Economics

I begin this essay by reflecting on my early paper (Nelson, 1859), and Ken’s (Arrow, 1962), as period pieces. These papers certainly have been influential in shaping the discussion of science and technology policy over the last forty years, at least among economists, but at the time they were written, economists were just beginning to get into analysis of the key processes and institutions involved in technological advance. A lot has been learned since that time, and the discussion has become much more sophisticated. I will highlight two of those intellectual developments: the growing recognition that technological advance must be understood as an evolutionary process, and recognition that the institutions involved in that process include much more than the simple market institutions on which economists usually focus. Then I turn to the contemporary policy arena that is the focus of this conference: issues relating to intellectual property. Both to link the discussion to my old paper, and because my own recent research has been focused there, I shall focus particularly on the patenting of “science”. Finally, I will consider the institutional division of labor in research and development, and argue that the question of what should be private and what should be public about science and technology cannot be explored adequately without explicit consideration of mechanisms of funding, and of who is expected to do the work under what terms. I will focus particularly on the role of universities in the system of institutions that do R and D. 2

@article{doi101086258177,
    author = "Nelson, Richard R.",
    title = "The Simple Economics of Basic Scientific Research",
    year = "1959",
    journal = "Journal of Political Economy",
    abstract = "I begin this essay by reflecting on my early paper (Nelson, 1859), and Ken’s (Arrow, 1962), as period pieces. These papers certainly have been influential in shaping the discussion of science and technology policy over the last forty years, at least among economists, but at the time they were written, economists were just beginning to get into analysis of the key processes and institutions involved in technological advance. A lot has been learned since that time, and the discussion has become much more sophisticated. I will highlight two of those intellectual developments: the growing recognition that technological advance must be understood as an evolutionary process, and recognition that the institutions involved in that process include much more than the simple market institutions on which economists usually focus. Then I turn to the contemporary policy arena that is the focus of this conference: issues relating to intellectual property. Both to link the discussion to my old paper, and because my own recent research has been focused there, I shall focus particularly on the patenting of “science”. Finally, I will consider the institutional division of labor in research and development, and argue that the question of what should be private and what should be public about science and technology cannot be explored adequately without explicit consideration of mechanisms of funding, and of who is expected to do the work under what terms. I will focus particularly on the role of universities in the system of institutions that do R and D. 2",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1086/258177",
    doi = "10.1086/258177",
    openalex = "W1971782430"
}

@article{doi1010160025556478900779,
    author = "Taylor, Peter and Jonker, Leo",
    title = "Evolutionary stable strategies and game dynamics",
    year = "1978",
    journal = "Mathematical Biosciences",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5564(78)90077-9",
    doi = "10.1016/0025-5564(78)90077-9",
    openalex = "W2028798910",
    references = "doi101038246015a0"
}

@book{boulding1981evolutionary1,
    author = "Boulding, K. E",
    title = "Evolutionary Economics",
    year = "1981",
    publisher = "Beverly Hills, Ca., Sage Publications",
    note = "talkorigins\_source = {true}; raw\_reference = {Boulding, K. E., 1981, Evolutionary Economics: Beverly Hills, Ca., Sage Publications.}"
}

I. OVERVIEW AND MOTIVATION 1. Introduction 2. The Need for an Evolutionary Theory II. ORGANIZATION-THEORETIC FOUNDATIONS OF ECONOMIC EVOLUTIONARY THEORY 3. The Foundations of Contemporary Orthodoxy 4. Skills 5. Organizational Capabilities and Behavior III. TEXTBOOK ECONOMICS REVISITED 6. Static Selection Equilibrium 7. Firm and Industry Response to Changed Market Conditions IV. GROWTH THEORY 8. Neoclassical Growth Theory: A Critique 9. An Evolutionary Model of Economic Growth 10. Economic Growth as a Pure Selection Process 11. Further Analysis of Search and Selection V. SCHUMPETERIAN COMPETITION 12. Dynamic Competition and Technical Progress 13. Forces Generating and Limiting Concentration under Schumpeterian Competition 14. The Schumpeterian Tradeoff Revisited VI. ECONOMIC WELFARE AND POLICY 15. Normative Economics from an Evolutionary Perspective 16. The Evolution of Public Policies and the Role of Analysis VII. CONCLUSION 17. Retrospect and Prospect References Index

@book{openalexw3124140110,
    author = "Winter and Sidney, G",
    title = "An evolutionary theory of economic change",
    year = "1982",
    abstract = "I. OVERVIEW AND MOTIVATION 1. Introduction 2. The Need for an Evolutionary Theory II. ORGANIZATION-THEORETIC FOUNDATIONS OF ECONOMIC EVOLUTIONARY THEORY 3. The Foundations of Contemporary Orthodoxy 4. Skills 5. Organizational Capabilities and Behavior III. TEXTBOOK ECONOMICS REVISITED 6. Static Selection Equilibrium 7. Firm and Industry Response to Changed Market Conditions IV. GROWTH THEORY 8. Neoclassical Growth Theory: A Critique 9. An Evolutionary Model of Economic Growth 10. Economic Growth as a Pure Selection Process 11. Further Analysis of Search and Selection V. SCHUMPETERIAN COMPETITION 12. Dynamic Competition and Technical Progress 13. Forces Generating and Limiting Concentration under Schumpeterian Competition 14. The Schumpeterian Tradeoff Revisited VI. ECONOMIC WELFARE AND POLICY 15. Normative Economics from an Evolutionary Perspective 16. The Evolution of Public Policies and the Role of Analysis VII. CONCLUSION 17. Retrospect and Prospect References Index",
    url = "https://openalex.org/W3124140110",
    openalex = "W3124140110"
}

Journal Article An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change Get access An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. By Richard R. Nelson and Sidney G. Winter. (Cambridge, Massachusetts & London: Harvard University Press, 1982. Pp. xi +437. £17.50.) Brian J. Loasby Brian J. Loasby University of Stirling Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Economic Journal, Volume 93, Issue 371, 1 September 1983, Pages 652–654, https://doi.org/10.2307/2232409 Published: 01 September 1983

@article{doi1023072232409,
    author = "Loasby, Brian J. and Nelson, Richard R. and Winter, Sidney G.",
    title = "An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change.",
    year = "1983",
    journal = "The Economic Journal",
    abstract = "Journal Article An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change Get access An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change. By Richard R. Nelson and Sidney G. Winter. (Cambridge, Massachusetts \& London: Harvard University Press, 1982. Pp. xi +437. £17.50.) Brian J. Loasby Brian J. Loasby University of Stirling Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Economic Journal, Volume 93, Issue 371, 1 September 1983, Pages 652–654, https://doi.org/10.2307/2232409 Published: 01 September 1983",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.2307/2232409",
    doi = "10.2307/2232409",
    openalex = "W2137358449"
}

Culture and the evolutionary process Culture and the evolutionary process. Robert Boyd, Peter J. Richerson(ed.), 1985. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago viii + 331 pages. $29.95 Marcy F. Lawton Marcy F. Lawton Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Condor, Volume 88, Issue 1, 1 February 1986, Pages 123–124, https://doi.org/10.2307/1367778 Published: 01 February 1986

@article{doi1023071367778,
    author = "Griesemer, James R. and Boyd, Robert and Richerson, Peter J.",
    title = "Culture and the Evolutionary Process",
    year = "1986",
    journal = "Ornithological Applications",
    abstract = "Culture and the evolutionary process Culture and the evolutionary process. Robert Boyd, Peter J. Richerson(ed.), 1985. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago viii + 331 pages. $29.95 Marcy F. Lawton Marcy F. Lawton Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Condor, Volume 88, Issue 1, 1 February 1986, Pages 123–124, https://doi.org/10.2307/1367778 Published: 01 February 1986",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.2307/1367778",
    doi = "10.2307/1367778",
    openalex = "W1811781384"
}

Evolutionary games are introduced as models for repeated anonymous strategic interaction.The basic idea is that actions (or behaviors) which are more "fit," given the current distribution of behaviors, tend over time to displace less fit behaviors.Simple numerical examples motivate the key concepts of fitness function and compatible dynamics, and illustrate the relation to previous biological models.Cone fields are introduced to characterize the continuous-time dynamical processes compatible with a given fitness function.The analysis focuses on dynamic steady state equilibria and their relation to the static equilibria known as NE (Nash equilibrium) and ESS (evolutionary stable state).For large classes of dynamics it is shown that all stable dynamic steady states are NE and that all NE are dynamic steady states.The biologists' ESS condition is less closely related to the dynamic equilibria.The paper concludes with a brief survey of economic applications.

@article{doi1023072938222,
    author = "Friedman, Daniel",
    title = "Evolutionary Games in Economics",
    year = "1991",
    journal = "Econometrica",
    abstract = {Evolutionary games are introduced as models for repeated anonymous strategic interaction.The basic idea is that actions (or behaviors) which are more "fit," given the current distribution of behaviors, tend over time to displace less fit behaviors.Simple numerical examples motivate the key concepts of fitness function and compatible dynamics, and illustrate the relation to previous biological models.Cone fields are introduced to characterize the continuous-time dynamical processes compatible with a given fitness function.The analysis focuses on dynamic steady state equilibria and their relation to the static equilibria known as NE (Nash equilibrium) and ESS (evolutionary stable state).For large classes of dynamics it is shown that all stable dynamic steady states are NE and that all NE are dynamic steady states.The biologists' ESS condition is less closely related to the dynamic equilibria.The paper concludes with a brief survey of economic applications.},
    url = "https://doi.org/10.2307/2938222",
    doi = "10.2307/2938222",
    openalex = "W2109150831",
    references = "doi101007978146847862422, doi1010160025556478900779, doi101017cbo9780511806292, doi101126science7466396, doi1023071367778, doi1023072232409, doi1023072280713, doi1023072348852, openalexw3124140110"
}

@article{doi101007bf01236366,
    author = "Dosi, Giovanni and Nelson, Richard R.",
    title = "An introduction to evolutionary theories in economics",
    year = "1994",
    journal = "Journal of Evolutionary Economics",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01236366",
    doi = "10.1007/bf01236366",
    openalex = "W1996153090",
    references = "doi1010160048733382900166, doi1010160048733384900180, doi1023072232409, doi1023072234208, doi1023072392832, doi1023072393549, doi1043249780203357637, doi104337978178254185100008, openalexw1495886451"
}

The authors respond to the thoughtful concerns raised by Dickson (1996) about the issue of path dependencies and the dynamics of resource-advantage (R-A) theory (Hunt and Morgan 1995). Rather than R-A theory and Dickson's work being inconsistent, the authors point out that Hunt and Morgan (1995) cite Dickson's (1992) work on two different occasions as support for the dynamics of R-A theory. Furthermore, because R-A theory proposes that firms seek superior financial performance, when combined with the fact that all firms cannot be superior at the same time, R-A competition necessarily is dynamic. Moreover, though the issue of path-dependencies is more contentious than Dickson suggests, R-A theory fully accommodates path dependencies, because it is an evolutionary, nonconsummatory theory.

@article{doi101177002224299606000410,
    author = "Hunt, Shelby D. and Morgan, Robert M.",
    title = "The Resource-Advantage Theory of Competition: Dynamics, Path Dependencies, and Evolutionary Dimensions",
    year = "1996",
    journal = "Journal of Marketing",
    abstract = "The authors respond to the thoughtful concerns raised by Dickson (1996) about the issue of path dependencies and the dynamics of resource-advantage (R-A) theory (Hunt and Morgan 1995). Rather than R-A theory and Dickson's work being inconsistent, the authors point out that Hunt and Morgan (1995) cite Dickson's (1992) work on two different occasions as support for the dynamics of R-A theory. Furthermore, because R-A theory proposes that firms seek superior financial performance, when combined with the fact that all firms cannot be superior at the same time, R-A competition necessarily is dynamic. Moreover, though the issue of path-dependencies is more contentious than Dickson suggests, R-A theory fully accommodates path dependencies, because it is an evolutionary, nonconsummatory theory.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1177/002224299606000410",
    doi = "10.1177/002224299606000410",
    openalex = "W2330945352",
    references = "doi101002smj4250050207, doi101002smj4250140303, doi101007bf01236366, doi1010160169207096881970, doi101017cbo9780511808678, doi101086261420, doi101086261725, doi101177014920639101700108, doi1023071060065, doi1023071884513"
}

@article{doi101007s001910050054,
    author = "Friedman, Daniel",
    title = "On economic applications of evolutionary game theory",
    year = "1998",
    journal = "Journal of Evolutionary Economics",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s001910050054",
    doi = "10.1007/s001910050054",
    openalex = "W2062799716",
    references = "doi1010160164070484900119, doi1023072938222"
}

The authors develop the concept of regional systems of innovation and relate it to preexisting research on national systems of innovation. They argue that work conducted in the ‘new regional science’ field is complementary to systems of innovation approaches. They seek to link new regional work to evolutionary economics, and argue for the development of evolutionary regional science. Common elements of interest to evolutionary innovation research and new regional science are important in understanding processes of agglomeration, trust building, innovation, institutions, and learning in regional systems. The authors develop analytical frameworks for designating regional systems of innovation in terms of distinction between institutions and organisations, hard and soft infrastructures, and the cultural superstructure. They conclude that an evolutionary approach assists understanding of regional potential for developing systemic innovation.

@article{doi101068a301563,
    author = "Cooke, Philip and Uranga, Mikel Gómez and Etxebarria, Goio",
    title = "Regional Systems of Innovation: An Evolutionary Perspective",
    year = "1998",
    journal = "Environment and Planning A Economy and Space",
    abstract = "The authors develop the concept of regional systems of innovation and relate it to preexisting research on national systems of innovation. They argue that work conducted in the ‘new regional science’ field is complementary to systems of innovation approaches. They seek to link new regional work to evolutionary economics, and argue for the development of evolutionary regional science. Common elements of interest to evolutionary innovation research and new regional science are important in understanding processes of agglomeration, trust building, innovation, institutions, and learning in regional systems. The authors develop analytical frameworks for designating regional systems of innovation in terms of distinction between institutions and organisations, hard and soft infrastructures, and the cultural superstructure. They conclude that an evolutionary approach assists understanding of regional potential for developing systemic innovation.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1068/a301563",
    doi = "10.1068/a301563",
    openalex = "W1986116487",
    references = "doi101093oxfordjournalscjea013725"
}

Journal Article Why is economics not an evolutionary science?1 Get access Thorstein Veblen Thorstein Veblen Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Cambridge Journal of Economics, Volume 22, Issue 4, July 1998, Pages 403–414, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a013725 Published: 01 July 1998

@article{doi101093oxfordjournalscjea013725,
    author = "Veblen, T. B.",
    title = "Why is economics not an evolutionary science?1",
    year = "1998",
    journal = "Cambridge Journal of Economics",
    abstract = "Journal Article Why is economics not an evolutionary science?1 Get access Thorstein Veblen Thorstein Veblen Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Cambridge Journal of Economics, Volume 22, Issue 4, July 1998, Pages 403–414, https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a013725 Published: 01 July 1998",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a013725",
    doi = "10.1093/oxfordjournals.cje.a013725",
    openalex = "W2073773768"
}

@book{doi1043249780203275146,
    author = "Metcalfe, J. Stanley",
    title = "EVOLUTIONARY ECONOMICS AND CREATIVE DESTRUCTION",
    year = "1998",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203275146",
    doi = "10.4324/9780203275146",
    openalex = "W4298387747"
}

@article{doi101007s001910050089,
    author = "Boschma, Ron and Lambooy, J.G.",
    title = "Evolutionary economics and economic geography",
    year = "1999",
    journal = "Journal of Evolutionary Economics",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s001910050089",
    doi = "10.1007/s001910050089",
    openalex = "W1973978641",
    references = "doi101007bf01236366, doi10108000343409750132289, doi1023071251962, doi102307144543, doi1023071880689, doi10230720041465, doi1023072118401, doi1023072232409, doi1023072232759, doi1023072234048, doi103998mpub10029"
}

Complex behaviour can occur in any system made up of large numbers of interacting constituents, be they atoms in a solid, cells in a living organism, or consumers in a national economy. Analysis of this behaviour often involves making important assumptions and approximations, the exact nature of which vary from subject to subject. Foundations of Complex-system Theories begins with a description of the general features of complexity and then examines a range of important concepts, such as theories of composite systems, collective phenomena, and stochastic processes. Each topic is discussed with reference to the fields of statistical physics, evolutionary biology, and economics, thereby highlighting recurrent themes in the study of complex systems. This detailed yet nontechnical book will appeal to anyone who wants to know more about complex systems and their behaviour. It will also be of great interest to specialists studying complexity in the physical, biological, and social sciences

@book{doi101017cbo9780511626135,
    author = "Auyang, Sunny Y.",
    title = "Foundations of Complex-System Theories: In Economics, Evolutionary Biology, and Statistical Physics",
    year = "1999",
    abstract = "Complex behaviour can occur in any system made up of large numbers of interacting constituents, be they atoms in a solid, cells in a living organism, or consumers in a national economy. Analysis of this behaviour often involves making important assumptions and approximations, the exact nature of which vary from subject to subject. Foundations of Complex-system Theories begins with a description of the general features of complexity and then examines a range of important concepts, such as theories of composite systems, collective phenomena, and stochastic processes. Each topic is discussed with reference to the fields of statistical physics, evolutionary biology, and economics, thereby highlighting recurrent themes in the study of complex systems. This detailed yet nontechnical book will appeal to anyone who wants to know more about complex systems and their behaviour. It will also be of great interest to specialists studying complexity in the physical, biological, and social sciences",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511626135",
    doi = "10.1017/cbo9780511626135",
    openalex = "W1532516291",
    references = "doi105840jphil198178268"
}

Contents: Preface and Acknowledgements Part I: Rival Paradigms in Economics 1. Introduction: The Century of Lost Opportunity 2. False Antagonisms and Doomed Reconciliations 3. A Case Study: The Fate of the Cambridge Capital Controversy 4. Metaphor and Pluralism in Economics Part II: The Evolution of Evolutionary Economics 5. Biological Metaphors in Economics from the 1880s to the 1980s 6. Meanings of Evolutionary Economics Part III: The Contributions of Richard Nelson and Sidney Winter 7. Richard Nelson and Sidney Winter 8. Optimization and Evolution: Winter's Critique of Friedman Revisited Part IV: Evolutionary Theories of the Firm 9. Transaction Costs and the Evolution of the Firm 10. The Coasean Tangle: The Nature of the Firm and the Problem of Historical Specificity 11. Evolutionary and Competence-Based Theories of the Firm References Index

@book{openalexw1600373605,
    author = "Hodgson, Geoffrey M.",
    title = "Evolution and institutions: on evolutionary economics and the evolution of economics",
    year = "1999",
    abstract = "Contents: Preface and Acknowledgements Part I: Rival Paradigms in Economics 1. Introduction: The Century of Lost Opportunity 2. False Antagonisms and Doomed Reconciliations 3. A Case Study: The Fate of the Cambridge Capital Controversy 4. Metaphor and Pluralism in Economics Part II: The Evolution of Evolutionary Economics 5. Biological Metaphors in Economics from the 1880s to the 1980s 6. Meanings of Evolutionary Economics Part III: The Contributions of Richard Nelson and Sidney Winter 7. Richard Nelson and Sidney Winter 8. Optimization and Evolution: Winter's Critique of Friedman Revisited Part IV: Evolutionary Theories of the Firm 9. Transaction Costs and the Evolution of the Firm 10. The Coasean Tangle: The Nature of the Firm and the Problem of Historical Specificity 11. Evolutionary and Competence-Based Theories of the Firm References Index",
    url = "https://openalex.org/W1600373605",
    openalex = "W1600373605"
}

Economists long have employed evolutionary language and metaphors to characterize economic change, but until recently have largely eschewed the expression of explicit evolutionary theories. Over the last decade, however, a number of explicit evolutionary theories have been developed by economists, and other social scientists. This essay discusses the general analytic art form, and summarizes and discusses a number of the particular models. In the light of those examples, it evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of explicit evolutionary theorizing as an approach to understanding economic change.

@incollection{doi10100797833228084005,
    author = "Nelson, Richard Alan",
    title = "Recent Evolutionary Theorizing About Economic Change",
    year = "2000",
    booktitle = "VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften eBooks",
    abstract = "Economists long have employed evolutionary language and metaphors to characterize economic change, but until recently have largely eschewed the expression of explicit evolutionary theories. Over the last decade, however, a number of explicit evolutionary theories have been developed by economists, and other social scientists. This essay discusses the general analytic art form, and summarizes and discusses a number of the particular models. In the light of those examples, it evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of explicit evolutionary theorizing as an approach to understanding economic change.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-322-80840-0\_5",
    doi = "10.1007/978-3-322-80840-0\_5",
    openalex = "W1521985566",
    references = "doi101007978146847862422, doi10106313050879, doi10108000213624198711504638, doi101093oxfordjournalscjea013725, doi1011425786, doi1023071058511, doi1023071060065, doi1023071884513, doi1023072218271, doi1023072232409, doi1023072233763, doi1023072234208, doi1023072393344, doi1023072393549, doi1023072551371, doi1023072938222, doi107208chicago97802263604920010001"
}

@article{doi101016s0048733302000628,
    author = "Geels, Frank W.",
    title = "Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: a multi-level perspective and a case-study",
    year = "2002",
    journal = "Research Policy",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1016/s0048-7333(02)00062-8",
    doi = "10.1016/s0048-7333(02)00062-8",
    openalex = "W2099330597",
    references = "doi10100797833228084005, doi1023072234048, doi1023072392832"
}

Within economic geography and industrial economics, interest in the concept of tacit knowledge has grown steadily in recent years. Nelson and Winter helped revive this interest in the work of Michael Polanyi by using the idea of tacit knowledge to inform their analysis of routines and evolutionary dynamics of technological change. More recently, the concept has received closer scrutiny. This paper offers a further contribution to this project by offering a critical analysis of the prevailing implicit and explicit economic geographies of tacit knowledge, focusing on the relationship between tacit knowledge and institutions. While much of the innovation literature focuses on a single question – can tacit knowledge be effectively shared over long distances – the paper argues that this issue cannot be properly addressed without considering a broader range of related questions. It highlights three tacit knowledge problems which, together, provide a more complete view of this issue. First, how is tacit knowledge produced? Second, how do firms find and appropriate tacit knowledge? Third, how is tacit knowledge reproduced or shared – that is, how does tacit knowledge promote social learning processes, and must the participants be geographically proximate in order for effective learning to occur? The paper revisits Michael Polanyi's original conception of tacit knowledge, showing it to be limited by its experiential and cognitive emphasis, with insufficient attention devoted to the role and origins of social context. Alternatively, the paper argues that one cannot sort out the geography of tacit knowledge without inquiring into the foundations of context and culture, and the institutional underpinnings of economic activity, taking the work of another Polanyi – Karl – as the logical starting point.

@article{doi101093jeg3175,
    author = "Gertler, M S",
    title = "Tacit knowledge and the economic geography of context, or The undefinable tacitness of being (there)",
    year = "2002",
    journal = "Journal of Economic Geography",
    abstract = "Within economic geography and industrial economics, interest in the concept of tacit knowledge has grown steadily in recent years. Nelson and Winter helped revive this interest in the work of Michael Polanyi by using the idea of tacit knowledge to inform their analysis of routines and evolutionary dynamics of technological change. More recently, the concept has received closer scrutiny. This paper offers a further contribution to this project by offering a critical analysis of the prevailing implicit and explicit economic geographies of tacit knowledge, focusing on the relationship between tacit knowledge and institutions. While much of the innovation literature focuses on a single question – can tacit knowledge be effectively shared over long distances – the paper argues that this issue cannot be properly addressed without considering a broader range of related questions. It highlights three tacit knowledge problems which, together, provide a more complete view of this issue. First, how is tacit knowledge produced? Second, how do firms find and appropriate tacit knowledge? Third, how is tacit knowledge reproduced or shared – that is, how does tacit knowledge promote social learning processes, and must the participants be geographically proximate in order for effective learning to occur? The paper revisits Michael Polanyi's original conception of tacit knowledge, showing it to be limited by its experiential and cognitive emphasis, with insufficient attention devoted to the role and origins of social context. Alternatively, the paper argues that one cannot sort out the geography of tacit knowledge without inquiring into the foundations of context and culture, and the institutional underpinnings of economic activity, taking the work of another Polanyi – Karl – as the logical starting point.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/3.1.75",
    doi = "10.1093/jeg/3.1.75",
    openalex = "W2162482203",
    references = "doi10108000343409750132289, doi105860choice313490"
}

This paper reviews the case for an evolutionary approach to problems of economic analysis, ranging from the details of individual firm behavior in the short run through industrial dynamics to the historical evolution of institutions and technologies. We draw upon a substantial body of recent research contributions. We characterize micro behavior as governed by skills and routines that are shaped by learning and selection. We then consider major areas of application of evolutionary thinking, including the analysis of competitive processes in technologically dynamic industries and the evolution of institutions and technologies.

@article{doi1012570895330027247,
    author = "Nelson, Richard R. and Winter, Sidney G.",
    title = "Evolutionary Theorizing in Economics",
    year = "2002",
    journal = "The Journal of Economic Perspectives",
    abstract = "This paper reviews the case for an evolutionary approach to problems of economic analysis, ranging from the details of individual firm behavior in the short run through industrial dynamics to the historical evolution of institutions and technologies. We draw upon a substantial body of recent research contributions. We characterize micro behavior as governed by skills and routines that are shaped by learning and selection. We then consider major areas of application of evolutionary thinking, including the analysis of competitive processes in technologically dynamic industries and the evolution of institutions and technologies.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1257/0895330027247",
    doi = "10.1257/0895330027247",
    openalex = "W1966871598",
    references = "doi101002sici10970266199708187509aidsmj88230co2z, doi10100797894010183408, doi10108000213624198711504638, doi101093oxfordjournalscjea013725, doi101126science18541571124, doi101257pandp109612, doi1023071060065, doi1023071884513, doi1023071926047, doi10230720048211, doi1023072232409, doi1043249780203018927"
}

The central theme of this book is competition treated as an evolutionary process in which the focus is upon economic change and not economic equilibrium. This theme is explored by linking together differences in economic behaviour with the role of markets as co-ordinating institutions. In this picture innovation plays a central role as a primary source of differential behaviour of firms and the purpose of the book is to identify the consequences of these differences for competition and competitive advantage.

@book{doi1043249780203018927,
    author = "Metcalfe, John Stanley, 1946-",
    title = "Evolutionary Economics and Creative Destruction",
    year = "2002",
    abstract = "The central theme of this book is competition treated as an evolutionary process in which the focus is upon economic change and not economic equilibrium. This theme is explored by linking together differences in economic behaviour with the role of markets as co-ordinating institutions. In this picture innovation plays a central role as a primary source of differential behaviour of firms and the purpose of the book is to identify the consequences of these differences for competition and competitive advantage.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203018927",
    doi = "10.4324/9780203018927",
    openalex = "W2116428288"
}

Evolutionary game dynamics is the application of population dynamical methods to game theory. It has been introduced by evolutionary biologists, anticipated in part by classical game theorists. In this survey, we present an overview of the many brands of deterministic dynamical systems motivated by evolutionary game theory, including ordinary differential equations (and, in particular, the replicator equation), differential inclusions (the best response dynamics), difference equations (as, for instance, fictitious play) and reaction-diffusion systems. A recurrent theme (the so-called ‘folk theorem of evolutionary game theory’) is the close connection of the dynamical approach with the Nash equilibrium, but we show that a static, equilibrium-based viewpoint is, on principle, unable to always account for the long-term behaviour of players adjusting their behaviour to maximise their payoff.

@book{doi101090s0273097903009881,
    author = "Hofbauer, Josef and Sigmund, Karl",
    title = "Evolutionary game dynamics",
    year = "2003",
    journal = "Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society",
    abstract = "Evolutionary game dynamics is the application of population dynamical methods to game theory. It has been introduced by evolutionary biologists, anticipated in part by classical game theorists. In this survey, we present an overview of the many brands of deterministic dynamical systems motivated by evolutionary game theory, including ordinary differential equations (and, in particular, the replicator equation), differential inclusions (the best response dynamics), difference equations (as, for instance, fictitious play) and reaction-diffusion systems. A recurrent theme (the so-called ‘folk theorem of evolutionary game theory’) is the close connection of the dynamical approach with the Nash equilibrium, but we show that a static, equilibrium-based viewpoint is, on principle, unable to always account for the long-term behaviour of players adjusting their behaviour to maximise their payoff.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1090/s0273-0979-03-00988-1",
    doi = "10.1090/s0273-0979-03-00988-1",
    openalex = "W2036083037",
    references = "doi1023072938222, openalexw1563149694"
}

Prolegomenon 1. Evolutionary economics: a theoretical framework Kurt Dopfer Part I. Ontological Foundations: 2. The rediscovery of value and the opening of economics Ilya Prigogine 3. Synergetics: from physics to economics Hermann Haken 4. Darwinism, altruism and economics Herbert A. Simon 5. Decomposition and growth: biological metaphors in economics from the 1880s to the 1980s Geoffrey M. Hodgson 6. Path dependence in economic processes: implications for policy analysis in dynamical systems contexts Paul A. David 7. Is there a theory of economic history? Joel Mokyr Part II. Framework for Evolutionary Analysis: 8. Toward an evolutionary theory of production Sidney G. Winter 9. Learning in evolutionary environments Giovanni Dosi, Luigi Marengo and Giorgio Fagiolo 10. Evolutionary theory of the firm Ulrich Witt 11. The self-organizational perspective on economic processes: a unifying paradigm John Foster 12. Evolutionary concepts in relation to evolutionary economics J. Stanley Metcalfe 13. Economics and the science of evolutionary complex systems Peter Allen 14. Perspectives on technological evolution Richard R. Nelson 15. Complex dynamics in economic organisms Ping Chen 16. Evolutionary theorizing on economic growth Gerald Silverberg and Bart Verspagen Bibliography Index.

@incollection{doi104337978184542350600007,
    author = "Dopfer, Kurt and Potts, Jason",
    title = "Evolutionary Foundations of Economics",
    year = "2004",
    booktitle = "Edward Elgar Publishing eBooks",
    abstract = "Prolegomenon 1. Evolutionary economics: a theoretical framework Kurt Dopfer Part I. Ontological Foundations: 2. The rediscovery of value and the opening of economics Ilya Prigogine 3. Synergetics: from physics to economics Hermann Haken 4. Darwinism, altruism and economics Herbert A. Simon 5. Decomposition and growth: biological metaphors in economics from the 1880s to the 1980s Geoffrey M. Hodgson 6. Path dependence in economic processes: implications for policy analysis in dynamical systems contexts Paul A. David 7. Is there a theory of economic history? Joel Mokyr Part II. Framework for Evolutionary Analysis: 8. Toward an evolutionary theory of production Sidney G. Winter 9. Learning in evolutionary environments Giovanni Dosi, Luigi Marengo and Giorgio Fagiolo 10. Evolutionary theory of the firm Ulrich Witt 11. The self-organizational perspective on economic processes: a unifying paradigm John Foster 12. Evolutionary concepts in relation to evolutionary economics J. Stanley Metcalfe 13. Economics and the science of evolutionary complex systems Peter Allen 14. Perspectives on technological evolution Richard R. Nelson 15. Complex dynamics in economic organisms Ping Chen 16. Evolutionary theorizing on economic growth Gerald Silverberg and Bart Verspagen Bibliography Index.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.4337/9781845423506.00007",
    doi = "10.4337/9781845423506.00007",
    openalex = "W1960000674"
}

The paper explains the commonalities and differences between neoclassical, institutional and evolutionary approaches that have been influential in economic geography during the last couple of decades. By separating the three approaches in terms of theoretical content and research methodology, wecan appreciate both the commonalities and differences between the three approaches. It is also apparent that innovative theorizing currently occurs at the interface between neoclassical and evolutionary theory (especially in modelling) and at the interface between institutional and evolutionary theory (especially in ‘appreciative theorizing’). Taken together, we argue that Evolutionary Economic Geography is an emerging paradigm in economic geography, yet does so without isolating itself from developments in other theoretical approaches.

@article{doi101093jeglbi022,
    author = "Boschma, Ron and Frenken, Koen",
    title = "Why is economic geography not an evolutionary science? Towards an evolutionary economic geography",
    year = "2006",
    journal = "Journal of Economic Geography",
    abstract = "The paper explains the commonalities and differences between neoclassical, institutional and evolutionary approaches that have been influential in economic geography during the last couple of decades. By separating the three approaches in terms of theoretical content and research methodology, wecan appreciate both the commonalities and differences between the three approaches. It is also apparent that innovative theorizing currently occurs at the interface between neoclassical and evolutionary theory (especially in modelling) and at the interface between institutional and evolutionary theory (especially in ‘appreciative theorizing’). Taken together, we argue that Evolutionary Economic Geography is an emerging paradigm in economic geography, yet does so without isolating itself from developments in other theoretical approaches.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbi022",
    doi = "10.1093/jeg/lbi022",
    openalex = "W2130277684",
    references = "doi101002sici10970266199708187509aidsmj88230co2z, doi101007s001910050089, doi101017cbo9780511808678, doi101017cbo9780511815478, doi101086228311, doi101093iccdth026, doi101093oxfordjournalscjea013725, doi101103revmodphys7447, doi101111j146802971997tb00064x, doi101126science2865439509, doi1015159780691206820, doi1023071060065, doi1023071884852, doi1023072232409, doi105860choice416654, openalexw2061901927"
}

In recent years, economic geographers have seized on the concepts of 'path dependence' and 'lock-in' as key ingredients in constructing an evolutionary approach to their subject. However, they have tended to invoke these notions without proper examination of the ongoing discussion and debate devoted to them within evolutionary economics and elsewhere. Our aim in this paper, therefore, is, first, to highlight some of the unresolved issues that surround these concepts, and, second, to explore their usefulness for understanding the evolution of the economic landscape and the process of regional development. We argue that in many important aspects, path dependence and 'lock-in' are place-dependent processes, and as such require geographical explanation. However, the precise meaning of regional 'lock-in', we contend, is unclear, and little is known about why it is that some regional economies become locked into development paths that lose dynamism, whilst other regional economies seem able to avoid this danger and in effect are able to 'reinvent' themselves through successive new paths or phases of development. The issue of regional path creation is thus equally important, but has been rarely discussed. We conclude that whilst path dependence is an important feature of the economic landscape, the concept requires further elaboration if it is to function as a core notion in an evolutionary economic geography.

@article{doi101093jeglbl012,
    author = "Martin, Ron and Sunley, Peter",
    title = "Path dependence and regional economic evolution",
    year = "2006",
    journal = "Journal of Economic Geography",
    abstract = "In recent years, economic geographers have seized on the concepts of 'path dependence' and 'lock-in' as key ingredients in constructing an evolutionary approach to their subject. However, they have tended to invoke these notions without proper examination of the ongoing discussion and debate devoted to them within evolutionary economics and elsewhere. Our aim in this paper, therefore, is, first, to highlight some of the unresolved issues that surround these concepts, and, second, to explore their usefulness for understanding the evolution of the economic landscape and the process of regional development. We argue that in many important aspects, path dependence and 'lock-in' are place-dependent processes, and as such require geographical explanation. However, the precise meaning of regional 'lock-in', we contend, is unclear, and little is known about why it is that some regional economies become locked into development paths that lose dynamism, whilst other regional economies seem able to avoid this danger and in effect are able to 'reinvent' themselves through successive new paths or phases of development. The issue of regional path creation is thus equally important, but has been rarely discussed. We conclude that whilst path dependence is an important feature of the economic landscape, the concept requires further elaboration if it is to function as a core notion in an evolutionary economic geography.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbl012",
    doi = "10.1093/jeg/lbl012",
    openalex = "W2116681438",
    references = "doi101007s001910050089, doi101017cbo9780511808678, doi1010800034340052000320887, doi101086225469, doi101093jeglbi022, doi101093oxfordjournalscjea013725, doi1023071060065, doi102307144543, doi1023072234208, doi1023072393988, doi1023072586011, doi103998mpub10029, doi104337978184542350600007, doi105860choice321166, openalexw1495886451"
}

Geoffrey M. Hodgson (1946–) is a Research Professor in Business Studies at the University of Hertfordshire (UK), the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Institutional Economics and was 2006 President of the Association for Evolutionary Economics. He is the author of more than a dozen books and nearly two hundred scholarly articles. His research has focused on institutions, and he also has had a long-standing interest in the history and methodology of institutional and evolutionary economics.

@incollection{doi101017cbo9780511819025026,
    author = "Hodgson, Geoffrey M.",
    title = "What Is the Essence of Institutional Economics?",
    year = "2007",
    booktitle = "Cambridge University Press eBooks",
    abstract = "Geoffrey M. Hodgson (1946–) is a Research Professor in Business Studies at the University of Hertfordshire (UK), the Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Institutional Economics and was 2006 President of the Association for Evolutionary Economics. He is the author of more than a dozen books and nearly two hundred scholarly articles. His research has focused on institutions, and he also has had a long-standing interest in the history and methodology of institutional and evolutionary economics.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511819025.026",
    doi = "10.1017/cbo9780511819025.026",
    openalex = "W2288757313",
    references = "openalexw1600373605"
}

We propose a framework that specifies the process of economic development as an evolutionary branching process of product innovations. Each product innovation provides a growth opportunity for an existing firm or a new firm, and for an existing city or a new city. One can then obtain both firm size and city size distributions as two aggregates resulting from a single evolutionary process. Gains from variety at the firm level (economies of scope) and the urban level (Jacobs externalities) provide the central feedback mechanism in economic development generating strong path dependencies in the spatial concentration of industries and the specialization of cities. Gains from size are also expected, yet these are ultimately bounded by increasing wages. The contribution of our framework lies in providing a micro-foundation of economic geography in terms of the interplay between industrial dynamics and urban growth. The framework is sufficiently general to investigate systematically a number of stylized facts in economic geography, while at the same time it is sufficiently flexible to be extended such as to become applicable in more specific micro-contexts. A number of extensions related to the concepts of knowledge spillover and lock-in, are also discussed.

@article{doi101093jeglbm018,
    author = "Frenken, Koen and Boschma, R.A.",
    title = "A theoretical framework for evolutionary economic geography: industrial dynamics and urban growth as a branching process",
    year = "2007",
    journal = "Journal of Economic Geography",
    abstract = "We propose a framework that specifies the process of economic development as an evolutionary branching process of product innovations. Each product innovation provides a growth opportunity for an existing firm or a new firm, and for an existing city or a new city. One can then obtain both firm size and city size distributions as two aggregates resulting from a single evolutionary process. Gains from variety at the firm level (economies of scope) and the urban level (Jacobs externalities) provide the central feedback mechanism in economic development generating strong path dependencies in the spatial concentration of industries and the specialization of cities. Gains from size are also expected, yet these are ultimately bounded by increasing wages. The contribution of our framework lies in providing a micro-foundation of economic geography in terms of the interplay between industrial dynamics and urban growth. The framework is sufficiently general to investigate systematically a number of stylized facts in economic geography, while at the same time it is sufficiently flexible to be extended such as to become applicable in more specific micro-contexts. A number of extensions related to the concepts of knowledge spillover and lock-in, are also discussed.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbm018",
    doi = "10.1093/jeg/lbm018",
    openalex = "W2096242135",
    references = "doi101007s001910050089, doi101016jrespol200605004, doi101093jeglbi022, doi101111j146802971997tb00064x"
}

Thus far, most of the work towards the construction of an evolutionary economic geography has drawn upon a particular version of evolutionary economics, namely the Nelson-Winter framework, which blends Darwinian concepts and metaphors (especially variety, selection, novelty and inheritance) and elements of a behavioural theory of the firm. Much less attention has been directed to an alternative conception based on complexity theory, yet in recent years complexity theory has increasingly been concerned with the general attributes of evolutionary natural and social systems. In this article we explore the idea of the economic landscape as a complex adaptive system. We identify several key notions of what is being called the new ‘complexity economics’, and examine whether and in what ways these can be used to help inform an evolutionary perspective for understanding the uneven development and adaptive transformation of the economic landscape.

@article{doi101093jeglbm019,
    author = "Martin, Ron and Sunley, Peter",
    title = "Complexity thinking and evolutionary economic geography",
    year = "2007",
    journal = "Journal of Economic Geography",
    abstract = "Thus far, most of the work towards the construction of an evolutionary economic geography has drawn upon a particular version of evolutionary economics, namely the Nelson-Winter framework, which blends Darwinian concepts and metaphors (especially variety, selection, novelty and inheritance) and elements of a behavioural theory of the firm. Much less attention has been directed to an alternative conception based on complexity theory, yet in recent years complexity theory has increasingly been concerned with the general attributes of evolutionary natural and social systems. In this article we explore the idea of the economic landscape as a complex adaptive system. We identify several key notions of what is being called the new ‘complexity economics’, and examine whether and in what ways these can be used to help inform an evolutionary perspective for understanding the uneven development and adaptive transformation of the economic landscape.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbm019",
    doi = "10.1093/jeg/lbm019",
    openalex = "W2145452789",
    references = "doi101007s001910050089, doi101017cbo9780511626135"
}

Journal Article Editorial: Constructing an evolutionary economic geography Get access Ron Boschma, Ron Boschma Department of Economic Geography,Faculty of Geosciences,Utrecht University,NL-3508 TC, Netherlands.email Department of Geography,University of Cambridge,Cambridge CB2 3EN,UK.email Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Ron Martin Ron Martin Department of Economic Geography,Faculty of Geosciences,Utrecht University,NL-3508 TC, Netherlands.email Department of Geography,University of Cambridge,Cambridge CB2 3EN,UK.email Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Journal of Economic Geography, Volume 7, Issue 5, September 2007, Pages 537–548, https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbm021 Published: 18 June 2007

@article{doi101093jeglbm021,
    author = "Boschma, Ron and Martin, Ron",
    title = "Editorial: Constructing an evolutionary economic geography",
    year = "2007",
    journal = "Journal of Economic Geography",
    abstract = "Journal Article Editorial: Constructing an evolutionary economic geography Get access Ron Boschma, Ron Boschma Department of Economic Geography,Faculty of Geosciences,Utrecht University,NL-3508 TC, Netherlands.email Department of Geography,University of Cambridge,Cambridge CB2 3EN,UK.email Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Ron Martin Ron Martin Department of Economic Geography,Faculty of Geosciences,Utrecht University,NL-3508 TC, Netherlands.email Department of Geography,University of Cambridge,Cambridge CB2 3EN,UK.email Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar Journal of Economic Geography, Volume 7, Issue 5, September 2007, Pages 537–548, https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbm021 Published: 18 June 2007",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbm021",
    doi = "10.1093/jeg/lbm021",
    openalex = "W1988112439",
    references = "doi101016jrespol200605004, doi104337978184542350600007"
}

Ever since an “evolutionary” perspective on the economy has been suggested, there have been differing, and partly incommensurable, views on what specifically this means. By working out where the differences lie and what motivates them, this paper identifies four major approaches to evolutionary economics. The differences between them can be traced back to opposite positions regarding the basic assumptions about reality and the proper conceptualization of evolution. The same differences can also be found in evolutionary game theory. Achievements of the major approaches to evolutionary economics and their prospects for future research are assessed by means of a peer survey.

@article{doi101007s0019100801077,
    author = "Witt, Ulrich",
    title = "What is specific about evolutionary economics?",
    year = "2008",
    journal = "Journal of Evolutionary Economics",
    abstract = "Ever since an “evolutionary” perspective on the economy has been suggested, there have been differing, and partly incommensurable, views on what specifically this means. By working out where the differences lie and what motivates them, this paper identifies four major approaches to evolutionary economics. The differences between them can be traced back to opposite positions regarding the basic assumptions about reality and the proper conceptualization of evolution. The same differences can also be found in evolutionary game theory. Achievements of the major approaches to evolutionary economics and their prospects for future research are assessed by means of a peer survey.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-008-0107-7",
    doi = "10.1007/s00191-008-0107-7",
    openalex = "W2063903232",
    references = "crossref2001darwinism, doi101007s001910050058, doi104337978184542350600007"
}

abstract Economic geography has, over the past decade or so, drawn upon ideas from evolutionary economics in trying to understand processes of regional growth and change. Recently, some researchers have sought to delimit and develop an “evolutionary economic geography” (EEG), aiming to create a more systematic theoretical framework for research. This article provides a sympathetic critique and elaboration of this emergent EEG but takes issue with some aspects of its characterization in recent programmatic statements. While acknowledging that EEG is an evolving and pluralist project, we are concerned that the reliance on certain theoretical frameworks that are imported from evolutionary economics and complexity science threatens to isolate it from other approaches in economic geography, limiting the opportunities for cross‐fertilization. In response, the article seeks to develop a social and pluralist conception of institutions and social agency in EEG, drawing upon the writings of leading institutional economists, and to link evolutionary concepts to political economy approaches, arguing that the evolution of the economic landscape must be related to processes of capital accumulation and uneven development. As such, we favor the use of evolutionary and institutional concepts within a geographical political economy approach, rather than the construction of some kind of theoretically separate EEG—evolution in economic geography, not an evolutionary economic geography.

@article{doi101111j19448287200901017x,
    author = "MacKinnon, Danny and Cumbers, Andrew and Pike, Andy and Birch, Kean and McMaster, Robert",
    title = "Evolution in Economic Geography: Institutions, Political Economy, and Adaptation",
    year = "2009",
    journal = "Economic Geography",
    abstract = "abstract Economic geography has, over the past decade or so, drawn upon ideas from evolutionary economics in trying to understand processes of regional growth and change. Recently, some researchers have sought to delimit and develop an “evolutionary economic geography” (EEG), aiming to create a more systematic theoretical framework for research. This article provides a sympathetic critique and elaboration of this emergent EEG but takes issue with some aspects of its characterization in recent programmatic statements. While acknowledging that EEG is an evolving and pluralist project, we are concerned that the reliance on certain theoretical frameworks that are imported from evolutionary economics and complexity science threatens to isolate it from other approaches in economic geography, limiting the opportunities for cross‐fertilization. In response, the article seeks to develop a social and pluralist conception of institutions and social agency in EEG, drawing upon the writings of leading institutional economists, and to link evolutionary concepts to political economy approaches, arguing that the evolution of the economic landscape must be related to processes of capital accumulation and uneven development. As such, we favor the use of evolutionary and institutional concepts within a geographical political economy approach, rather than the construction of some kind of theoretically separate EEG—evolution in economic geography, not an evolutionary economic geography.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-8287.2009.01017.x",
    doi = "10.1111/j.1944-8287.2009.01017.x",
    openalex = "W1883459023",
    references = "doi101093oxfordjournalscjea013725, doi1011770309132507083505"
}

abstract This article argues that in its “canonical” form, the path dependence model, with its core concept of lock‐in, affords a restrictive and narrowly applicable account of regional and local industrial evolution, an account moreover that is tied to problematic underpinnings based on equilibrist thinking. As such, the canonical path dependence model actually stresses continuity rather than change. The article explores recent developments in political science, in which there have been active attempts to rethink the application of path dependence to the evolution of institutions so as to emphasize change rather than continuity. These developments are used to argue for a rethinking of path dependence ideas in economic geography.

@article{doi101111j19448287200901056x,
    author = "Martin, Ron",
    title = "Roepke Lecture in Economic Geography—Rethinking Regional Path Dependence: Beyond Lock‐in to Evolution",
    year = "2009",
    journal = "Economic Geography",
    abstract = "abstract This article argues that in its “canonical” form, the path dependence model, with its core concept of lock‐in, affords a restrictive and narrowly applicable account of regional and local industrial evolution, an account moreover that is tied to problematic underpinnings based on equilibrist thinking. As such, the canonical path dependence model actually stresses continuity rather than change. The article explores recent developments in political science, in which there have been active attempts to rethink the application of path dependence to the evolution of institutions so as to emphasize change rather than continuity. These developments are used to argue for a rethinking of path dependence ideas in economic geography.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-8287.2009.01056.x",
    doi = "10.1111/j.1944-8287.2009.01056.x",
    openalex = "W2118388110",
    references = "doi101093jeglbi022, doi101093jeglbl012, doi1043249780203275146, doi104337978184542350600007"
}

abstract This article argues that financialization—shorthand for the growing influence of capital markets, their intermediaries, and processes in contemporary economic and political life—generates an analytical opportunity and political economic imperative to move finance into the heart of economic geographic analysis. Drawing upon long‐standing concerns about the relatively marginal location of finance in economic geography, we emphasize the integral role of finance in connecting the entangled geographies of the economic to the social, the cultural, and the political. In the wake of various “turns” in the discipline, we develop this integrationist approach to finance in ways that retain political economies of states, markets, and social power in our interpretations of geographically uneven development. In this article, we discuss the plural nature of emergent work on financialization and develop three analytical themes to shape our discussion of financialization. Next, we elaborate our analytical approach by warning against functional, political, and spatial disconnections traced in the literature on the geographies of money. We then explore how financialization is broadening and deepening the array of agents, relations, and sites that require consideration in economic geography and is generating tensions between territorial and relational spatialities of geographic differentiation. Finally, we address the relative dearth of empirical work by examining the financialization of brands that have shaped the evolution of the brewing business and the development of new derivative instruments to hedge against weather risks. We conclude by arguing that our analysis of financialization demonstrates how finance occupies an integral position within economic geographies and reveals some of the sociospatial relations, constructions, and reach of existing and new actors, relations, and sites in shaping the uneven development of financialized contemporary capitalism.

@article{doi101111j19448287200901057x,
    author = "Pike, Andy and Pollard, Jane",
    title = "Economic Geographies of Financialization",
    year = "2009",
    journal = "Economic Geography",
    abstract = "abstract This article argues that financialization—shorthand for the growing influence of capital markets, their intermediaries, and processes in contemporary economic and political life—generates an analytical opportunity and political economic imperative to move finance into the heart of economic geographic analysis. Drawing upon long‐standing concerns about the relatively marginal location of finance in economic geography, we emphasize the integral role of finance in connecting the entangled geographies of the economic to the social, the cultural, and the political. In the wake of various “turns” in the discipline, we develop this integrationist approach to finance in ways that retain political economies of states, markets, and social power in our interpretations of geographically uneven development. In this article, we discuss the plural nature of emergent work on financialization and develop three analytical themes to shape our discussion of financialization. Next, we elaborate our analytical approach by warning against functional, political, and spatial disconnections traced in the literature on the geographies of money. We then explore how financialization is broadening and deepening the array of agents, relations, and sites that require consideration in economic geography and is generating tensions between territorial and relational spatialities of geographic differentiation. Finally, we address the relative dearth of empirical work by examining the financialization of brands that have shaped the evolution of the brewing business and the development of new derivative instruments to hedge against weather risks. We conclude by arguing that our analysis of financialization demonstrates how finance occupies an integral position within economic geographies and reveals some of the sociospatial relations, constructions, and reach of existing and new actors, relations, and sites in shaping the uneven development of financialized contemporary capitalism.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-8287.2009.01057.x",
    doi = "10.1111/j.1944-8287.2009.01057.x",
    openalex = "W1961642364",
    references = "doi1011770309132507083505"
}

This paper discusses some developments in the theory of the organizational capabilities of the business enterprise. Antecedents are recognized, and some promising new developments and areas for future research are identified. The role of managers in the economic system is highlighted and discussed within the context of economic and organizational research. Suggestions for future developments of dynamic capability research involve employment of evolutionary and behavioral theories.

@article{doi101287orsc10900424,
    author = "Augier, Mie and Teece, David J.",
    title = "Dynamic Capabilities and the Role of Managers in Business Strategy and Economic Performance",
    year = "2009",
    journal = "Organization Science",
    abstract = "This paper discusses some developments in the theory of the organizational capabilities of the business enterprise. Antecedents are recognized, and some promising new developments and areas for future research are identified. The role of managers in the economic system is highlighted and discussed within the context of economic and organizational research. Suggestions for future developments of dynamic capability research involve employment of evolutionary and behavioral theories.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.1090.0424",
    doi = "10.1287/orsc.1090.0424",
    openalex = "W2125520059",
    references = "doi101287orsc10700280"
}

@incollection{doi101016s0169721810010038,
    author = "Dosi, Giovanni and Nelson, Richard R.",
    title = "Technical Change and Industrial Dynamics as Evolutionary Processes",
    year = "2010",
    booktitle = "Handbook of the economics of innovation",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-7218(10)01003-8",
    doi = "10.1016/s0169-7218(10)01003-8",
    openalex = "W1574782094",
    references = "doi101002sici10970266199708187509aidsmj88230co2z, doi101007bf01236366, doi101016b978075069718750010x, doi10106313050879, doi101093oseoinstance00043218, doi101111j146802971997tb00064x, doi1012570895330027247, doi1015159781400879762024, doi10230720048211, doi1023072232409, doi1023072393549, doi1023072393553, doi1023073119338, doi1043249780203275146, doi104337978184542350600007, openalexw1600373605"
}

In this paper, we review the different definitions of resilience and their potential application in explaining the long-term development of urban and regional economies. We reject equilibrist versions of resilience and argue instead that we should seek an understanding of the concept from an evolutionary perspective. After discussing a number of such perspectives, we focus on the adaptive cycle model from panarchy theory to generate testable hypotheses concerning urban and regional resilience. Two case study city-regional economies are used to explore this model. We conclude that the evolutionary adaptive cycle model, though not without problems, warrants further study as a framework for analysing regional economic resilience.

@article{doi101093cjresrsp029,
    author = "Simmie, James and Martin, R.",
    title = "The economic resilience of regions: towards an evolutionary approach",
    year = "2010",
    journal = "Cambridge Journal of Regions Economy and Society",
    abstract = "In this paper, we review the different definitions of resilience and their potential application in explaining the long-term development of urban and regional economies. We reject equilibrist versions of resilience and argue instead that we should seek an understanding of the concept from an evolutionary perspective. After discussing a number of such perspectives, we focus on the adaptive cycle model from panarchy theory to generate testable hypotheses concerning urban and regional resilience. Two case study city-regional economies are used to explore this model. We conclude that the evolutionary adaptive cycle model, though not without problems, warrants further study as a framework for analysing regional economic resilience.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1093/cjres/rsp029",
    doi = "10.1093/cjres/rsp029",
    openalex = "W2118805239",
    references = "doi101093jeglbl012, doi104337978184542350600007"
}

Following last decade’s programmatic papers on Evolutionary Economic Geography, we report on recent empirical advances and how this empirical work can be positioned vis-à-vis other strands of research in economic geography. First, we review studies on the path dependent nature of clustering, and how the evolutionary perspective relates to that of New Economic Geography. Second, we discuss research on agglomeration externalities in Regional Science, and how Evolutionary Economic Geography contributed to this literature with the concepts of cognitive proximity and related variety. Third, we go into the role of institutions in Evolutionary Economic Geography, and we relate this to the way Institutional Economic Geography tends to view institutions. From this discussion, a number of new research challenges are derived.

@article{doi101093jeglbq053,
    author = "Boschma, Ron and Frenken, Koen",
    title = "The emerging empirics of evolutionary economic geography",
    year = "2011",
    journal = "Journal of Economic Geography",
    abstract = "Following last decade’s programmatic papers on Evolutionary Economic Geography, we report on recent empirical advances and how this empirical work can be positioned vis-à-vis other strands of research in economic geography. First, we review studies on the path dependent nature of clustering, and how the evolutionary perspective relates to that of New Economic Geography. Second, we discuss research on agglomeration externalities in Regional Science, and how Evolutionary Economic Geography contributed to this literature with the concepts of cognitive proximity and related variety. Third, we go into the role of institutions in Evolutionary Economic Geography, and we relate this to the way Institutional Economic Geography tends to view institutions. From this discussion, a number of new research challenges are derived.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1093/jeg/lbq053",
    doi = "10.1093/jeg/lbq053",
    openalex = "W2115322324",
    references = "doi101007s001910050089"
}

This article proposes a novel conceptualization of knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship, which can capture the main characteristics of a vital phenomenon in the modern economy. Our conceptualization is based upon the integration of Schumpeterian entrepreneurship, evolutionary economics, and innovation systems approach. It consists of a theoretical definition and a stylized process model. According to this view, knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurs are involved in the creation, diffusion, and use of knowledge; introduce new products and technologies; draw resources and ideas from their innovation system; and introduce change and dynamism into the economy. In the article, we also offer an empirical definition of knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship, which we then use to identify its key characteristics and relevance. We conclude with recommendations for a future research agenda.

@article{doi101007s1118701800602,
    author = "Malerba, Franco and McKelvey, Maureen",
    title = "Knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship integrating Schumpeter, evolutionary economics, and innovation systems",
    year = "2018",
    journal = "Small Business Economics",
    abstract = "This article proposes a novel conceptualization of knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship, which can capture the main characteristics of a vital phenomenon in the modern economy. Our conceptualization is based upon the integration of Schumpeterian entrepreneurship, evolutionary economics, and innovation systems approach. It consists of a theoretical definition and a stylized process model. According to this view, knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurs are involved in the creation, diffusion, and use of knowledge; introduce new products and technologies; draw resources and ideas from their innovation system; and introduce change and dynamism into the economy. In the article, we also offer an empirical definition of knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship, which we then use to identify its key characteristics and relevance. We conclude with recommendations for a future research agenda.",
    url = "https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-018-0060-2",
    doi = "10.1007/s11187-018-0060-2",
    openalex = "W2800290144",
    references = "doi101016s0169721810010038"
}