Neo-Schumpeterian growth theory: missing entrepreneurs results in incomplete policy advice
指出新熊彼特增长模型因忽略真正的不确定性而让企业家角色变得多余，导致对创新、利润等解释不足，可能误导政策过度强调研发投入，强调税收政策对激励不确定性承担和创新的重要性。
The neo-Schumpeterian growth models, which appeared in the early 1990s, have ostensibly reintroduced the entrepreneur into mainstream growth theory. However, we show that by ignoring genuine uncertainty and by assuming that profits follow an objectively true and ex ante known probability distribution, the entrepreneur is made redundant. Thus, the theory fails to exhaustively explain innovation, the role of ownership competence, profits, the function of financial markets, wealth and income distribution, and, ultimately, economic growth. These shortcomings risk leading to erroneous or overly narrow policy conclusions by overestimating the importance of supporting R&D investments. Rather, the presence of genuine uncertainty forms a fundamental theoretical basis for the importance of new venture creation as a source of innovation-driven growth; entrepreneurs must establish and expand firms to capture the subjectively perceived profit opportunities. Therefore, tax policy is decisive for the commercialization and dissemination of innovations by providing incentives to uncertainty-bearing, not only for entrepreneurs, but also for intrapreneurs and financiers taking an active part in the governance and development of firms based on innovations characterized by genuine uncertainty. Furthermore, taxation can distort the evolutionary selection of innovations and firms, for instance, by taxing owners and firms differently. The neo-Schumpeterian growth models, introduced in the early 1990s, aimed to integrate creative destruction into mainstream economic theories of growth. However, the models fall short because they do not account for genuine uncertainty, instead assuming that profits can be predicted based on known probabilities. This oversight effectively sidelines the entrepreneur's unique role and does not satisfactorily explain economic phenomena critical to economic growth such as innovation, ownership, profits, and the role of financial markets. These limitations could lead to flawed or narrow policy recommendations, especially those that overemphasize the importance of research and development (R&D) investments. To address these issues, economic policies should focus more on enhancing the commercialization and dissemination of innovations. This includes providing incentives not just for entrepreneurs, but also for intrapreneurs and financiers who actively engage in and support the entrepreneurial ventures, bearing uncertainty and contributing to their governance and growth. In this context, tax policy is of major importance as it greatly influences incentives to uncertainty-bearing, not only for entrepreneurs, but also for intrapreneurs and financiers taking an active part in the governance and development of firms based on innovations characterized by genuine uncertainty. Furthermore, an inappropriately designed tax code will distort the evolutionary selection of innovations and firms, for example, by taxing owners and firms differently.