Article thumbnail

Government spending composition, technical change and wage inequality

By Guido Cozzi and Giammario Impullitti


In this paper we argue that government spending played a significant role in stimulating the wave of innovation that hit the U.S. economy in the late 1970s and in the 1980s, as well as the simultaneous increase in inequality and in education attainment. Since the late 1970’s U.S. policy makers began targeting commercial innovations more directly and explicitly. We focus on the shift in the composition of public demand towards high-tech goods which, by increasing the market-size of innovative firms, functions as a de-facto innovation policy tool. We build a quality-ladder non- scale growth model with heterogeneous industries and endogenous supply of skills, and show that increases in the technological content of public spending stimulates R&D, raise the wage of skilled workers and, at the same time, stimulate human capital accumulation. A calibrated version of the model suggests that government policy explains between 12 and 15 percent of the observed increase in wage inequality in the period 1976-91.R&D-driven growth theory, heteregeneous industries, fiscal policy composition, innovation policy, wage inequality, educational choice.

OAI identifier:

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.

Suggested articles


  1. (1995).“Economics of Defense R&D,”
  2. Ability Biased Technological Transition, Wage Inequality, and Economic Growth,"
  3. (2004). An Agenda for a Growing Europe: The Sapir Report,
  4. (2006). Appropriate Growth Policy: A Unifying Framework”,
  5. (1995). Can Imperfect Competition Explain the Difference between Primal and Dual Productivity Measures? Estimates for US Manufacturing”,
  6. (2008). Can social norms affect the international allocation of innovation?",
  7. (1994). Changes in the Demand for Skilled Labor within U.S. Manufacturing Industries: Evidence from the Annual Survey of Manufactures,”
  8. E.C.Prescott.(1985).“The Equity Premium: A Puzzle,”
  9. (1998). Endogenous Growth Without Scale Effects”,
  10. (2003). Fiscal Policy and Long-Run Growth in R&D-Based Models with Endogenous Market Structure,"
  11. (2008). Fiscal policy, Heterogeneous Industries, and Long-run Growth,” mimeo. 25[15] Cummins
  12. (1987). Forecasting and Testing in Co-Integrated Systems",
  13. (2003). Global Production Sharing and Rising Inequality: A Survey of Trade and Wages”,
  14. (2005). Growth with Quality-Improving Innovations: An Integrated Framework”,
  15. (2005). in a World of Ideas”,
  16. (2008). International Competition and U.S. R&D Subsidies: a Quantitative Welfare Analysis,” EUI ECO Working paper,
  17. (1996). Labor Market Institutions and the Distribution of Wages, 1973-1992: A Semiparametric Approach”,
  18. (2003). Military Procurement and Technology Development",
  19. (2003). Patterns of Skill Premia”,
  20. (1993). R&D Tax Policy During the Eighties: Success or Failure?” Tax Policy and the
  21. (1997). Revision of the High-Technology Sector and Product Classification”,
  22. (1998). Scale Effects in Schumpeterian Models of Economic Growth”,
  23. (2007). Self-fulfilling prophecies in the quality ladders economy",
  24. (2008). Shifting Patterns:
  25. (2002). Skill-Biased Technological Change and Rising Wage Inequality: Some Problems and Puzzles”,
  26. (2002). Technical Change, Inequality and the Labor Market”,
  27. (2002). Technological Acceleration, Skill Transferability and the Rise of Residual Inequality,”
  28. (1998). Technological Change and Population Growth”,
  29. (2000). Technological Change and the future of Warfare.
  30. (1998). Technology and Changes in Skill Structure: Evidence From Seven OECD Countries”,
  31. (1989). Technology and the Pursuit of Economic Growth,
  32. (1998). The Changing Structure of the U.S. National Innovation System:
  33. (2005). The Effects of Technical Change on Labor Market Inequalities,"
  34. (1999). The Supply of the Skilled Labor and Skill-Biased Technological Progress”,
  35. (1999). The U.S. Policy Response to Globalization: Looking for the Keys Under the Lamp Post",
  36. (1995). Time Series Tests of Endogenous Growth Models”,
  37. (2000). Too Much of a Good Thing? The Economics of Investment in R&D",
  38. (1998). U.S. Technology Policy: New Tools for New Times,"