Economic Growth from a Theoretical Perspective of Knowledge Economy: an Empirical Analyisis for Mexico



This paper analyzes some theoretical aspects of the knowledge economy and measures the effects of the knowledge factor on Mexico’s economic performance over the two past decades. We propose specific indicators to measure the activities of production, acquisition, diffusion, and application of knowledge and verifying their relationship to the GDP per capita through a co-integration econometric model. The overall results agree with the economic theory, since the global knowledge economy indicator is positive and significant. Analyzing the activities individually we found that production and application performed as expected; whereas the values found for acquisition and diffusion are not significant. The amount of knowledge generated in the world increases constantly so that the acquisition of this production cannot keep pace and the capabilities of Mexico to implement knowledge are lagging behind. The acquisition of knowledge has different unregistered elements, such as the informal acquisition, the different qualities of the acquired knowledge and the characteristics of who acquires the knowledge.  Perhaps, the most complex indicator is the diffusion of knowledge, which mainly occurs through invisible channels, from person to person, linking tacit knowledge, this phenomenon is hard to quantify.

Full Text:



Aboites, J. (2009). Generación de conocimiento tecnológico y negocios. Ideas Concyteg. 4(50), 846-858.

Antonelli. C. (2009). The economics of innovation: from the classical legacies to the economics of complexity. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 18(7), 611-646.

Archibugui, D. and Lundvall, B-A. (2001). The Globalizing Learning Economy. London:

Oxford University Press.

Bell, D. (1999). The Comming of Post-Industrial Society. New York: Basic book.

Brătianu, C. and Orzea, I. (2013). Knowledge strategies using social networks. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 1(1), 25-38.

Chen, D. and Dahlman, C.. (2006). The Knowledge Economy, the KAM Methodology and World Bank

Operations. Washington: World Bank.

CONACYT (2012). Informe General del Estado de la Ciencia y la Tecnología.[General Report of Science

and Technology Status]. México: Conacyt

Correa, C. (1989). Propiedad intelectual, innovación tecnológica y comercio internacional. [Intellectual Property, Technological Innovation and International Commerce]. Comercio Exterior 39 (12).

Engle, R.F. and Granger, C.W.J (1987). Co-integration and Error Correction: Representation, Estimation and Testing. Econometrica 55, 251-276

Etzkowitz, H. and Leydesdorff, L. (1997). Universities and the Global Knowledge Economy. A Triple Helix of University-Industry Government Relations. London: Pinter Publishers.

Fagerberg J., Srholec, M., and Verspagen B. (2010). Innovation and Economic Development. Hall, B. and Rosenberg, N. (2010). Handbook of Economics of Innovation, v. 2 (pp. 833-872). Amsterdam: Elsevier- NH.

Foray, D. (2004). The Economics of Knowledge. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Freeman, Ch. (1991). Networks and Inventors: a Synthesis of Research Isssue, Research Policy 20 (5), 499-514.

Griliches, Z. (1979). R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence. Chicago: University of Chicago


Lall, S. (1992). Technological Capabilities and Industrialization. World Development 20(2), 165-186.

Lopez, S. (2002). Análisis de algunos elementos necesarios para la administración y gestión de laciencia y la tecnología en el contexto nacional. Aportes 20 (2), 103-120.

Lundvall, B. A. (1992). National Systems of Innovation, Towards a Theory of Innovation and Interactive Learning. London: Pinter Publishers.

Mokyr, J. (2010). The contribution of Economic History to the study on innovation and technical change: 1750-1914. Hall, B. and Rosenberg, N. (2010). Handbook of Economics on Innovation, v. 1 (pp. 11-50). Amsterdam: Elsevier-NH.

Nelson, R (1994). The co-evolution of technology, industrial structure and supporting institutions. Industrial and corporate Change 3(1), 47-63.

Nicolae, M. and Vitelar, A. (2013). Knowledge transfer in Romanian Higher Education. Management Dynamics in the Knowledge Economy, 1(1), 87-89.

OECD (2001). OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard: Towards a Knowledge-Based Economy. París: OECD.

Richter, R. and Streb, J. (2011). Catching-up and falling behind: Knowledge spillover from American to German machine toolmakers. The Journal of Economic History, 71(4), pp.1006-1031.

Rivera, M. A., (2007). Política tecnológica, conocimiento y desarrollo nacional: hacia una propuesta integradora. José Luis Calva (Coord.) Política industrial manufacturera, Colección Agenda para el desarrollo, vol. 7, México: Miguel Ángel Porrúa, UNAM y Cámara de Diputados.

Romer, P. (1991). El cambio tecnológico endógeno. El Trimestre Económico, 58(231), 441-480.

Ruiz, C. (2004). Hacia un cambio en el paradigma de la competitividad: la importancia de las organizaciones empresariales. Cimoli, García y Garrido (Coords.). El camino latinoamericano hacia la competitividad. México: Siglo XXI editores y UAM Azcapotzalco.

Soete, L., Verspagen , B., and Weel, B T. (2010). System of innovation. Hall, B. H. and Rosenberg, N. (2010). Handbook of Economics of Education, v. 2 (pp. 1159-1180). Amsterdam: Elsevier-NH,

Stoneman, P. and Battisti, G. (2010). The diffusion of new technology. Hall, B. and Rosenberg, N. (2010). Handbook of Economics of Innovation, v. 2 (pp. 733-760). Amsterdam: Elsevier-NH.

Stoneman, P. (2013). The impact of prior use on the further diffusion of new process technology. Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 22(3), 238-255.

Toh, M.H., Tang, H.C. and Choo, A. (2002). Mapping Singapore’s knowledge based economy. Economic Survey of Singapore, Third quarter, 56-75.

World Bank (2008). Knowledge Economy Index 2008. Rankings

World Bank (2012). Knowledge Economy Index 2012. Rankings


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c)

© Faculty of Management (SNSPA)

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under CC BY-NC

The opinions expressed in the papers published are the authors’ own and do not necessarily express the views of the editors of this journal. The authors assume all responsibility for the ideas expressed in the materials published.

ISSN 2392-8042 (online)