Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-kn6lq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-23T06:10:31.725Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Should the government subsidize innovation or automation?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 April 2022

Angus C. Chu ,
Guido Cozzi ,
Yuichi Furukawa  and
Chih-Hsing Liao
Angus C. Chu
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, University of Macau, Macau, China
Guido Cozzi
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
Yuichi Furukawa
Affiliation:
Faculty of Economics, Aichi University, Nagoya, Japan
Chih-Hsing Liao*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, National Central University, Taoyuan, Taiwan
*
*Corresponding author. Email: chihhsingliao@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This study introduces automation into a Schumpeterian growth model to explore the effects of R&D and automation subsidies. R&D subsidy increases innovation and growth but decreases the share of automated industries and the degree of capital intensity in the aggregate production function. Automation subsidy has the opposite effects on these macroeconomic variables. Calibrating the model to US data, we find that raising R&D subsidy increases the welfare of high-skill workers but decreases the welfare of low-skill workers and capital owners, whereas increasing automation subsidy increases the welfare of high-skill workers and capital owners but decreases the welfare of low-skill workers. Therefore, whether the government should subsidize innovation or automation depends on how it evaluates the welfare gains and losses of different agents in the economy.

Keywords

Automationinnovationeconomic growth

Information

Type
Articles
Information
Macroeconomic Dynamics , Volume 27 , Issue 4 , June 2023 , pp. 1059 - 1088
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Acemoglu, D. and Akcigit, U. (2012) Intellectual property rights policy, competition and innovation. Journal of the European Economic Association 10(1), 1–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Acemoglu, D., Manera, A. and Restrepo, P. (2020) Does the US tax code favor automation? Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 231, 2020–2300.Google Scholar
Acemoglu, D. and Restrepo, P. (2018) The race between man and machine: Implications of technology for growth, factor shares and employment. American Economic Review 108(6), 1488–1542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Acemoglu, D. and Restrepo, P. (2020) Robots and jobs: Evidence from US labor markets. Journal of Political Economy 128(6), 2188–2244.Google Scholar
Aghion, P. and Howitt, P. (1992) A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica 60(2), 323–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aghion, P., Jones, B. and Jones, C. (2017). Artificial intelligence and economic growth. NBER Working Paper No. 23928.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agrawal, A., Gans, J. and Goldfarb, A. (2019) The Economics of Artificial Intelligence: An Agenda, The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Arntz, M., Gregory, T. and Zierahn, U. (2017) Revisiting the risk of automation. Economics Letters 159(3), 157–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, P., Chu, A., Chu, H. and Lai, C. (2021) Optimal capital taxation in an economy with innovation-driven growth. Macroeconomic Dynamics 81, 1–34, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Chu, A. and Cozzi, G. (2018) Effects of patents versus R&D subsidies on income inequality. Review of Economic Dynamics 29(10), 68–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chu, A., Cozzi, G., Fan, H., Furukawa, Y. and Liao, C. (2020) How minimum wages affect automation and innovation in a schumpeterian economy. MPRA Working Paper, No. 103974.Google Scholar
Chu, A., Cozzi, G., Furukawa, Y. and Liao, C. (2018) Should the government subsidize innovation or automation? MPRA Working Paper No. 88276.Google Scholar
Chu, A., Furukawa, Y. and Ji, L. (2016) Patents, R&D subsidies and endogenous market structure in a Schumpeterian economy. Southern Economic Journal 82(3), 809–825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cozzi, G. (2007) The arrow effect under competitive R&D. The B.E. Journal of Macroeconomics (Contributions) 7(1), Article–2.Google Scholar
Cozzi, G., Giordani, P. and Zamparelli, L. (2007) The refoundation of the symmetric equilibrium in Schumpeterian growth models. Journal of Economic Theory 136(1), 788–797.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dauth, W., Findeisen, S., Suedekum, J. and Woessner, N. (2017) German robots: The impact of industrial robots on workers. CEPR Discussion Papers, No. 12306 .Google Scholar
Davidson, C. and Segerstrom, P. (1998) R&D subsidies and economic growth. RAND Journal of Economics 29(3), 548–577.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dinopoulos, E. and Segerstrom, P. (2010) Intellectual property rights, multinational firms and economic growth. Journal of Development Economics 92(1), 13–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Evans, L., Quigley, N. and Zhang, J. (2003) Optimal price regulation in a growth model with monopolistic suppliers of intermediate goods. Canadian Journal of Economics 36(2), 463–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frey, C. and Osborne, M. (2017) The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation? Technological Forecasting and Social Change 114(1), 254–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gasteiger, E. and Prettner, K. (2021) Automation, stagnation, and the implications of a robot tax. Macroeconomic Dynamics, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Grossman, G. and Helpman, E. (1991) Quality ladders in the theory of growth. Review of Economic Studies 58(1), 43–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guerreiro, J., Rebelo, S. and Teles, P. (2021) Should robots be taxed? Review of Economic Studies, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Hemous, D. and Olsen, M. (2022) The rise of the machines: Automation, horizontal innovation and income inequality. American Economic Journal, Macroeconomics 14(1), 179–223.Google Scholar
Howitt, P. (1999) Steady endogenous growth with population and R&D inputs growing. Journal of Political Economy 107(4), 715–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Impullitti, G. (2010) International competition and U.S. R&D subsidies: A quantitative welfare analysis. International Economic Review 51(4), 1127–1158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, C. and Williams, J. (2000) Too much of a good thing? The economics of investment in R&D. Journal of Economic Growth 5(1), 65–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laitner, J. and Stolyarov, D. (2004) Aggregate returns to scale and embodied technical change: Theory and measurement. Journal of Monetary Economics 51(1), 191–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peretto, P. (1998) Technological change and population growth. Journal of Economic Growth 3(4), 283–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peretto, P. and Seater, J. (2013) Factor-eliminating technological change. Journal of Monetary Economics 60(4), 459–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prettner, K. and Strulik, H. (2020) Innovation, automation, and inequality: Policy challenges in the race against the machine. Journal of Monetary Economics 116(2), 249–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Romer, P. (1990) Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy 98(5), S71–S102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segerstrom, P. (2000) The long-run growth effects of R&D subsidies. Journal of Economic Growth 5(3), 277–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segerstrom, P., Anant, T. and Dinopoulos, E. (1990) A schumpeterian model of the product life cycle. American Economic Review 80(5), 1077–1091.Google Scholar
Trimborn, T., Koch, K. and Steger, T. (2008) Multi-dimensional transitional dynamics: A simple numerical procedure. Macroeconomic Dynamics 12(3), 301–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeira, J. (1998) Workers, machines, and economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics 113(4), 1091–1117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeira, J. (2006) Machines as engines of growth. CEPR Discussion Paper, No. 5429.Google Scholar
Zeng, J. and Zhang, J. (2007) Subsidies in an R&D growth model with elastic labor. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 31(3), 861–886.CrossRefGoogle Scholar