□

□ｎＨｕ

目ＨＨＨ日

□

日Ｈ

国

□

目Ｈ

国

Hacettepe Universitesi

IKTISAIII VE IDARI BILIMLER FAKULTESI

l10rgttli l

CILT13/1995

HACETTEPE ONⅣ ERSiTESi :iKTiSADi VE iDARi BiLIMLER FAKOLTESi DERGiSi

ciLT r3l1995

REA― G TECWOLOGHン E,CIANGE:

THE NEW TECWO‐ ECOⅣmCI珈 懸υEttGF

Yrd.Do●.Dr.Ehem… K*

■.INTRODUCTION :

」謝熙席黒朦lT警∬l猟調器鑑li翼躙factors and output in a production process over tilne. It is not a

concrcte variablc to lneasure readily. It has never bcen a crucial

matter、■th solne exccptions,such as K.Max and」 i Schumpcter,inthe history of econolnic theo竃 ァ;i.e・ , it is a sorL of'7blaCk box"and

needs to be taken as・ g市en". ～

It has different stages and talces Place in different foll人 ぇs

depending On the size of the change and environment、 vhere it is

applied for.lVhen thc changes and difFusiolls of tcchnologies crncrge,

they become clusters of technological change,and,affect the whole

social and economic shcture ofthe nations.Thus,cconOmSts todaycan not ignore、 ″hat is gOing On、 vith the changes in technology:

because,lt is changil■ g Our da」y life,so we have to considerit To help

that purposc,this study first generally analysis technogical change

in detail in diffcrcnt perspectivcs― process or tcchn。 1。gical change,

型vhetller it is cmbodicd or discl■ bodied,neutrality of it,Ineasurcrncnt

of it and taxonolny of it― and second,discusscs the new techno―

econolmic paradigm which is deincd as thc recent advancements intechnology.

2.― HNODOGICAL CHANGE

The word "technology" can be deined as ''knowledge aboutscientnc applications": or::the stock Of knowledge(technical or

* Erciyes Universitesi, I.l.B.F., Iktisat Boliimti Oyetlm Uyesi

102

managernent) which permits the introducilon of new products orprocess'; i.e" it is a method of production at a given Urne (Chesnais,1986, p, 93).-'ec6oiiling to DoSi; technotogy ii a 1'set of pieces ofknowledge, both- directly practical (related to concrete problems anddevices) and theoretical (but practically applicable although notnecessarily already applied), know-how. methods, procedures,experience of successes ald failures and also, of course, physica_ldevices ald equipmenf' (Dosi, 1984, p. 13- ).

Technological change refers to the changes in a productionprocess as a result of the applicaUon of new knou'ledge in science andtechnologr. It is an explanation of changes in production structure bythe applicatlon of a new seienti-ffc discovery. To make this changeunable'in a production process. changes in science and educaUonhave to go togettrer with a successful promotion strategy.

Another way of defining technological change cal be done bydistinguishing'product innovation" and "process innovation"although the distinction is not alu.ays clear cut (Heathfield andWibe,1987, p.1 18; Freeman,1979, p.183). Sometimes technoiogicalchange appears as a transforrnation ofprocess offactors into output(new production process). which is calied "process innovation'; andsomeUmes it also appears as a production of entireiy nslv goods,which is called "product innovation"

2.1.. Process of Technologiaal Change

It has been traditional to ana\ze technological change in aSchumpe*erian way distinguishing it into three stages: invention,innovation and diffusion. Technological change is an aggregate ofl]rese three stages,

Invention is a joint set of new ideas in many diflerent relatedfieids with clear inlerrelationships and applicability. In otherwords, it is a discovery of a nerv scientilic and technological advariceand its possibility to transla'Le into a prototype (Cyert andMowery.1987, p.25).

While invention suggests the possibility of sornething new,innovation is the application of this possibiiity with marketactivities. Innovation is a transformation of clear applicable ideas

H.0.llqlsADl VE lDAR BlLIMER FA‐ L― l DERCISI ,r REAMNG■ ECHNOttlCALCIIANGE 1(〕3

into producfion process, which is a new producUon function (Diwanand Chals"aborty, 1991, p. 192), such as what is happening,today inmicroelectronics. biotechnologies. etc.

Finally, diftusion has to do with the atternpts of firms in themarkeL to imitate and adopt the new waY of production, which lsexpectedly cheaper and more profitable. When the market issaturated with the new process and product, investors (inventors)will be looking for a new technique and product to keep competing inthe market

i:

' 2.2. Dnbodied and Disembodied Tecbnologteal Charge

If the technologicat change is realized through the e'cisting factorsto produce more of the samd product, it is called "disembodied"technological change. This type of technology "consists of particularerTertise of past attempts and past technological solutions, togetherwith the knowledge ald the achievements of the state-of-the-a"rt"(Dosi 1984. p. 14) On the other hand, if technological change isaccompanied u/ith some new factors and-changes in factor quality, itis called "embodied" technological ctrange.

2.3. Neutrality of Technologtcal Change

in a production function. the state of technology can be shown as:

g=f(X1,,a(2, -..,Xr,T (1)

'rvhere Q denotes possible output, Xi denote inputs and T denotes thecurrent satate of technology. The production function, as in equaUonl, is an engineering reialionship reflecUng technology and the lawsof nature. Larvs of nature do not change over time while ourunderstanding of technologlr and nature has improved over the years.(Berrd| 1991, p. 63). This improvement in technology is cxpressed asa shift in the production Iunction implying more output (Q) with thesame factors ffil.

The change in technology can atso be explained through anisoquant map. Assuming trvo inputs, capital (K) and labor (L), theisoquant cun e rvill shift towards the origin since fewer factors willbe needed to produce the same amount of output.

104 H.0.lICIISADi VE lDAR BILIMLER FAKOlrEЫ DERGlSI

As long as the consequenccs of technologial change is cOnce.■ ■ed,

,cb=Omists have tsually considercd whethcr it is'biased'or五`ёitral「.Thёre arё thrce kmds Of neutrality related to tqchnological

change:Hicks neutrality,Ha‐ od neutrality and Solow neutratity.

If the techno16gical advandements leave the capital-labor ratios

unchangcd when the factor priccs relnain constant,it is called“ Hicksncutralityll.In this case,the isoquant will shift paranel tOwards the

Origi五 .

If the changes in technology leave the capital― output ratiOunchanged when the pricc of capital ren■ ains constant,■ ls calledi'IIarrod neutrality". In this case, the isoquant will shift biased

towards labor, which is a labor― saving techn01ogical changeTheoreucany,this lneans that the isoquant curve has lnoved towards

thc origin through the advances in techonological change with a bias

in the labor― saving directiOn.This is to sav thatthe same amount of

Output will be produced with lcss labor and lnOre capital.

Finauy, f technolそ疑ョical Change leaves the labor― output ratiounohttged whё n the price of labor is held constant, it is callcd"Solow neutralitブ1.In thiS Case,the isOquant will shift biased

towards capital,which is a capital― saving technological change.The

samcisoquant has moved to、 vards the ongin thrOugh the advances in

technologicd change with a bias in the capital― saving diectiOn.This

is to say that the scalne amount of output、 vill bc produced M′ ith less

capit4 and mOre labor.

2.4.MeasuFement ofTechnological chtte

Most empirical studics in measuring the ecOnOllllic effccts of

technological change arc based on the cconometric production(orcost)function approach 〔for a detailed discussion on empiricalapproaches to measure technological challge,see for example,Pattcland Soete,1988).ハs equation l shows, the state of techno10gy iS

represcnted in a productioll function indicating a shift in theproduction function、 vith inore outputs from the salne factors.Since

the advanccments in technology arc not easily deflned things,the

measurement of these changes has al、 vays become thc heart of

lraCむ9al diffiCulty.There Fnight be di∬ ercnt proxies used to cxpress

the state or technology.Each pro五 ソhas some pnoities to the others

REAII襲 ■ECHNO臨 園 CttE

in specific circumstances. but aimost all of them have seriouswedlmesses in practical s€nse. Therefore, it is hard to say which oneis the best proper proxy.

One way to measure and represent advancements in technologr isto calculate Tota-l Factor Productivity (TFP), defined as t}re ratio ofquantity of output produced to a weighted combinaUon of quanUtiesof different input factors used (Diwan and Chalraborly, 1991, p. 5 -5)i.e-, TFP relates the value of real output to the asSociated total inputs.Denoting the level bf output by Q, TFP is calculated'aS follows:

TFP=g75Y,xt tzt

where xi is the quantity of input factor i arrrC Wi is some appropriateweight.

Stnce the changes in technology are continuous over time, rnanyresearchers used "time trend- as a proliy to express ihe state oftechnologr. Given the followlng production function:

q=f(xt,xe, .-. ,x.r;t) xi =1, .".., n (3)

w-here xi is tle quantiLy of input factor i, q is output, and t is Urnetrend (To see the usage of technological change in a translogproducUon {or cost) function, see Antle and Capalbo, 1988; andBerndt,199l).

'Research and Development" (R&D) has recentiy become alavoured explanation of the state of technology in the literature.Different R&D indicators can be used in different studies for differentcountries by different authors, such as tota-l R&D expenditures.indusrtrial R&D expenditures, R&D capital stock, and number ofscientists working in R&D jobs. If;

105

t=g(RaD),

equation(3)becomes

q=glXl,犯 ,¨ メn;R/1D),

(4〕

xi, i=1,....,n (5)

I06 H.IJ. IKflSADI VE IDARI BILIMLER FAI(OUTESI DERGISI

The difficulty with R&D is that, there is no well-specifiedproduction funqtign for knowledge (Heathfield arld l4ribe, I g gZ , p .1291,there is no standard R&D indicator to express technological change,and also many small firms are involving in the high-tech marketwithout investing fqr R&D.

'Education' and 'labor training", such as the number of graduatesfrom the colleges br number of tratned people might be a good proxyto express, (he ghanges in technologr (D6nek, f gg4). It can becalculat'ed as tn the equations (a) and (5) just delining t as E, insteadof R&D.

There are some other methods and proxies tc measure the state oftechnology, such as "patent", .'papers and publications", .and"learnj.ng by doing". For example, 'papers and publications" rnight bean appropriate measurement of the technoiogical chalge in somecases, such as biotechnology (Chakraborty, 1989, p. 114). Finally,"learning by doing" offered bv Arrow (1962), again assumes thattechnological change is a function of time, and it is a kind ofmeasurement of "experience" to produce (Berndt, ig9l, p. 66) - Ofcourse. a-11 these have specific significance in different occasions. .

2.5. Texonomy of Technological Change

Freeman (1987) organizes four tlpes of technological change: Firstare "incremental innovations", which are continuously occurredevents in any industry or sen'ice activity. as a resuil of inventionsand improvements suggested by the scientists_ Second are ',radicajinnovations",.which are discontinuous events and usually occur as aresult of an R&D activity. Third are "the technologicaj s-ystems-,rvhich are the ciusLers of new imrovations. and include numerousradical and incremental innovations in both product and processes.The final ones are "chalges of techno-economic paradigm', wirich arefar-reaching arrd pervasive changes in technology. The.v affect a-tl thebranches o1-the economic and socia-l sysl.em and brings out sorne nervsectors. Indeed, a neLV techno-economic paradigm is a new way ofsoiution of current technoiogical problems based on the latestprinciples from science.

REAuZING TECHNOttICAL C… E tw

3. TIIE NDW TFfIINO.PCONOMIC PARADI,CIIVI

The last type of technological changes a-ffect the factor coststmcture and condltions of productlon for almost a-ll brasches of theeconomy and give rise to enlirely new sectors. They also compriseclusters of incremental and radical innovations as well as new

technological systems. This type of technological change, change tntechno-economic paradigm, does not frequently happen although thefrequency of it is becoming more and more short.

3.1.The Old Paradlgrn

The mass-production techno-economic paradigm started justa{ter the Second World War with the leadership of the U.S- It waspretty much consistent with the'neo-classical factor substitution andcost minimization theories.

The old techno-economic paradigm has been defined by oil energy'product standard?aUon and mass scale producUon. The features ofstandardizaUon and mass production has ensured cost reductionthrough economies of scale. These tcchniques have been pervasiveindeed, and as a result, one has rvitnessed the grorvth of massma-rkets, such as mass media, mass lransit systems, mass educationand mass consurnption. The mass production techniques are base<l

on massive capital investment and large unskilled labor inputs.Underdevelopment, in this paradigm, is considered analogous to lackof capital.

3.2 Transition Ftom the Old to tJ.e NewParadigm

This paradigrn has been started to be replaced by the new techno-econornic paradigm that depends on irrformation Lechnology sincethe mid'1970s. It has already taken place in many key industries,such as microelectronics, computers, data processing micro-processors, robotics, aerospace, nelv materials, optoelectrbnics'biotechnologz and telecommunications systems. It wrll affect all thebranches of the economy (from national to international level), butnot in an overnight. There wlll be a structural transition from the oldparadigm to the new one. According to a study fthe World Bank 1993'p. 9). the trarsition u,ill take place in three main stages. In the firststage, "Industrial Economy in Transition". information demand

H.0.lKnsADiVE lDAR BlIIMLER D毬 OL― l DERGISl

growth'is concentrated in a couple of sectors, such as ba'king,international trade. governrnent administration of tax and securit5r.In the second stags, "Limited Information Economy', the newparadigm (informatics) is diffused to other sectors likemariufaeturing while the leading sectors wlll be experiencing moreinstitutional and structural transformation. In the final sLage,"Information-Based Economy", there will be a profound structura_ltransformation in the economy with necessar5r social and economicinstitutional environment.

3.3. Deflntng and Ilistingulshing the New Faradtgm

The new paradigm is called dilrerenily by different authors, rike"the Third Wave" {TofIIer, 1980). "the era of the Great Divide,, (pioreand Sabel, 1984), "Information Technology', (Freeman, fgg7),"Informatics" ('The world Bank (1993), and some others theorize it as"the new techno-economic paradigm', (Diwan,1gg9; Diwan andChakraborty, 1991; Diwal and Desai, 1990: D6nek, 1994; F-reeman,1987; Freeman ald Perez, 1988; and Kodama,lggo). But ttre meaningsare same; they aI explain tie recent revolutionary developments intechnology

Basically, there are four approaches to this paradigm: The firstapproach sees the nerv paradigm as a continuation of ihe"automatlon" debate of the 1950s, ,*'hich talks about processinnovation. The second approach identifies a group of indusGes andserv-ices around computer, electronic, and communication sectorswhich have the most dlmamic employment gnowth recenily. Thethird approach concerns with the "information societ-y" as a result ofmodern industrialized societies that shift the rvork force fromunskilled to skilled jobs. The for-rrth approach comprises elements ofall previous three approaches. According to Freeman, the lastapproach, which beiongs to him, is the best one that explains the newparadigm (Freeman,198Z, p. 50).

The new techno-economic paradigm is determined byinformation te chnologies that involve segmented markets,customized produetion and economies of scope. The continuouslychanging technologies are science-basecr and require both R&D andskilled labor in addition to capital in n'hich these lechnoLogies areembodied. Furthermore, these technologies are international in the

REAuZヽC IECHNObЭGICAl´ CHANGE

sense that the production process can be carried on in different partsof the world tn the face of globalizing markets. Such 'marketsegmentation and globalization go''together and set a dynamicprocess of self propagation" (Diwan and Chakraborty,tggl. p. 6).There are also more entry points in the new paradigm. and manynewly industrializing countries can, and do enter.

3.4. Cheracterlstics and Implicattons of tlre New paradigm

According to Freeman (1987) and Diwan and Desai (I99I), some ofthe charasteristics of the new paradigm are as follows: One, becauseof trle continuous fall in costs (prices). the new product is becomingcheaper. TWo, the supply of commodity is unlimited.. Three, it tspervasive. Four, markets are. getting more segmented. Smallproduction urrits are becoming rnore econornic in terms of flexibilityand speediness in model and equipment changes. Therefore, thestandardized, homogeneous products of the old mass-producUonparadigm can no longer compete with the new paradigm based onmore flexible production structure. Five, the quaiity of products,process. services proceed t}te price. Six, it leads to saving in all theproduction factors, but increases tlre neecl for skilled labor- Finally,the new pa-radigm requires a strong network of component andmaterial suppliers w'ith assembly type lirms or with service firms asrvell as beLween producers. wholesalers and retailers for a quickresponse to changes in consurner demand.

It is norv recognized that the electronlc and semiconductor-basedtechnologies satis$r all these condiUons. The price of chips has beencontinuously fatling while its processing speed and scale ofintegration has been increasing. Generally, the supply of these chipsis largely available as desired, and they are now embedded invirtually every consumer and producer goods. This condition alsoensures continuous cost reductions of goods and processes in whichthese technologies are embodied. Their pervasiveness enlarges oldand establishes new markets for products. Cost reductions andenlarged markets make them competiUve and are the necessaryconditions for a self-perpetuating process.

The old mass production paradigm is now in crisis, and the newparadtgm has already taken place among the fastest growingindustries such as computer and electronic equipments with a

109108

110 H.U. IKT]SADI \TE IDARI BILIMLER FAI{OIJTESI DERG1SI

remarkable cost reduction. lt satisfies all above conditions, andtherefore, gives an edge over the old mass-production paradigrn. Theneed is for more skill, training and appropriate social and econorrricinstituUonal change.

According to Diwan and Desai (r9g1), two major implications ofthe new paradigm can be observed today: (i) On the demald side, thereare two important features. one, markets are getting segmented.Product differentiation and product customization are veryimportant; the' new product can be adjusted to the desires ofcustomers through the flexibitity of production. Thus, quality hasthe priority rather than price. Production with small mlcro-chipsare beceorning more flexible, qualrty and cheaper than the old rnass-production units. TWo, markets are becoming globai. Therefore, afirm has to produce for international markets. But, it requires todevelop internationar market networks. (ii) similarly, on t-tre supplyside, trere are three features. one, entr-y is not t.Lat difficult; for entryR&D, capital investment, skill and geographical advantages arerequired. Trvo, the production process is becoming internationalnow, Three, technological change becomes a continuous process, theentry for a finn ald a countij,. v,-ill not be difficult.

The effects of technological change are very important especiallyin two areas: one is Lhe competitiveness efect, and two is the labormarket elrect. The competitiveness effect of technological change hasbeen found positive in many studies in the literature, r.vhich meanst]:at. competitiveness of a country increases as the advancements intechnologv are applied to the economy.

on the other hand, the second efrect of technological change is notthat clear. These are some of the possible outcomes of theappiications of nerv technologies considering labor market: Asurplus of some skills, a shortage of skiils related to the developmentand implementation of new technologies, emergence of new sklllrequirements and occupations, and internal shifts of skillrequirements towards newly industriaiized countries (CDEI, 19g5,p.86). However:, the general consensus from the previous techno_economic paradigms is that the direct labor market effects of moderntechnoiogies are, on the whole, negative (Warnken ald Ronning igg0,p. 215). The overall direct effect on labor market will be the sum ofthe impacts on industrl, growtl: rates. occupational profiles.of

REAuZINC lECHN70_IcAI´ CIIANIGE

industries and skill profiles of occupaUons (CDEI.t9g5, p. g3). To seethe two effects together, some stuclies capture both competiuvenessand employment data in thelr model {such as, Cyert andMowery, 1987; Erber and Horn,199O: and Foley, Watts and Wilson,1992). The general flnding is that, the long-run emplo5rment gainthrough international competitiveness may compensate the short-run employment losses by technolagical change in the future.

On tl:.e other hand, the studies (such as the ones of Groshen andWilliams, 1992; Topel, 1999; Murphy and Welch,t993; and Farber,1993) concentrating on the period of last two decades {taking the newtechno-eeonomic paradigm into consideration) 'find that the neurtechnologies have increased the demand tbr high skilled.workerswhile they have decreased the demand for low-skilled workers.Hence, this causes technological unemplo5rment mostly to be seenamong low-skilled workers and an increase in skill requirements.Technically saying, technoiogical change is becoming more andmore labor saving for low-skillled rvorkers and labor using for high-skilled workers.

4. CONCLUSION AI\ID SUGGESTIONS-

Technological change refers to tir" "frunges

in a productionprocess as a result of the application of new knowledge in science andtechnologr. Today, scieilce and technology are changing very fast. Asa result of these changes, our daily life is also changingcontinuously. These changes in technology can happen in threestages: Invention, innovatlon and di{fusion. These changes may beembodied or disembodied, and/or biased or neutral in nature.Technological change can be measured and represented in empiricalstudies ln different ways, such as Totar Factor productivity (TFp),iime trend, learni.ng by doing, R&D, education and iabor training. Ont-he other hand, changes in technologr is seen jn the following forms:Incremental innovations, radical innovations, the technologicalsysterns, and cha-nges in techno-economic paradigm that affect allthe branches of the economy and brings out some new sectors.

As Diwan ald Desai (I9gO) argue, the businesses that have beenconducted according to the old mass-producuon techno-economicparadigm are losing to international competition not only ininternational markets but even in their own dornestic markets. For

tt2 H.O. ITffISADI \rE IDARI BILIMLER FAKULTFSI DERCISIREAIIZNG TECHr{OI.OGICAL Crr.EruCO 113

oiample, some large corporations such as IBM and major automotiveproducers in the U.S. are losing to international cornp"etiuorr even inthe u.s- market against the Japanese competitors which areconsidered as the lea{ing examples of the new paradigm.

The situation is,to align the present busjness (as a representativeof the ord paradi€m) with the new paradigm with sJme radicarcha,ges. In other words, the old businesses (in the U.s., in Turkey, forinstalce) have to learrr foreign cultures, and invest more on R&D anctskill forrnalion. These are the necessarJ. condiuons for growth andchanging business culture. Furthermore, it needs to be understoodtlat labor-capital substitution of mass production paradigm is nomore accepted in the new paradigm; they are complfmentary now.Labor is not a "cost" ofproduction, it has to be treated as an -asset-.

To compete in international markets, these old businesses have toseek out market segments that satisfy particurar needs of customers,produce quality goods, and maintain employee loyalty as wett aJintensive distribution of the products and deli'ery at the prornisedtime. Finally. the domestic firms and governments have to learn andadopt fonvard-looking and-future-orientecl strategies based on adlmamic nationar science and technorog3r policy bv initiating andcontinuing proper science and technorogv infrast.rr"tr... improvingthe level of education and the quality of population investing moreon 'human capitat" to make the country enabre to compete in theinternational rnankets. To achie,e the final point, praciitioners ofeconomic poricy neeci to maintain the highest croseness betw.eenuniversities and industry as well as bebween firms.

Ait-El-Hadj, s.' Tcchnoshifts: Meetrng the charlenge of Technologicalcha'nge, translated by H.M- Relinan, producuvity press, cambridge,Massach., 1992.

An[e, J.M. and S.M. Capalbo (f 98g): -An Introduction to RecentDevelopments in production Theory and producLivityMeas ureme nt., in Agri c ultu.ral productiwity: Measurcment andExplanation, edited by s.M. capalbo and J.M. Antle, Resources forthe Future, Washington. D.C.. l7_9S, fg8S.

Arrow' ILJ', -The Economic Impricatbns of rrarning by Doing-, Review ofEcoaomic Studics, Vol. 29 (3). No. 80, lbS-73, June Ig62.

Baltagi, B.H. and J-M. Griftin, 'A General Index of rechnica-r change-, Journatof politlcal Economy, Vol. 96, No. 1., 2G41. 198g.

Bernclt' E'R.' The practice of Econornetrics: classic and conternporar,r,Addison-Wesley publishing Comp.. M assach., I 99 I .

Binswanger' H'p', -rhe Measurernent of Technical change Biases with IvlanyFactors of production., The Anerican Economic Reyierr,December, Vol. 64, No. 6, 964_92€., lg74.

Canadian Department of Employment ald ImmigraUon (CDEI), -ChangingSkill Requiremeents- in .Empro5rrneat Growth and structurarChange. OECD, paris, 1985.

Chakrabarti. AK.. -Technologr Indicators: Conceptual Issues andMeasurement problems-, Journal of Dngineering andTechaologz lLlanagemcnt, 6, 99_ I 16. lgag-

Chesnais, F., 'Science, Technologr and Competitiveness., ScienceTechnolog rrrdustry Review, OECD, Autumn, No. l. gs_r29. 1986.

Christensen, L.R.. D.1V. Joqgenson and L.J. t-au (1973): -Transcendentaltogarithmic produc'on Frontiers-, The Review of Economicsand Statistics, February, Vol. LV(l), Za_45..

REFERENCES

l14 H.ウ.1]31sADi VE lDAR BlLIMLER FhKOLΠ受班DERCiSl

Qァcrt,R.M,and D.C.Mowery,(edsl,TechndOgy and EmPlo′ ▲ニュent:

署 竃lli話鳥τl∬he ua Econ雪,Na饉ond A“demy

Demi,1.,Teknolojlk De言霧me Ve Tttrklyc'」h Tckn。1可油(Meselele五,

DP■ Ankara,1986.

PIWan,R and Sr Dosai,“Market GlobaLa饉 On and lntcmatiOnalCoinpetitiveness:Imphcabons fOr U.s.Business・ ,Isstes inlntematlonal Business,sp亘 ng,1_7,199o.

Divvan,R.and C.Chよ raborサ ,High Tecno10gy and lntematiOnalComPctitiveness,Praeger,N.Y.1991.

Dosi,G.,Technical change and lnd■ ■stHal TFanSfOrmation,ThcMacmman Press Ltd,London, 1984.

DOnek,P・・Fmp10yニュニenti SkШ Fo―ation,and the New Tcchno―Economic Paradigm:An Empirical Study Of Turkish‐Manufact遍 ng,unpublished Ph D dissertiOn,Renssclacr

PO■eChlliC insutute,Trpy,M,1994.

D01lek,E..‐ Change in sklll Requiremenも Duc to Advmcements inTechn010gァ :A Review Article",Erctyesき niversitesi,1.1.B,F.Dergisi,vOl.11.1994.

Dura.C.,Bilgi ToPllコnu K■ lt●r Bakanllgl Yab■ niarl,No 1244,Atra,199o.

D■lger,I.,Tcknol可 i tretini:icat,Bul■,ve Yenil:Ir Ara,t■ _alannmArtma,mda iktisadi Politikanln Etkisl.DPT,Ankara, 1991.

Freeman,C.,~rhe Kondratiev Long、vavcs.Tcchnical change andUnemployment',in StructuFd Detcr菫 饉nants Of Employムュニentand Vnemploy“ .ent,Vol.H,oECD.Pans,1979.

Frccman,c..」 .Ciark and L.Soete,Unemployment and Technical

lnnovation:A Study of Long waves and EconomicDevcloPment,Green、vαЭd Press,Vv7cstpttt,cOnnect, 1982_

uttmc■ に HNOuX〕 IcAL C地いOE

職 ernan,c.,and L.Soete.ledS),“ Factor Suヽ titution anl TCChnical Changeい,

in Technical Ch賀嘔eand m Emploァ ment,edited by c.Freeman and sOete,3asil Blackweu Ltd,NY,1987.

Freeman,c_,“ InforFnatiOn Tcchnology and chttge Ⅲ TechnO― ■ 90nOmic

Paradigm‐ ,in Tcchnical change ma Fun EmPloymtht edited byC.Frecman and L.Soete,3asil Blackwell Ltd,NY.1987.

Got M..B.H.Bahk and R.A.IVall,“ Decomposing Technical Changゞ,

Sol■them Econormc」 。_l,V。 1.60,No.1.Wul17,220-234,1993.

Heathneld,D.F.and S.Wibc,Aュ IntroductiOn to cOst and PFOduCtion

Functions,Humalities Press intemaむ Onal lnc,N」 . 1987.

」orgensOn,DW.and Z.Gnliches,‐ rhe ExplanatiOn of Product■ ity7 changc",in The Mcasu町 ement of Productivity,The Brclohngs lnstituむ on.WashingtOn DC,1972.

K1lln,A,TurJdye i_lat san■p■ndc Tekn91■ik Detti,量n,ToBB,ハ正曇

“

ra,1990. ._

IIodma.F..SrA,and CSPS(satama univ,」ap司 ,‐Can changes in thcTechno‐ Econonlic Parad薬 三ln be ldentified Through EnlpHc」 andouanutatltre Study?",Scicnce Technology lndus"Rcvie■ 7.

OECD,」中 、No 7,101‐ 129,1990.

Metcalfe,S.,“ Technical chan〔 ば ,in tt New Palgrave:A Dic饉 o… y ofEconon遺 cs,V01.4.edited by」..Eatttll,M.Mllgate andP.New■lan,1987.

National science Bocard{NSB),Science&Enginecring lndicators

i∞ 3、 NSB.

Norswcprthy,」 .R and S.L.Jang,Empttcal Mcasurement and Aュ alysis OfProductivity and Technological change:ApplicatiOns inHigh_Tech and Sen嗜 cc lndustFieS,The North Holland,

動 e Nemerland.1992.

Pattel,P.and L.Soetc,“McastlHng the Economic EFccts oFfrechn。 10gy".

Scicnce Technology lndustry Revicw.OECD,No.4、 December,121-166,1988.

l15

H.0.lF[lsADi VE lDAR BILIMLER FAKOL―l DERClSI

Schcttkat,R.and M.Nagner,(edS).Techn。 logical change andEmpl`巧 anent:lnnovation in the Gc― ■ュEcono可 ,trans by A.Watt Walter dc Cruytcr,NY,1990.

lVorld Bank,・ °hkey:Informatics and Economlc Mode用 置zat10n",A World Bank counLy study・ .WashingtOn,DoC.,1983.

ru\CETTEPE ON iVERSiTESiiKTiSADi .trE IDARI BILIMLER rarulresi DERciSi

1995

A LAGRANGEAN RELtXAl日 ON APPR10ACH FORMULπ PRODUCT,MULH ECHELON INVENTORY

SYSTEPIS V濯TH CAPACFrAttD DYNA配LOTSIZING

ゝ

…

∠協4ン,コИ測7″ガJaあ 職 0&Dル“

盛 θSD響″ 殷 ′″ グ M斃

“

滋 2″ Sごθ肥 ′

rrr`劇りη

“

″ ″ scぁθJ

z醜3∬rar aが,ar5″

L“εωrarlИ IイКtt DTJ劇配

減麟レ 1995

Absは , This paper focuses on multi― echelon inventOry systemshaving an arborescent structure ln the structure cach intermediate

facHity las eXactly one predecessor and pOsdbly sevcrd tuocessoFS.

鋸e‥もfWl思 ::lTttF腫:h盤鳳11臨t吼鵠よnkTeiC軍躙器胤鯖WT賞懲電電麗棚器玉議高:ittal督i[∴驚篭Ltth:L∬:讐n「輩'。驚

n施

基I翼躍鷲樅憮畷l五弾織product.

SutteCt CIassirlca● Ons: Inventory/PrOductiOni MJ」 ―Echelon Lot―Siiing・

iく

Pr°gramnling: Integer, Branch and BOund, Lagrangean

Key Wo」s:Inventory,Integer Progranllning,ヽ lodellillg,ProductiOn.

1. INTRODU〔 」■■ON

簾露」蹴犠鰍iζ「驚篇緊1撫撫:&∬∫l騨:L露

|

|

|