Economic nature and patterns of technological change

   This paper examines the substantive nature of technological change, which is not only a consequence of the desire to improve the means of production but also of scientific knowledge, which opens up new possibilities in the field of production methods.

   The purpose of the study is to demonstrate the fundamental patterns of technological development from and "economics of technology" as a new scientific field.

   Unlike orthodox economic schools, which primarily determine only the aggregate impact of technologies on the product being created, the objective of this field is to identify the specific patterns generated by technological change. The methodology is based on the theory of institutional and technological change, "the economics of technology" as a modern scientific field developed by the Russian school of economics, and taxonomic and empirical analysis. Its application has allowed us, on the one hand, to highlight the autonomous nature of technological development, defined by the horizon of basic sciences that open up possibilities for creating production methods and influencing certain objects over a given period of time. Furthermore, technology generates a number of unique effects that also have independent significance for economic development, including the "combinatorial accretion" effect, "technological dualism," the "productivity paradox," "rapid industrial change," and the low sensitivity of technological growth to investment in new technologies. These special effects differ at the macroeconomic and microeconomic levels, making classical performance assessment criteria inappropriate. Therefore, the field of technological change, which is highly heterogeneous and has sectoral specificities even in the dissemination of widely applicable technologies, requires a differentiated approach when developing technology policy measures. The results confirm the inverse relationship between productivity and technological advancement for Russia. This necessitates the verification of current economic development policies against the goals of the National Projects already adopted for implementation and additional objectives to ensure technological sovereignty through technological innovation.

1. Acemoglu D. (2012). Introduction to economic growth. Journal of Economic Theory. 147(2), 545–550. doi: 10.1016/j.jet.2012.01.023

2. Amann E. (2002). Globalisation, industrial efficiency and technological sovereignty: Evidence from Brazil. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance. 42(5), 875–888. doi: 10.1016/S1062-9769(02)00144-8

3. Anchishkin A. I. (1986). Nauka, tekhnika, ekonomika [Science, Technology, and Economics]. Moscow: Economica. (In Russ.).

4. Breschi S., Malerba F., Orsenigo L. (2000). Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation. The Economic Journal. 110(463), 388–410.

5. Dementiev V. E. (2026). The evolution of scientific business inquiries at different phases of the life cycle of new technologies. Economics of Science. 12(1), 34–48. (In Russ.).

6. Dementiev V. E. (2023). Technological sovereignty and priorities of localization of production. Terra Economicus. 21(1), 6–18. (In Russ.). doi: 10.18522/2073-6606-2023-21-1-6-18

7. Edler J., Blind K., Kroll H., Schubert T. (2023). Technology sovereignty as an emerging frame for innovation policy. Defining rationales, ends and means, Research Policy. 52(6), 104765. doi: 10.1016/j.respol.2023.104765

8. Erokhin V. V., Pavlyutenkova O. A. (2026). Competition and the diffusion of innovations: a dynamic perspective. Economics of science. 12(1), 122–135. (In Russ.).

9. Eum W., Lee J-D. (2022). The co-evolution of production and technological capabilities during industrial development. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics. 63, 454–469. doi: 10.1016/j.strueco.2022.07.001

10. Glazyev S. Yu. (2019). Ryvok v budushchee. Rossiya v novykh tekhnologicheskom i mirokhozyaystvennom ukladakh [A Leap into the Future. Russia in the New Technological and Global Economic Orders]. Moscow: Knizhny Mir. (In Russ.).

11. Glazyev S. Yu. (1993). Teoriya dolgosrochnogo tekhniko-ekonomicheskogo razvitiya [Theory of Long-Term Techno-Economic Development]. Moscow: Vladar. (In Russ.).

12. Heinman S. A. (2008). Effektivnost' natsional'noy ekonomiki: istochniki rosta, poteri i rezerv [Efficiency of the National Economy: Sources of Growth, Losses, and Reserves]. Collection of scientific papers : in 2 vol. Moscow: Institute of Economics RAS. (In Russ.).

13. Ivanov V. V. (2022). New science and technology policy. Economic Revival of Russia. 3(73), 24–28. (In Russ.).

14. Kleiner G. B. (2024). The systems paradigm and the theory of technology. Terra Economicus. 22(4), 6–18. (In Russ.). doi: 10.18522/2073-6606-2024-22-4-6-18

15. Krasnikov G. Ya., Gornev E. S., Matushkin I. V. (2017). General theory of technology and microelectronics: part 2. Issues of methodology and classification. Electronic engineering. Series 3: Microelectronics. 4, 16–41. (In Russ.).

16. Lvov D. S. (1990). Effektivnoe upravlenie tekhnicheskim razvitiem [Effective Management of Technical Development]. Moscow: Economica. (In Russ.).

17. Schumpeter J. A. (2007). Teoriya ekonomicheskogo razvitiya. Kapitalizm, sotsializm i demokratiya [Theory of Economic Development. Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy]. Moscow: Eksmo. (In Russ.).

18. Solodovnikov S. Yu., Sergievich T. V., Skoraya K. V. (2025). A unified social and scientific community of Russia and Belarus as an important attribute of the Union State. Economics of Science. 11(4), 52–63. (In Russ.).

19. Solow R. (1987). We’d better watch out. New York Times Book Review. New York Times. July 12, 36.

20. Sukharev O. S. (2026). “Economics of technology”: principles of development and potential assessment. Economics of Science. 12(1), 49–64. (In Russ.).

21. Sukharev O. S. (2025). Nauchno-tekhnologicheskiy potentsial i promyshlennaya politika [Scientific and Technological Potential and Industrial Policy]. Moscow: Finance and Statistics. (In Russ.).

22. Wu L., Chen W. (2023). Technological achievements in regional economic development: An econometrics analysis based on DEA. Heliyon. 9(6), e17023. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e17023

23. Zharinov I. O., Zharinov O. O. (2026). Scientific and methodological apparatus for describing the dynamics of digital technology development. Economics of Science. 12(1), 106–121. (In Russ.).