Herbert Hovenkamp, Nov 01, 2008
Joseph Schumpeter´s vision of competition saw it as a destructive process in which effort, assets, and fortunes were continuously destroyed by innovation. This endless process displaced older technologies in order to make way for new ones, but led to economic growth far greater than more stable, conservative alternatives. Schumpeter´s vision was striking in sharp contrast with the conventional neoclassical model of competitive markets, where the focus was on changes in output and price, relatively leisurely shifts in consumer tastes, and exceptional strategic behavior that occasionally dislodged one technology and displaced it by another. Neoclassical competition is a little like watching the ocean when it is calm, while Schumpeterian competition is like watching a raging storm or perhaps even a tidal wave. As Evans and Hylton so powerfully observe, neoclassical economics is much more comfortable modeling the relatively stable situation than the Schumpeterian one. Economists since Alfred Marshall have observed that the static, partial equilibrium analysis that dominates industrial economics is readily susceptible to mathematics, and many of its rather specific propositions are testable. The Schumpeter model may be testable at a very general level, but probably not in any sense that antitrust policy finds useful. Schumpeter´s analysis is much too concerned with the mostly unmanageable realities of the economy as a whole and with largely unanticipated developments that cannot readily be modeled within the equilibrium-searching forces of neoclassical economics.
Featured News
Bank Regulators Clarify That Crypto Qualifies as Collateral Under Capital Reserves Rule
Mar 6, 2026 by
CPI
States Are Drawing a Hard Line on AI in the Workplace
Mar 6, 2026 by
CPI
States Prepare New Legal Challenge to Trump’s Global Tariffs
Mar 5, 2026 by
CPI
OpenAI Accused in Chicago Lawsuit of Acting as Unlicensed Legal Advisor
Mar 5, 2026 by
CPI
Senate Democrats Target Meatpacking Giants With New Antitrust Bill
Mar 5, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Behavioral Economics
Feb 22, 2026 by
CPI
Behavioral Antitrust in 2026
Feb 22, 2026 by
Maurice Stucke
Behavioral Economics in Competition Policy: Going Beyond Inertia and Framing Effects
Feb 22, 2026 by
Annemieke Tuinstra & Richard May
Agreeing to Disagree in Antitrust
Feb 22, 2026 by
Jorge Padilla
Recognizing What’s Around the Corner: Merger Control, Capabilities, and the New Nature of Potential Competition
Feb 22, 2026 by
Magdalena Kuyterink & David J. Teece