Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Learning, market selection and the evolution of industrial structures

  • Published:
Small Business Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Industrial economics is a rich source of ‘puzzles’ for economic theory. One of them — certainly the most discussed — regards the co-existence of firms (and plants) of different sizes, displaying rather invariant skewed distributions. Other ‘puzzles’, however, concern the sectoral specificities in industrial structures, the persistence of asymmetric corporate performances and the dynamics of entry and exit. The paper reports some preliminary results on evolutionary modeling of the links between the microeconomics of innovation, the patterns of industrial change and some observable invariances in industrial structures.

First, the paper reviews a few of these empirical regularities in structures and in the patterns of change. Second, the paper discusses the achievements and limits of interpretations of the evidence based on equilibrium theories. Finally, it presents a model where these regularities are explained as emergent properties deriving from non equilibrium interactions among technologically heterogeneous firms. Moreover, simulation exercises show that also the intersectoral variety in the observed industrial structures and dynamics can be interpreted on the grounds of underlying specificities in the processes of technological learning — which is called ‘technological regimes’ — and of the processes of market interactions — i.e. ‘market regimes’.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acs, Z. J. and D. B. Audretsch, 1989, ‘Small-Firm Entry in U.S. Manufacturing’,Economica 56, 255–265.

    Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z. J. and D. B. Audretsch, 1990,Innovation and Small Firms, Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aldrich, H. and E. Auster, 1986, ‘Even Giants Started as Dwarves’,Research in Organizational Behaviour 8, 46–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., 1991, ‘New-Firm Survival and the Technological Regime’,Review of Economics and Statistics 60, 441–450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., 1995,Innovation and Industry Evolution, Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B. and T. Mahmood, 1995, ‘New Firm Survival: New Results Using a Hazard Function’,Review of Economics and Statistics 64, forthcoming.

  • Baily, M. N. and A. K. Chakrabarty, 1985, ‘Innovation and Productivity in US Industry’,Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 2, 609–632.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, J. R and P. K. Gorecki, 1991, ‘Entry, Exit and Productivity Growth’, in P. Geroski and J. Schwalbach (eds.),Entry and Market Contestability: An International Comparison, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 244–256.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barca, F., 1985, ‘Tendenze nella Struttura Dimensionale dell'Industria Italiana: Una Verifica Empirica del “Modello di Specializzazione Flessibile”’,Politica Economica 1, 71–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beesley, M.E. and R. T. Hamilton, 1984, ‘Small Firms' Seedbed Role and the Concept of Turbulence’,Journal of Industrial Economics 33, 217–232.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bianco, M. and P. Sestito, 1992, ‘Entry, Growth and Market Structure: A Preliminary Analysis of the Italian Case’, presented at the International Conference on ‘Birth and Start-up of Small Firms’, Milano.

  • Bond, R. S., 1975, ‘Mergers and Mobility among the Largest Manufacturing Corporations, 1984 to 1988’,Antitrust Bullettin 20, 505–519.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cable, J. and J. Schwalbach, 1991, ‘International Comparison of Entry and Exit’, in P. Geroski and J. Schwalbach (eds.),Entry and Market Contestability: An International Comparison, Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 257–281.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calvo, G. A. and S. Wellisz, 1980, ‘Technology, Entrepreneurs and Firm Size’,Quarterly Journal of Economics 95, 663–677.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiaromonte, F. and G. Dosi, 1992, ‘The Microfoundations of Competitiveness and Their Macroeconomic Implications’, in D. Foray and C. Freeman (eds.),Technology and the Wealth of Nations, London: Pinter Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collins, N. R. and L. E. Preston, 1961, ‘The Size Structure of the Largest Industrial Firms’,American Economic Review 51, 986–1011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conlinsk, J., 1980, ‘Costly Optimizers vs. Cheap Imitators’,Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 6, 46–61.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G., 1982, ‘Technological Paradigms and Technological Trejectories. A Suggested Interpretation of the Determinant and Direction of Technological Change’,Research Policy 11, 147–162.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G., 1984,Technical Change and Industrial Transformation. The Theory and an Application to the Semiconductor Industry, London: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G., 1988, ‘Sources, Procedures and Microeconomic Effect of Innovation’,Journal of Economic Literature 26, 1120–1171.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G. and L. Orsenigo, 1988, ‘Industrial Structure and Technical Change’, in A. Heertie (ed.),Innovation, Technology and Finance, Oxford: Blackwell, 14–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G. and R. Salvatore, 1992, ‘The Structure of Industrial Production and the Boundaries between Organization and Markets’, in A. Scott and M. Stolper (eds.),Pathways to Regional Development, Boulder: Westview Press, 1–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G., K. Pavitt and L. Soete, 1990,The Economics of Technical Change and International Trade, New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dosi, G., D. J. Teece and S. Winter, 1992, ‘Towards a Theory of Corporate Coherence: Preliminary Remarks’, in G. Dosi, R. Giannetti and P.A. Toninelli (eds.),Technology and Enterprises in a Historical Perspective, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 185–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dunne, T., M. J. Roberts and L. Samuelson, 1988, ‘Patterns of Firm Entry and Exit in U.S. Manufacturing Industries’,Rand Journal of Economics 19, 495–515.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, D. S., 1987a, ‘The Relationship Between Firm Growth, Size and Age: Estimates for 100 Manufacturing Industries’,Journal of Industrial Economics 35, 567–581.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, D. S., 1987b, ‘Tests of Alternative Theories of Firm Growth’,Journal of Political Economy 95, 657–674.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foray, D. and C. Freeman, 1993,Technology and the Wealth of Nations, London: Pinter Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, C., 1982,The Economics of Industrial Innovation, London: Pinter Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geroski, P. and A. Jacquemin, 1988, ‘The Persistence of Profits: An International Comparison’,Economic Journal 98, 375–390.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geroski, P. and S. Machin, 1992, ‘The Dynamics of Corporate Growth’, mimeo, London Business School.

  • Geroski, P. and J. Schwalbach (eds.), 1991,Entry and Market Contestability: An International Comparison, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbons, M. and J. S. Metcalfe, 1986, ‘Technological Variety and the Process of Competition’, mimeo, University of Manchester.

  • Griliches, Z., 1986, ‘Productivity, R&D and Basic Research at the Firm Level in the 1970's’,American Economic Review 76, 141–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, B. H., 1987, ‘The Relationship Between Firm Size and Firm Growth in the U.S. Manufacturing Sector’,Journal of Industrial Economics 35, 583–600.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M. T. and G. R. Carroll, 1991,Dynamics of Organizational Populations: Density, Competition and Legitimation, New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, M. T. and J. Freeman, 1989,Organizational Ecology, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, P. E. and S. J. Prais, 1956, ‘The Analysis of Business Concentration: A Statistical Approach’,Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 119, 150–191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, R. M., 1988,The Failure of Established Firms in the Face of Technical Change: A Study of Photolithographic Alignment Equipment, Dept. of Business Economics, Harvard University Cambridge, Mass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hymer, S. and P. Pashigian, 1962, ‘Firm Size and Rate of Growth’,Journal of Political Economy 52, 556–569.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ijiri, Y. and H. A. Simon, 1977,Skew Distribution and the Size of Business Firms, Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iwai, K., 1984a, ‘Schumpeterian Dynamics: An Evolutionary Model of Innovation and Imitation’,Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 5, 159–190.

    Google Scholar 

  • Iwai, K., 1984b, ‘Schumpeterian Dynamics, Part II: Technological Progress, Firm Growth and “Economic Selection”’,Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 5, 321–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaffe, A. B., 1986, ‘Technological Opportunity and Spillovers of R&D: Evidence from Firms' Patents, Profits and Market Value’,American Economic Review 76, 984–1001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jovanovic, B., 1982, ‘Selection and Evolution of Industry’,Econometrica 50, 649–670.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kalecki, M., 1945, ‘On the Gibrat Law’,Econometrica 13, 161–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A. D. H., 1954,Big Enterprise in a Competitive System, Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klepper, S., 1992, ‘Entry, Exit and Innovation over the Product Life Cycle: The Dynamics of First Mover Advantages, Declining Product Innovation and Market Failure’, paper presented at the International J.A. Schumpeter Society, Kyoto, August.

  • Klepper, S. and E. Graddy, 1990, ‘The Evolution of New Industries and the Determinants of Market Structure’,Rand Journal of Economics 21, 27–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, S. J., 1989,Entry and Industry Evolution in the ATM Manufacturers' Market, Ann Arbor: UMI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane, D. A., 1992, ‘Artificial Worlds and Economics’, SantaFe, SFI, Working Paper 92.09.048.

  • Levin, R., A. Klevorick, R. R. Nelson and S. Winter, 1987, ‘Appropriating the Returns from Industrial Research and Development’,Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 3, 147–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lucas, R. E. Jr, 1978, ‘On the Size Distribution of Business Firms’,Bell Journal of Economics 9, 508–523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mahmood, T., 1992, ‘Does the Hazard Rate of New Plants Vary Between Low-and High-Tech Industries?’,Small Business Economics 4, 201–209.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malerba, F., 1985,The Semiconductor Business, London: Pinter Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malerba, F., 1992, ‘Learning by Firms and Incremental Technical Change’,Economic Journal 94, 213–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malerba, F. and L. Orsenigo, 1989, ‘Technological Regimes and Patterns of Innovation: A Theoretical and Empirical Investigation of the Italian Case’, in A. Heertje and M. Perlman (eds.),Evolving Technology and Market Structure, Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malerba, F. and L. Orsenigo, 1995, ‘Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation’,Cambridge Journal of Economics 19, 47–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Malerba, F. and L. Orsenigo, 1993, ‘Technological Regimes and Firm Behaviour’,Industrial and Corporate Change 2(1), 74–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mansfield, E., 1962, ‘Entry, Gibrat's Law, Innovation and the Growth of Firms’,American Economic Review 52, 1023–1051.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsili, O., 1992,Apprendimento, Selezione e Dinamica delle Strutture Industriali, Faculty of Statistics, Rome.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mermelstein, D., 1969, ‘Large Industrial Corporations and Asset Shares’,American Economic Review 59, 531–541.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, W. G., 1988,Dynamic Commercialization: An Organizational Economic Analysis of Innovation in the Medical Diagnostic Imaging Industry, University of California, Berkely, UMI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, D. C., 1990, ‘Profits and the Process of Competition’, in D. C. Mueller (ed.),The Dynamics of Company Profits: An International Comparison, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, R. R. and S. Winter, 1982,An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nicolis and I. Prigogine, 1989,Exploring Complexity An Instruction, San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Odagiri, K. and H. Yamawaki, 1990, ‘Persistence of Profits in Japan’, in D. C. Mueller (ed.),The Dynamics of Company Profits: An International Comparison, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 169–186.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pakes, A. and R. Ericson, 1987, ‘Empirical Implications of Alternative Models of Firm Dynamics’, Social System Research Institute Workshop series, University of Wisconsin.

  • Patel, P. and K. Pavitt, 1991, ‘Europe's Technological Performance’, in C. Freeman, M. Sharp and W. Walker (eds.),Technology and the Future of Europe: Global Competition and the Environment in the 1990s, London: Pinter Publisher, 37–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pavitt, K., 1984, ‘Sectoral Patterns of Technical Change: Towards a Taxonomy and a Theory’,Research Policy 13, 343–373.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, B. D. and B. A. Kirchhoff, 1989, ‘Formation, Growth and Survival: Small Firm Dynamics in the U.S. Economy’,Small Business Economics 1, 65–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverberg, G., 1987, ‘Technical Progress, Capital Accumulation and Effective Demand: A Self-Organization Model’, in D. Batten, J. Casti and B. Johansson (eds.),Economic Evolution and Structural Adjustment, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York: Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silverberg, G., G. Dosi and L. Orsenigo, 1988, ‘Innovation, diversity and Diffusion: A Self-Organization Model’,The Economic Journal 98, 1032–1054.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A., 1955, ‘On a Class of Skew Distribution Functions’,Biometrika 42, 425–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. A. and C. P. Bonini, 1958, ‘The Size Distribution of Business Firms’,American Economic Review 48, 607–617.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, A. and G. Whittington, 1975, ‘The Size and Growth of Firms’,Review of Economic Studies 42, 15–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suarez, F. F. and J. M. Utterback, 1991, ‘Dominant Design and the Survival of Firms’, WP, NO 42-91, International Center for Research on the Management of Technology, MIT.

  • Suarez, F. F. and J. M. Utterback, 1992, ‘Innovation, Competition and Industry Structure’,Research Policy 4, 67–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sylos-Labini, P., 1967,Oligopoly and Technical Progress, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winter, S. G., 1984, ‘Schumpeterian Competition in Alternative Technological Regimes’,Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organization 5, 287–320.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winter, S. G., 1990, ‘Survival, Selection and Inheritance in Evolutionary Theories of Organization’, in J. V. Singh (ed.),Organizational Evolution: New Directions, Newbury Park: Sage, 269–297.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Economics, University of Rome ‘La Sapienza’, Italy

    Giovanni Dosi & Orietta Marsili

  2. Department of Economics, Bocconi University, Milano

    Luigi Orsenigo

  3. Tecsiel, Rome

    Roberta Salvatore

Authors
  1. Giovanni Dosi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Orietta Marsili
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Luigi Orsenigo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Roberta Salvatore
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Additional information

This research has undertaken within an on going project sponsored by the Italian Research Council (CNR, ‘Progetto strategico’,Cambiamento tecnologico e sviluppo economico). Support by the Consortium on Competitiveness and Cooperation Centre for Research in Management, University of California at Berkeley is also gratefully acknowledged.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dosi, G., Marsili, O., Orsenigo, L. et al. Learning, market selection and the evolution of industrial structures. Small Bus Econ 7, 411–436 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01112463

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01112463

Keywords

Search

Navigation