×
Home Current Archive Editorial board
News Contact
Scientific article

THE ENTREPRENEURIAL STATE AND CRISIS

By
Vesna Petrović
Vesna Petrović

Abstract

In this paper, we consider the relationship between the entrepreneurial state and the crisis (caused by economic and non-economic reasons and vice versa). Thus, it is about the interactive attitude of the entrepreneurial state in resolving the crisis and the impact of the crisis on the further development of new economic competencies and competencies of the state in the economy. The entrepreneurial state is seen as an entrepreneur and one of the most important economic actors, which accepts long-term investment risks, bearing in mind the broader picture and the common good. The development of new technologies and new technology companies in the United States and other developed countries has been possible, thanks to the investment of the American entrepreneurial state and its agencies. We start from the assumption that the American crisis, in 2008. caused by high debts, the private sector, not the US public debt, which today is enormously high and skyrocketing. At the heart of this consideration is the thesis that the classical economic theory of non-interference of the state in economic life, which stands aside in the recent era of the development of global capitalism, does not hold water. On the contrary, it turns out that government risky investment in the long run is the basis of a modern economy in which the private sector can develop only on the premises of this huge investment in the development of modern new technologies. Most innovation today and research institutes in the United States are due to the investments of the American state. The paper discusses the impact of the crisis on the understanding of the entrepreneurial state and its role in innovation, the role of new technologies and innovations in economic growth, entrepreneurial state and risks, entrepreneurial state and knowledge economy, entrepreneurial state in "pushing" versus "pulling" the green industrial revolution and the cost of investment, innovation, and development of the American entrepreneurial state.

References

1.
Abramovitz M. Resource and Output Trends in the United States since 1870. National bureau of Economic research; 1956.
2.
Adner R. The Wide Lens: A New Strategy for Innovation. Portfolio Penguin; 2012.
3.
Andersen R. The Silent Green Revolution’’ Underway at the Department of Energy’. Atlantic,9 septembar 2012.Apple. Creatnig Jobs throuh Innovation’. Apple.com. 2012.
4.
Barca S. Energy,Property,and the Industrial Revolution Narrative. Ecological Economics. 2011. p. 1309–15.
5.
Chesbrough H. Open Innovation: The new Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Tecnology. Harvard Business School Press; 2003.
6.
Christensen C. The Innovator’s Dilemma: When New Tecnologies Cause Great Firms to Fail. Harvard Business Press; 1997.
7.
Freeman C. ’ ’The -National System of Innovation-in Historical Perspective. Cambridge Journal of Economics. 1995. p. 5–24.
8.
Fridman M. Metodologija pozitivne ekonomije. U Esejima o pozitivnoj ekonomiji.Čikago. University of Chicago Press; 1953. p. 3–43.
9.
Fridman M. Sloboda izbora,Global Book. 1996.
10.
Kejnz J. Opšta teorija zaposlenosti,kamate i novca. Sluzbeni glasnik; 2013.
11.
Macukato M. Preduzetnička drzava, Rušenje mitova o sukobu privatnog i društvenog sektora,Akademska knjiga. 2020.
12.
Martinot E. Renewable Power for China:Past,Present,and Future. Fronties of Energy and Power Engineering in China. 2010. p. 287–94.
13.
Mazzucato M, Shipman A. Acounting for Productive Investment and Value Creation. Industrial and Corporate Change. 2014. p. 1–27.
14.
Mirović I. Novac i međunarodni monetarni sistem, Eseji o novcu. FPE Bijeljina; 2020.
15.
Mirović I. Strane banke u zemljama zapadnog Balkana. FPE Bijeljina; 2016.
16.
Pizano D. Razgovor s velikim ekonomistima. Mate; 2015.
17.
Polanyi K. The Great Transformation: The political and Economic Orgins of Our Time. 2001.
18.
Prestowitz C. Apple Makes Good Products but Flawed Arguments. Foreign Policy. 2012. p. 23.
19.
Veber M. Protestantska etika i duh kapitalizma. Novi Sad; 2011.

Citation

Article metrics

Google scholar: See link

The statements, opinions and data contained in the journal are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publisher and the editor(s). We stay neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.