This study looks at how financialization has changed technology innovation strategy. It is our contention that, as conditions of managerial myopia worsen in line with deepening financialization, economic entities direct technological innovation strategy toward incremental innovation at the expense of radical innovation that involves high-risk and long-term investment. We test this hypothesis on data for thirty-one OECD countries between 1990 and 2006 and use both generalized method of moments estimation and Poisson regression models. We find that, as financialization advanced, the radicalness of technological innovation declined, while the number of patent registrations increased. This finding could be the result of recent trends wherein financialization has led to a rise in corporate funding through financial markets and an increase in the importance of patents, which, in turn, has boosted the motivation of companies to increase their patent registrations quantitatively. On the other hand, the qualitative importance of these patents (radicalness of technological innovation) decreased over the period of study, reflecting growing short-termism in technological innovation strategy.

This study empirically tests the effects of income inequality on growth for 43 countries from 1991 to 2014 based on a cumulative growth model. The results show that, first, the estimation results using a reduced equation reveal a positive correlation between the income inequalities of lagging countries and the respective growth gaps with the frontier country. This confirms that the increase in income inequality negatively affects growth. Secondly, a cumulative growth model using 3SLS estimation shows that income inequality has a negative effect only on investment. However, we fail to find correlations between technological innovation and income inequality and between human capital accumulation and income inequality. Considering that investment has a positive impact on productivity, we conclude that income inequality has a negative impact on investment and that the resulting sluggish investment has a negative impact on productivity, which in turn negatively influences growth. Third, contrary to Kaldor and Barro’s prediction, we find that income inequality in developing countries is negatively correlated with growth, particularly for investment. The effects of income inequality on investment are found to be similar in both developed and developing countries. We also find region-specific differences in the paths through which income inequality affects sustainable economic growth.

This study aims to investigate the determinants of service export market performance, using OECD data. Real exchange rate, technology variables and institutional environment are introduced as explanatory variables in regressions for 17 OECD countries over 2001–2007. Some of the major findings from the study can be summarized as follows. There was no robust evidence that cost-related factors have an impact on service export performances. Controlling for cost changes, it was found that technology factors (R&D intensity, fixed capital formation and IT investment) have a positive effect on export market share dynamics. It is also clear that the institutional factors (human capital, free trade environment and English as an official language) have a positive impact on service export performances.

Does international specialization in producer services warrant sustainable growth? This paper seeks to answer the question regarding the relationship between trade specialization in producer services and productivity growth in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries using a difference generalized method of moments. Three indicators of trade specialization (export ratio, revealed comparative advantage, and trade specification index) are adopted as explanatory variables in productivity growth regressions for 12 OECD countries over 1987–2002. The results show both the positive and negative impact of international specialization on producer services on productivity growth; it is only when one country specializes in technology-intensive (or R&D-intensive) producer services that international specialization in producer services has a positive impact on productivity growth.

본 연구는 한국노동패널자료 2000년～2012년 개인자료를 활용하여 한국사회의 기회불평등을 모수적 추정방법을 이용하여 분석하였다. 분석결과 첫째, 2000년～2012년 기간 동안 전체 연령(30세～60세) 분석의 기회균등지수는 0.04～0.052 정도이며 전체 소득불평등에 대한 기회불평등의 기여정도는 약 18%～23% 수준이다. 즉 전체 소득불평등의 약 1/5정도가 기회불평등에 기인한 것으로 분석되었다. 둘째, 우리나라의 기회불평등에서 성별차이가 가족환경보다 더 중요한 역할을 한다는 것을 발견할 수 있었다. 다시 말해, 한국사회에서 환경적 조건에 의해서 결정되는 기회불평등은 노동시장에서 성별 임금격차가 매우 크게 영향을 미치고 있음을 확인할 수 있었다. 반면, 여성간의 기회불평등은 감소한 것으로 추정되며, 이는 남녀를 합한 전체의 기회불평등을 감소시킨 것으로 나타났다. 그러나 30대 남성의 경우 10년 전에 비하여 기회불평등이 증가한 것을 확인할 수 있었다. 셋째, 30대 남성의 기회불평등 증가를 직접효과(환경이 직접적으로 소득에 영향을 미치는 효과)와 간접효과(환경이 노력을 매개로 소득에 영향을 미치는 효과)로 구분하여 살펴보면, 지난 10년간 30대 남성의 기회불평등 증가의 83.3%가 직접효과에 기인함을 확인할 수 있었다. 즉, 아버지의 배경 등의 환경이 기회불평등에 직접적으로 영향을 미치는 효과가 대부분을 차지하고 있다는 것이다. 본 연구는 이상의 분석결과에 대한 정책적 함의로서 소득불평등을 개선시킬 수 있는 정책, 고용의 질 개선을 위한 정책, 그리고 공교육에 대한 지출확대 등을 제시하고 있다.