Moving to a new global competitiveness index. In: K. Schwab, M. E. Porter (eds.). The global competitiveness report 2008—2009. Geneva: World Economic Forum, pp. 43—63.Porter M. E., Delgado M., Ketels C. H., Stern S. (2008). Moving to a new global competitiveness index. In: K. Schwab, M. E. Porter (eds.). The global competitiveness report 2008—2009. Geneva: World Economic Forum, pp. 43—63.Romer P. M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 98, No. 5, Part 2, S71-S102. https://doi.org/10.1086/261725Romer P. M. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 98, No. 5, Part 2, S71-S102. https://doi.org/10.1086/261725Russell M. G., Smorodinskaya N. V. (2018). Leveraging complexity for ecosystemic innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 136, pp. 114—131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.11.024Russell M. G., Smorodinskaya N. V. (2018). Leveraging complexity for ecosystemic innovation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 136, pp. 114—131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.11.024Schumpeter J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism, and democracy. New York: Harper & Brothers.Schumpeter J. A. (1942). Capitalism, socialism, and democracy. New York: Harper & Brothers.Smorodinskaya N. V., Russell M. G., Katukov D. D., Still K. (2017). Innovation ecosystems vs. innovation systems in terms of collaboration and co-creation of value. Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/41798Smorodinskaya N. V., Russell M. G., Katukov D. D., Still K. (2017). Innovation ecosystems vs. innovation systems in terms of collaboration and co-creation of value. Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. http://hdl.handle.net/10125/41798Solow R. M. (1956). A contribution to the theory of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 70, No. 1, pp. 65—94. https://doi.org/10.2307/1884513Solow R. M. (1956). A contribution to the theory of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 70, No. 1, pp. 65—94. https://doi.org/10.2307/1884513Summers L. H. (2015). Demand side secular stagnation. American Economic Review, Vol. 105, No. 5, pp. 60—65. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20151103Summers L. H. (2015). Demand side secular stagnation. American Economic Review, Vol. 105, No. 5, pp. 60—65. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.p20151103Syverson C. (2004). Market structure and productivity: A concrete example. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 112, No. 6, pp. 1181—1222. https://doi.org/10.1086/424743Syverson C. (2004). Market structure and productivity: A concrete example. Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 112, No. 6, pp. 1181—1222. https://doi.org/10.1086/424743Syverson C. (2017). Challenges to mismeasurement explanations for the US productivity slowdown. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 165—186. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.2.165Syverson C. (2017). Challenges to mismeasurement explanations for the US productivity slowdown. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 165—186. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.31.2.165Tan Y., Huang Y., Woo W. T. (2016). Zombie firms and the crowding-out of private investment in China. Asian Economic Papers, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 32—55. https://doi.org/10.1162/ASEP_a_00474Tan Y., Huang Y., Woo W. T. (2016). Zombie firms and the crowding-out of private investment in China. Asian Economic Papers, Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 32—55. https://doi.org/10.1162/ASEP_a_00474

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.