|
on Knowledge Management and Knowledge Economy |
|
Issue of 2026–03–16
six papers chosen by Laura Nicola-Gavrila, Centrul European de Studii Manageriale în Administrarea Afacerilor |
| By: | Daron Acemoglu; Dingwen Kong; Asuman Ozdaglar |
| Abstract: | We study how generative AI, and in particular agentic AI, shapes human learning incentives and the long-run evolution of society’s information ecosystem. We build a dynamic model of learning and decision-making in which successful decisions require combining shared, community-level general knowledge with individual-level, context-specific knowledge; these two inputs are complements. Learning exhibits economies of scope: costly human effort jointly produces a private signal about their own context and a “thin” public signal that accumulates into the community’s stock of general knowledge, generating a learning externality. Agentic AI delivers context-specific recommendations that substitute for human effort. By contrast, a richer stock of general knowledge complements human effort by raising its marginal return. The model highlights a sharp dynamic tension: while agentic AI can improve contemporaneous decision quality, it can also erode learning incentives that sustain long-run collective knowledge. When human effort is sufficiently elastic and agentic recommendations exceed an accuracy threshold, the economy can tip into a knowledge-collapse steady state in which general knowledge vanishes ultimately, despite high-quality personalized advice. Welfare is generally non-monotone in agentic accuracy, implying an interior, welfare-maximizing level of agentic precision and motivating information-design regulations. In contrast, greater aggregation capacity for general knowledge—meaning more effective sharing and pooling of human-generated general knowledge—unambiguously raises welfare and increases resilience to knowledge collapse. |
| JEL: | D80 D83 |
| Date: | 2026–02 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:nbr:nberwo:34910 |
| By: | Diana Jeremejeva (" Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Latvia, Aspazijas blvd. 5, LV-1050, Riga, Latvia " Author-2-Name: Inga BÅ«mane Author-2-Workplace-Name: Faculty of Economics and Social Sciences, University of Latvia, Aspazijas blvd. 5, LV-1050, Riga, Latvia Author-3-Name: Author-3-Workplace-Name: Author-4-Name: Author-4-Workplace-Name: Author-5-Name: Author-5-Workplace-Name: Author-6-Name: Author-6-Workplace-Name: Author-7-Name: Author-7-Workplace-Name: Author-8-Name: Author-8-Workplace-Name:) |
| Abstract: | " Objective - The study aims to provide a multidimensional understanding of the conceptual boundaries of intangible assets, distinguishing them from related constructs such as firm-specific intangible resources and intellectual capital. In this regard, the study examines how accounting, legal, and economic perspectives – particularly identification, property rights, control, and economically relevant distinctive features – shape the degree of ""asset ness"" exhibited by different intangibles. Methodology/Technique - The research adopts a multidisciplinary, literature-based approach. Attention was paid to both seminal and contemporary studies published over the last two decades. An extensive search across a range of academic databases was conducted, and the reference lists of seminal papers were examined. In addition, targeted searches were conducted for key authors who have made significant contributions to the field. Findings - IP-based intangibles consistently satisfy asset definition criteria across accounting, economic, and legal dimensions. In contrast, many intangibles remain firm-specific and embedded within organizational processes, making them inseparable from the firm and therefore unrecognizable under accounting standards. The analysis demonstrates that challenges surrounding intangibles consistently emerge across disciplinary boundaries, thereby highlighting the multidimensional nature of the topic. Novelty - The present paper contributes to the existing literature by offering a multidimensional conceptual foundation for understanding the multifaceted nature of intangibles. The study introduces a distinction between intangible assets and firm-specific intangible resources and conceptualizes intellectual capital as a synergistic knowledge system in which both components and their interconnections are pivotal. Type of Paper - Review" |
| Keywords: | intangibles; intangible assets; intellectual capital; property rights |
| JEL: | M40 M41 O34 |
| Date: | 2026–03–31 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:gtr:gatrjs:afr248 |
| By: | Carmen E. Stoenoiu (Memorandumului st., no. 28, 400114, Cluj-Napoca, Romania, Technical University of Cluj-Napoca Author-2-Name: Author-2-Workplace-Name: Author-3-Name: Author-3-Workplace-Name: Author-4-Name: Author-4-Workplace-Name: Author-5-Name: Author-5-Workplace-Name: Author-6-Name: Author-6-Workplace-Name: Author-7-Name: Author-7-Workplace-Name: Author-8-Name: Author-8-Workplace-Name:) |
| Abstract: | " Objective - The current research focuses on existing studies from 2015-2024, which investigate 5 elements, such as competence, skills, knowledge, abilities, and attitudes, regarding the accounting field, in the context of structural changes related to activities in the economy. Methodology/Technique - At the level of the accounting field, the study reveals strong interconnections among economic and business aspects and technical and professional skills. Findings - The originality of the study lies in the fact that it creates an image of the progress of the accounting profession, showing the synergy that exists in education and the development of skills, and then between the application of knowledge and the achievement of performance. Type of Paper - Review" |
| Keywords: | employability, accounting, economics, business, technical, and professional skills. |
| JEL: | M40 M41 |
| Date: | 2026–03–31 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:gtr:gatrjs:afr246 |
| By: | Harashima, Taiji |
| Abstract: | Many empirical studies support the necessity of public funding of science, but endogenous growth models do not necessarily do so. In this paper, I distinguish between investments in research and development (R&D) for “discovery” and “invention” in a framework of an endogenous growth model and show that there is the optimal ratio of discovery to invention in the sense that the highest productivity of producing knowledge is achieved. Because discovery generally does not generate profit, investments in R&D for discovery have to be publicly financed. Therefore, a government has the responsibility to maintain an optimal ratio of discovery to invention to keep the highest rate of endogenous economic growth. |
| Keywords: | Endogenous growth; Discovery; Production of knowledge; Public funding of science; R&D |
| JEL: | H41 O32 O33 O38 O40 |
| Date: | 2026–01–11 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:pra:mprapa:127672 |
| By: | Martinez Cillero Maria (European Commission - JRC); Napolitano Lorenzo (European Commission - JRC); Rentocchini Francesco (European Commission - JRC); Seri Cecilia; Zaurino Elena (European Commission - JRC) |
| Abstract: | HIGHLIGHTS ‣ Technological mergers and acquisitions (M&As) increase investors' market power by around 2% beyond standard M&As, with stronger effects concentrated among top R&D investors, US-based investors, and high-tech manufacturing investors. ‣ The increase in market power seems primarily driven by the consolidation of control over existing patents, limiting knowledge diffusion and making it harder for competitors to catch up. ‣ These findings support ongoing policy discussions on updating merger review regulations, as traditional concentration metrics may not fully capture competition risks posed by large technology firms. ‣ Technological assets and innovations are often embedded and masked within larger M&A deals. Separating the technology component of patents would allow regulators to assess competition concerns related to innovation while still allowing the acquisition to proceed. ‣ The analysis draws on a newly constructed firm-level dataset to provide a more systematic picture of technological M&As and market power. |
| Date: | 2026–02 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ipt:iptwpa:jrc145729 |
| By: | Cheang, Bryan; Mehrotra, Praharsh |
| Abstract: | This paper explores the limits of mission‐directed entrepreneurial states by drawing on the theory of recombinant innovation and F.A. Hayek's insights on the spontaneous growth of knowledge in society. First, the use of discretionary policymaking curtails the range of knowledge generated in the process of social interaction, limiting the scope for ideas to be fortuitously recombined. Second, by privileging a single overarching mission, the state may foster a social culture that encourages compliance with authority, limiting the epistemic curiosity in individuals necessary for creative innovation. We make this argument through a comparative historical analysis of Singapore and Hong Kong, which adopted divergent approaches to development. Despite rapid growth in both, the former's technocratic governance came at the expense of its creative sectors, while the latter's reliance on spontaneous solutions enabled strong creative industries to develop despite little state support. By using creative performance as a proxy for innovation‐led development, we exemplify the limits of top‐down governance. Rather than fostering creative destruction, the entrepreneurial state may end up being a creative destroyer. |
| JEL: | R14 J01 N0 |
| Date: | 2026–02–24 |
| URL: | https://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ehl:lserod:137148 |