Factor Price Variation and the Hicksian Hypothesis: A Microeconomic Model

Quantity or Quality: The Impact of Labour Saving Innovation on Us and Japanese Growth Rates, 1960-2004*

“…The novel contribution of this paper, accruing from those of Sato and Ramachandran (1987) and Sato (1970), is that we analyse not only how the TFP has increased or decreased, but also analyse separately the efficiency of capital and the efficiency of labour. The result of this analysis will allow us to make a policy proposal that in order to raise TFP growth, we have to consider how and how much the efficiency of eitheror both of capital and labour must be increased.…”

A Note on Modelling Endogenous Growth

“…But they did not consider biased technical progress. That step was taken in Sate and Ramachandran (1987). They showed that, in a steady state, the bias in technical progress will just counterbalance the differential growth in factor prices.…”

The factor bias of technical change and technology adoption under uncertainty

“…More recently, Sato and Ramachandran (1987) have shown a profit-maximizing firm that, faced with differential increases in input prices, could develop compensating cost-reducing technologies. They have also proven the Hicksian proposition for a monopolistic firm with an infinite time horizon.…”

“…We also assume that the firm finances all its research internally and that the levels of research expenditure as a proportion of total revenue, e^PY, determine the rate of ^If we do not assume full internalization, there will be an economic externality; that is, an individual firm can do nothing to capture the benefits of technical change through that firm's own behavior. A very common assumption in the industrial organization literature on endogenous technical progress is a noncompetitive market structure (Sato and Ramachandran, 1987). However, for simplicity, this study does not assume a noncompetitive market.…”

“…One would imagine that the decision to develop and adopt an innovation would depend on the degree of uncertainty and risk to the producer. It has not always been possible to ^See, for example, Antle (1984Antle ( , 1986, Binswanger (1974aBinswanger ( , 1974bBinswanger ( , 1978, Fellner (1961), Hayami and Ruttan (1985), Schwartz (1969, 1982), Kennedy (1964), Nordhaus (1973), Sato (1970), Sato and Ramachandran (1987), Sato and Suzawa (1983), and Stevenson (1980). explain why certain technologies have been developed and adopted in one country or region and not in another.…”