Natalie Watkins
10-8-2015, City + Metropolitan Econ
Essay Responses for Mid-Term
2. From our pantheon of theorists (Ricardo, Marshall, Skitovsky, Schumpeter, Vernon & Hoover, Chinitz, Markusen, Piore & Sabel, Galster, Norton & Rees, Perroux, Christaller, Losch, and Sassen), which theorist (or 2-person team of theorists) do you find most convincing? Why? Be specific, and provide examples.
I find Hoover & Vernon to be the most convincing economic theorists. They describe healthy economic growth through the Product Cycle Theory based on Schumpeterian ideals which contains the following stages: small firms with specialized skills innovate, production is standardized and can move into areas with cheaper labor, these ‘matured’ activities leave a hole in the original growth pole which can be a seedbed where new industries can start the cycle over again. …show more content…
This includes trading of furs that led into logging, and then into manufacturing. Healthy continuation of this cycle with new innovation could have prevented the fall of Detroit. Hoover & Vernon’s theory can also be seen in the transitions from cassette tapes to CDs and then MP3 players and music streaming devices.
This theory is most convincing to me, or rather refreshing to me because it is not as centralized on the concept of large agglomeration economics and the race-to-the-bottom prize of lower production costs. Although there is certainly much “racing to the bottom” as products develop and mature, the saga regenerates itself through continual seedbed capacity for innovation rather than propulsive industry which is criticized be Chinitz as being too strongly correlated with the size of the resulting agglomeration
10-8-2015, City + Metropolitan Econ
Essay Responses for Mid-Term
2. From our pantheon of theorists (Ricardo, Marshall, Skitovsky, Schumpeter, Vernon & Hoover, Chinitz, Markusen, Piore & Sabel, Galster, Norton & Rees, Perroux, Christaller, Losch, and Sassen), which theorist (or 2-person team of theorists) do you find most convincing? Why? Be specific, and provide examples.
I find Hoover & Vernon to be the most convincing economic theorists. They describe healthy economic growth through the Product Cycle Theory based on Schumpeterian ideals which contains the following stages: small firms with specialized skills innovate, production is standardized and can move into areas with cheaper labor, these ‘matured’ activities leave a hole in the original growth pole which can be a seedbed where new industries can start the cycle over again. …show more content…
This includes trading of furs that led into logging, and then into manufacturing. Healthy continuation of this cycle with new innovation could have prevented the fall of Detroit. Hoover & Vernon’s theory can also be seen in the transitions from cassette tapes to CDs and then MP3 players and music streaming devices.
This theory is most convincing to me, or rather refreshing to me because it is not as centralized on the concept of large agglomeration economics and the race-to-the-bottom prize of lower production costs. Although there is certainly much “racing to the bottom” as products develop and mature, the saga regenerates itself through continual seedbed capacity for innovation rather than propulsive industry which is criticized be Chinitz as being too strongly correlated with the size of the resulting agglomeration