You are looking at 1 - 4 of 4 items

  • Author or Editor: Guilherme de Oliveira x
Clear All Modify Search
You do not have access to this content

Guilherme de Oliveira and Eduardo Prado Souza

The extensive empirical effort made in the growth and distribution literature to estimate whether economic growth is wage- or profit-led has not sufficiently considered the theoretical foundation of the Neo-Kaleckian model. This paper attempts to respect key tenets of the investment function by estimating a panel-data model in which country-specific structural characteristics and possible endogenous relationships in income distribution and economic growth are explicitly considered. The identification strategy is based on several estimates of the capital stock and the rate of capacity utilization for 61 countries over the period between 1995 and 2014. The main results suggest that the growth regime was wage-led in developed countries, while most developing countries exhibited a profit-led growth regime. Interestingly, however, while the profit-led regime occurs through the international trade channel in Latin American countries, in other developing countries, the causality channel is mainly related to the domestic investment function.

You do not have access to this content

Renata Lèbre La Rovere, Marcelo Gerson Pessoa de Matos, Guilherme de Oliveira Santos and Antonio Pedro da Costa e Silva Lima

This chapter aims to discuss possibilities of bridging the innovation systems (IS) and the entrepreneurial ecosystems (EE) literatures. While the former explains how actors interact on innovation development and how institutions contribute to this process, the latter focuses on the entrepreneur as the unit of analysis. However, both literatures are important to explain why and how firms innovate. Thus, we analyze the main similarities and differences between the entrepreneurial ecosystems and the innovation systems approaches regarding three critical dimensions: the individual, the firm/organization and the institutional context. We also highlight three types of entrepreneurship that demonstrate the benefits of integrating the two literatures: knowledge-intensive entrepreneurship, social entrepreneurship and green entrepreneurship. After the introduction, section 2 presents the IS and EE literatures and section 3 their similarities and differences. Section 4 presents the concepts that require an integration of IS and EE and section 5 the conclusions.