under-represents the impact of innovation on economic growth, while
evidence-based innovation accounting - tabs (2 of 6) to (6 of 6) - does not,
GDP - Gross Domestic Product - is a measure that
Academic Peer Review. How does it react to this?  The idea is backwards. On innovation, academic economists should seek scrutiny from those who practice innovation professionally. Government agencies should insist on it. The professional measure of innovation. Isn't it just price divided by cost?  No.That would not capture the success of improved products and processes. Measuring the way they increase 'quality' is essential, but found nowhere in Economics. The answer requires quantity to be an independent variable, a capability that was abandoned by Economics almost a century ago, page 76. I have restored it to pages 11 to 13. Price plotted against quantity is a demand curve from which 'quality' can easily be enumerated. Why is it just performance (or 'quality') divided by unit cost then?  Because that captures the outcomes from all innovation practice, including mine, is consistent with the best knowledge available from product success studies, and explains the economics of the innovation funnel precisely, pages 41 to 43. Our profession is one of the least known about. Our tacit know-how remains under any public radar; we also inhabit a world being presumed without access to it from campuses. But you don't consider High-tech,  My data range is 1951-2001. There is plenty of high-tech. Supercomputing is considered on pages 59 & 72. Much has happened since then. The Smartphone is an entity at the forefront of today's digital economy. Its treatment is crippled without these methods. National Accounting cannot be changed,  Elevate it. National Accounting currently views innovation as an addition to GDP, an output from the economy. But it is an input. This messes with productivity on multiple levels. National Accounting is marred for want of better innovation accounting from its STEM source; partially recognized in 2007, page 96, but glossed over since. Adjusting prices for changes in quality?  You are referring to hedonic methodology. Its limitations were already apparent in 1971 but have never been adequately addressed. Zvi Griliches used wheelbase as an auto attribute. No-one goes to a dealer to buy a length. Such proxies may or may not work. A contemporary deviation for the Smartphone highlights this deficiency, page 33, Figures 27a-d. These traditional techniques aren't capable in the digital economy, adding to the litany of Economics' shortcomings already recently listed in
 Numbered Pages are from 'Innovation in Economics: Missing Pieces' HERE
 The Economist