2008RePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsRequires access

Some Second Thoughts on Monopolistic Distortions and Endogenous Growth

Lutz G. Arnold, Christian Bauer

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

The most fundamental proposition about growth and competition is that there is a tradeoff between static welfare and long-term growth. This paper reconsiders this basic proposition in an increasing product variety endogenous growth model with competitive markets for 'old' innovative products and for a traditional good. We shed light on some implications of monopolistic distortions which tend to be ignored by standard models. First, no growth may be better than some growth, since modest positive growth potentially requires sizeable static welfare losses. Second, the economy may converge to a steady state with zero growth, even though another (saddle-point stable) steady state with positive growth exists if the initial share of 'cheap' competitive markets is sufficiently high, as this implies a relatively low demand for 'expensive' innovative goods. Third, such a 'no-growth trap' may happen in a world economy made up of several countries engaged in free trade with each other. The policy implications are that growth-enhancing policies may be misguided and that quick deregulation as well as quick trade liberalization can lead to stagnation in the long term.

Open-access reader

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The most fundamental proposition about growth and competition is that there is a tradeoff between static welfare and long-term growth. This paper reconsiders this basic proposition in an increasing product variety endogenous growth model with competitive markets for 'old' innovative products and for a traditional good. We shed light on some implications of monopolistic distortions which tend to be ignored by standard models. First, no growth may be better than some growth, since modest positive growth potentially requires sizeable static welfare losses. Second, the economy may converge to a steady state with zero growth, even though another (saddle-point stable) steady state with positive growth exists if the initial share of 'cheap' competitive markets is sufficiently high, as this implies a relatively low demand for 'expensive' innovative goods. Third, such a 'no-growth trap' may happen in a world economy made up of several countries engaged in free trade with each other. The policy implications are that growth-enhancing policies may be misguided and that quick deregulation as well as quick trade liberalization can lead to stagnation in the long term.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The most fundamental proposition about growth and competition is that there is a tradeoff between static welfare and long-term growth. This paper reconsiders this basic proposition in an increasing product variety endogenous growth model with competitive markets for 'old' innovative products and for a traditional good. We shed light on some implications of monopolistic distortions which tend to be ignored by standard models. First, no growth may be better than some growth, since modest positive growth potentially requires sizeable static welfare losses. Second, the economy may converge to a steady state with zero growth, even though another (saddle-point stable) steady state with positive growth exists if the initial share of 'cheap' competitive markets is sufficiently high, as this implies a relatively low demand for 'expensive' innovative goods. Third, such a 'no-growth trap' may happen in a world economy made up of several countries engaged in free trade with each other. The policy implications are that growth-enhancing policies may be misguided and that quick deregulation as well as quick trade liberalization can lead to stagnation in the long term.

Key concepts: Monopolistic competition, Endogenous growth theory, Economics, Welfare, Creative destruction, Liberalization, Deregulation, Microeconomics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Some Second Thoughts on Monopolistic Distortions and Endogenous Growth — Research Paper | ScholarLens