technological progressiveness

Technological progressivenessclick for a larger image
Fig. 182 Technological progressiveness. (a) The fall in a firm's long-run average cost curve from AC1 to AC2 as a result of technological advance. (b) Advances in computer technology. The time and cost for a computer to process 1,700 typical data-processing operations. Source: IBM, cited in Financial Times, 15 February 1991.

technological progressiveness

an aspect of MARKET PERFORMANCE that denotes the extent to which firms develop and introduce new and improved products, production and distribution techniques. Radical INVENTIONS and INNOVATIONS may make it possible to reduce manufacturing and distribution costs, thereby permitting a lowering of the supply price to the consumer. See Fig. 182 (a) . In the theory of costs, firms are assumed to operate within existing technological boundaries in both the SHORT RUN and the LONG RUN, but in the VERY LONG RUN, technological progressiveness serves to change the underlying cost conditions. For example, Fig. 182 (b) shows how the time and

cost to undertake a particular data-processing activity has been reduced by improvements in computer technology Technological progressiveness in aggregate terms affects a country's rate of ECONOMIC GROWTH. (See ECONOMIC GROWTH for further discussion.) See also MONOPOLY, PRODUCT PERFORMANCE, RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, SOLOW ECONOMIC GROWTH MODEL, TECHNOLOGICAL UNEMPLOYMENT, PRODUCTIVITY, AUTOMATION.

Collins Dictionary of Economics, 4th ed. © C. Pass, B. Lowes, L. Davies 2005
References in periodicals archive ?
Answering this question requires understanding the reasons behind Britain's lack of technological progressiveness. One popular explanation is a culture that denigrated industry and entrepreneurship.
These mergers were financed with debt that has burdened the companies so that the could not do the things they ought to have done to enhance production efficiency, technological progressiveness and international competitiveness.
If they can prove to me that their merger demonstrably will enhance production efficiency, promote technological progressiveness, enhance international competitiveness, and that these objectives cannot be achieved by less anticompetitive ways than by merger, then I would say go ahead.

Full browser ?