Dynamic structuralism and path-dependence : industrial economics in Italy - article ; n°1 ; vol.73, pg 65-89

Cristiano Antonelli

Description

Revue d'économie industrielle - Année 1995 - Volume 73 - Numéro 1 - Pages 65-89
A dynamic path-dependent structuralism has been developed in Italian industrial economics building on the analysis of the role of the systemic and non-ergodic nature of economic change and hence of historic time in the evolution of the organization of firms and industries, the characters of technological change and regional clusters. The common thread of many contributions of industrial economics in the last twenty years seems to be the attempt to elaborate an enlarged and dynamic notion of «industrial structure» that explores the characters o the interaction between structures and conduct.
L'économie industrielle italienne a développé un structuralisme dynamique, avec dépendance de sentier. Elle s'est appuyée pour cela sur le rôle de la nature systémique du changement économique et par conséquent du temps historique dans l'évolution de l'organisation des entreprises et des industries, des caractéristiques du changement technologique et des agglomérations régionales. La tendance commune de nombreuses contributions dans les vingt dernières années semble avoir consisté à essayer de construire une conception plus dynamique de la structure industrielle permettant d'analyser les modalités des interactions entre la structure et les comportements.
25 pages
Source : Persée ; Ministère de la jeunesse, de l’éducation nationale et de la recherche, Direction de l’enseignement supérieur, Sous-direction des bibliothèques et de la documentation.

Informations

• Publié par: REVUE_D-ECONOMIE_INDUSTRIELLE
• Publié le: 01 janvier 1995
• Nombre de lectures: 89
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 1 Mo

Extrait

Cristiano Antonelli
Dynamic structuralism and path-dependence : industrial
economics in Italy
In: Revue d'économie industrielle. Vol. 73. 3e trimestre 1995. pp. 65-89.
Abstract
A dynamic path-dependent structuralism has been developed in Italian industrial economics building on the analysis of the role of
the systemic and non-ergodic nature of economic change and hence of historic time in the evolution of the organization of firms
and industries, the characters of technological and regional clusters. The common thread of many contributions of
industrial economics in the last twenty years seems to be the attempt to elaborate an enlarged and dynamic notion of «industrial
structure» that explores the characters o the interaction between structures and conduct.
Résumé
L'économie industrielle italienne a développé un structuralisme dynamique, avec dépendance de sentier. Elle s'est appuyée pour
cela sur le rôle de la nature systémique du changement économique et par conséquent du temps historique dans l'évolution de
l'organisation des entreprises et des industries, des caractéristiques du changement technologique et des agglomérations
régionales. La tendance commune de nombreuses contributions dans les vingt dernières années semble avoir consisté à
essayer de construire une conception plus dynamique de la structure industrielle permettant d'analyser les modalités des
interactions entre la structure et les comportements.
Citer ce document / Cite this document :
Antonelli Cristiano. Dynamic structuralism and path-dependence : industrial economics in Italy. In: Revue d'économie
industrielle. Vol. 73. 3e trimestre 1995. pp. 65-89.
doi : 10.3406/rei.1995.1585
http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/rei_0154-3229_1995_num_73_1_1585Cristiano ANTONELLI
Dipartimento di Economia Università di Torino
DYNAMIC STRUCTURALISM
AND PATH-DEPENDENCE:
INDUSTRIAL ECONOMICS IN ITALY (l)
Key-words : Structure, Variety, Change.
I. — INTRODUCTION
At the beginning of the nineties a large part of industrial economics in Italy
builds upon a dynamic structuralist approach, derived from the structuralist
paradigm, «structure - conduct - performance». An approach to which many
Italian economists had made important contributions (Sylos, 1956; 1984;
1992; Lombardini, 1953; 1971; 1976; R.Bianchi, 1980; Momigliano, 1975;
Modigliani, 1958). In fact Italian scholars have paid attention to the structure
of the industry as the main element to understand the economic dynamics, and
therefore they are to-day in a strong position in the new wave of studies devo
ted to analyze structural change, endogenous growth and innovation.
The structure-conduct-performance model placed great importance on consi
dering the importance of industrial structure defined in terms of concentration,
minimum efficient size, diversification, integration and technology as paramet
ers with which to interpret the conduct of firms and the variance in perfo
rmances in conditions of imperfect competition. In so doing the structure-
conduct-performance model appeared to provide an alternative approach to
face numerous analytical problems of indeterminacy and multiple equilibria
which features the models of oligopolistic competition of Cournotian derivat
ion. The research agenda of the structuralist approach however was limited by
its static and exogenous assumptions about the determinants of the industrial
structure. During the seventies and the eighties, interest in the traditional
(1) The comments of Mario Amendola, Roberto Marchionatti, Jacques De Bandt and two ano
nymous referees to previous versions of this paper are acknowledged. The support of the
National and Local Funds of M.U.R.S.T. is also gratefully
REVUE D'ÉCONOMIE INDUSTRIELLE — n° 73, 3a trimestre 1995 65 structuralist approach declined rapidly in the angloamerican literature, but
much less so in the Italian context (2).
In Italy instead a consistent effort to elaborate a dynamic structuralism has
gradually emerged. The analysis of the effects of the systemic and non-ergo-
dic nature of economic change and hence of historic time on the economic
organization of firms and industries, on the characters of technological chan
ge and on the role of regional factors, acts as a common source of guidance
and methodology. So far one can articulate the hypothesis that a strong com
mon thread in the variety of contributions to industrial economics in the last
twenty years seems to be provided by the attempt to elaborate an enlarged and
dynamic notion of «industrial structure» that explores the systemic characters
of the interaction between structures and conduct. In a dynamic structuralism
in fact the conduct of firms at any time t is analysed as determined by the cha
racters of the preexisting structure, and yet, especially when it consists in the
introduction of Schumpeterian innovations, not only in products, but also in
processes, organizations, intermediary inputs, location, and factor markets, it
can change them in depth. Hence conduct affects both performances and the
structure at time t+1.
The basic flavour of dynamic structuralism parallels the efforts to build an
industrial dynamics (Mueller, 1986; Carlsson,1987) and to analyse the role of
institutions (Chandler 1990; Williamson, 1975 and 1985) and of selection
(Saviotti-Metcalfe, 1991; Metcalfe, 1992) in the evolution of routines, firms,
markets and technologies (Nelson-Winter, 1982; Dosi-Freeman-Nelson-
Silverberg-Soete 1988) and shares many elements of path-dependence analys
is, now spreading in the angloamerican literature (David, 1975; 1985 and
1993; Arthur, 1989; Krugman, 1991).
In dynamic structuralism in fact the direction of change and its rate are dete
rmined by the specific characters of the intentional interaction of agents
constrained by bounded rationality and limited knowledge and the set of struc
tural features into which their action is embedded or «localized». This dyna
mic structuralism as well as path-dependence analysis seem in fact able to
conjugate the pervasive role of preexisting structures -a past-dependent
approach- with the scope for analysis of the behaviour of intentional agents.
(2) This review has no pretension to be exhaustive: important contributions using other
approaches such as the game theoretic have been made by Delbono (1988,1989,1990),
DeFraia-Delbono(1989), De Nicolo'-Delbono(1991) and Bonanno (1988) who apply this
approach to analysing the outcome of oligopolistic rivalry in industries characterized by
high barriers to entry, vertical integration together with patent races and spillovers of tech
nological externalities.
66 REVUE D'ÉCONOMIE INDUSTRIELLE — n° 73, 3e trimestre 1995 This paper presents a selective review of the contributions of Italian authors
to a dynamic version of the structuralist approach. The most significant contri
butions (3) to such an evolution will be presented and discussed as follows:
i. The economic organization of firms and industries,
ii. Regional Interdependence in industrial and technological districts,
iii. The analysis of technological change and the process of innovation.
II. — THE ECONOMIC ORGANIZATION OF FIRMS
AND INDUSTRIES
The structure-conduct-performance model emphasizes the relevance of
increasing returns mainly based on technical economies of scale in determi
ning firms profitability and therefore the marginal and interstitial survival of
the small firms.
At the beginning of the seventies the discussion about the new emerging
model of industrial organization based upon low levels of vertical integration
and high levels of cooperation between small firms and large corporations- the
so called «decentramento produttivo»- broke out setting off a radical revision
in Italian industrial economics. The theory of the firm returned to be the centre
of attention. The inadequacy of the of the firm in neoclassical setting
and the need to take into account the cooperation as well the competition beca
me the issue. As Salvati (1974) noted, the traditional theory of the firm could
not tackle these problems because «the underlying model concerns the beha
viour of single firms and not the relationship between firms».
A detailed interpretation of the very important role played by small firms and
above all by their cooperation with large firms was proposed within a structur
alist model at the beginning of the debate by Brusco (1973). He remarked that
a strong dualism featured the labour market, so that the an ample supply of
unskilled labour at low cost explains the continuous entry of new micro-firms,
especially when the economies of scale and concentration were of little import
ance, and product differentiation and entrepreneurial energy were high
(Graziani, 1975). Fua' (1976, and 1985) with a long series of empirical studies
in to the characteristics of economic and industrial growth in Italy suggested
that the industrial structure of countries with late industrialization, is characte
rized by a process of diffusion of technological and organizational capabilities
that are