Contenido

La expresión "destrucción creativa" fue popularizada por Joseph Schumpeter y está más asociada a él, particularmente en su libro Capitalismo, Socialismo y Democracia"), publicado por primera vez en 1942. Ya en su libro Ciclos económicos de 1939, intentó refinar las ideas innovadoras de Nikolai Kondratieff y su ciclo de onda larga que Schumpeter creía que fue impulsado por la innovación tecnológica.[20]​ Tres años más tarde, en Capitalismo, Socialismo y Democracia, Schumpeter introdujo el término "destrucción creativa", que derivó explícitamente del pensamiento marxista (analizado extensamente en la Parte I del libro) y lo usó para describir el proceso disruptivo de transformación que acompaña a tal innovación:.

En la visión del capitalismo de Schumpeter, la entrada innovadora de los emprendedores fue la fuerza disruptiva que sostuvo el crecimiento económico, incluso cuando destruyó el valor de las empresas y los trabajadores establecidos que disfrutaban de cierto grado de poder de monopolio derivado de paradigmas tecnológicos, organizativos, regulatorios y económicos anteriores.[21]​ Sin embargo, Schumpeter fue pesimista acerca de la sostenibilidad de este proceso, y lo vio como un eventual debilitamiento de los propios marcos institucionales del capitalismo:.

Sin embargo, Schumpeter elaboró el concepto, haciéndolo central en su teoría económica, y más tarde fue tomado como una doctrina principal de la llamada Escuela Austriaca de pensamiento económico de libre mercado.

Examples

Schumpeter (1949) in one of his examples used "the railroadization of the Middle East as pioneered by the Illinois Central." He wrote: "The Illinois Central not only meant very good business while it was being built and while new towns were built around it and the land was cultivated, but it spelled the death penalty for the [old] agriculture of the West."[22]​.

Companies that once revolutionized and dominated new industries, for example, Xerox in photocopiers[23]​ or Polaroid in instant photography, have seen their profits decline and their dominance fade as rivals release improved designs or reduce manufacturing costs. In technology, the cassette tape replaced the 8-track, only to be replaced in turn by the compact disc, which was undermined by downloads to MP3 players, which are now being usurped by streaming web services.[24] Companies that made money from technology becoming obsolete do not necessarily adapt well to the business environment created by new technologies.

An example of this is the way ad-supported online news sites like The Huffington Post are leading to the creative destruction of the traditional newspaper. The Christian Science Monitor announced in January 2009[25]​ that it would no longer continue to publish a daily paper edition, but would instead be available online daily and provide a weekly print edition. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer became online-only in March 2009.[26]​ Nationally in the U.S., employment in the newspaper business fell from 455,700 in 1990 to 225,100 in 2013. During that same period, employment in Internet publishing and broadcasting rose from 29,400 to 121,200.[27]​ Traditional French alumni networks, which generally charge their students to connect online or through paper directories, are in danger of creative destruction caused by free social networking sites such as LinkedIn and Viadeo.[28]​.

Indeed, successful innovation is typically a source of temporary power in the market, eroding the profits and position of old firms, but ultimately succumbing to the pressure of new inventions marketed by other competitors. Creative destruction is a powerful economic concept because it can explain many of the dynamics or kinetics of industrial change: the transition from a competitive market to a monopolistic market, and vice versa.[29]​ It has been the inspiration for endogenous growth theory and also evolutionary economics.[30]​.

David Ames Wells (1890), who was a leading authority on the effects of technology on the economy at the turn of the century, gave many examples of creative destruction (without using the term) caused by improvements in the efficiency of the steam engine, transportation, the international telegraph network, and agricultural mechanization.[31]

David Harvey

Geographer and historian David Harvey in a series of works since the 1970s (Social Justice and the City, 1973;[32]​ The Limits to Capital, 1982;[33]​ The Urbanization of Capital, 1985;[34]​ Spaces of Hope, 2000;[35]​ Spaces of Capital, 2001;[36]​ Spaces of Neoliberalization, 2005;[37]​ The Enigma of Capital and the Crises of Capitalism, 2010[38]​), elaborated Marx's thinking on the systemic contradictions of capitalism, particularly in relation to the production of the urban environment (and with the production of space in general). He developed the notion that capitalism finds a "spatial solution"[39]​ to its periodic crises of overaccumulation through investment in fixed assets of infrastructure, buildings, etc.: "The built environment which constitutes a vast field of collective means of production and consumption absorbs large amounts of capital in both its construction and maintenance. Urbanization is a way of absorbing surplus capital."[40]​ While the creation of the built environment can act as a form of crisis displacement, It can also constitute a limit in itself, since it tends to freeze productive forces in a fixed spatial form. As capital cannot withstand a limit to profitability, increasingly frenetic forms of "time-space compression"[41]​ emerge (increased speed of turnover, ever faster transport and communications infrastructure innovation, "flexible accumulation"[42]​), often driving technological innovation. Such innovation, however, is a double-edged sword:

Globalization can be seen as a definitive form of space-time compression, allowing capital investment to move almost instantaneously from one corner of the world to another, devaluing fixed assets and laying off labor in an urban conglomerate while opening new manufacturing centers in more profitable sites for production operations. Therefore, in this continuous process of creative destruction, capitalism does not resolve its contradictions and crises, but simply "moves them geographically".[44]

Marshall Berman

In his 1987 book All That is Solid Melts into Air: The Experience of Modernity,[10]​ particularly in the chapter titled "Innovative Self-Destruction" (pp. 98-104), Marshall Berman offers a reading of Marxist "creative destruction" to explain key processes at work within modernity. The title of the book is taken from a well-known passage from the Communist Manifesto. Berman elaborates this into a kind of Zeitgeist that has profound social and cultural consequences:.

Here Berman emphasizes Marx's perception of the fragility and evanescence of the immense creative forces of capitalism, and makes this apparent contradiction one of the key explanatory figures of modernity.

Manuel Castells

The sociologist Manuel Castells, in his trilogy on The information age: economy, society and culture (whose first volume, The network society, appeared in 1996),[11] reinterpreted the processes by which capitalism invests in certain regions of the world, while detaching itself from others, using the new paradigm of "information networks". In the era of globalization, capitalism is characterized by almost instantaneous flow, creating a new spatial dimension, "the space of flows."[46] While technological innovation has enabled this unprecedented fluidity, this same process causes entire areas and redundant populations to be ignored by information networks. In fact, Castells defines the new spatial form of the megacity or megalopolis as having the contradictory quality of being "connected globally and disconnected locally, physically and socially."[47] Castells explicitly links these arguments to the notion of creative destruction:

Daniele Archibugi

Developing the Schumpeterian legacy, the Science Policy Research Unit school at the University of Sussex has further detailed the importance of creative destruction by exploring, in particular, how new technologies are often idiosyncratic with existing productive regimes and will lead to bankrupt companies and even industries that fail to keep up with the rate of change. Chris Freeman and Carlota Pérez have developed these ideas.[49]​ More recently, Daniele Archibugi and Andrea Filippetti have associated the economic crisis of 2008 with the slowdown in the opportunities offered by information and communication technologies (ICT).[50]​ Using the film Blade Runner as a metaphor, Archibugi has argued that of the innovations described in the film in 1982, all those associated with ICT have become part of our lives. everyday. But, on the contrary, none of those in the field of biotechnology have been fully commercialized. A new economic recovery will occur when some key technological opportunities are identified and sustained.[51]​.

Others

In 1992, Philippe Aghion and Peter Howitt put forward the idea of ​​creative destruction in formal mathematical terms,[53] providing an alternative model of endogenous growth compared to Paul Romer's expanding varieties model. In 2025, they received the Nobel Prize in Economics "for the theory of sustained growth through creative destruction." [54]​.

In 1995, Harvard Business School authors Richard L. Nolan and David C. Croson released Creative Destruction: A Six-Stage Process for Transforming the Organization. The book advocated downsizing to free up slack resources, which could then be reinvested to create a competitive advantage.

More recently, the idea of ​​"creative destruction" was used by Max Page in his 1999 book, The Creative Destruction of Manhattan, 1900-1940. The book charts the constant reinvention of Manhattan, often at the expense of preserving a particular past. Describing this process as "creative destruction," Page explains the complex historical circumstances, economics, social conditions, and personalities that have produced crucial changes in Manhattan's urban landscape.[55]​.

In addition to Max Page, others have used the term "creative destruction" to describe the process of urban renewal and modernization. T.C. Chang and Shirlena Huang made reference to "creative destruction" in their paper Recreating place, replacing memory: Creative Destruction at the Singapore River. The authors explored efforts to redevelop a waterfront area that reflected a vibrant new culture while paying sufficient homage to the region's history. Rosemary Wakeman chronicled the evolution of an area in central Paris, France, known as Les Halles. Les Halles was home to a vibrant market from the 19th century onwards. Finally, in 1971, the markets were relocated and the pavilions demolished. In its place, there is now a train, metro and bus hub. Les Halles is also the site of France's largest shopping center and the controversial Center Georges Pompidou.[57]​.

The term "creative destruction" has been applied to the arts. Alan Ackerman and Martin Puncher (2006) edited a collection of essays under the title Against the theater: creative destruction on the modernist stage. They detail the changes and causal motivations experienced in theater as a result of the modernization of both show production and the underlying economy. They talk about how theater has reinvented itself in the face of anti-theatricality, pushing the limits of the traditional to include more physical productions, which could be considered avant-garde staging techniques.[58]​.

In his 1999 book, Still the New World, American Literature in a Culture of Creative Destruction, Philip Fisher analyzes the themes of creative destruction at play in literary works of the century, including the works of authors such as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Walt Whitman, Herman Melville, Mark Twain, and Henry James, among others. Fisher argues that creative destruction exists within literary forms just as it does within changing technology.[59]​.

The innovative entrepreneur, as described by Schumpeter, is an individual who is unusual in his vitality and energy, even in the face of temporary failures. The innovator is not an inventor. The latter is generally a genius, a professional or professional technician/scientist. The entrepreneur creates markets for the inventions of geniuses. The innovator also stands out for his perseverance and ambition, not for his genius. His motivation would not be mere wealth, or simple hedonism: the Schumpeterian entrepreneur—who comes from any social class—dreams of creating an economic empire, a business dynasty (a name, a brand).

For Schumpeter the essence of capitalism is dynamism, thus a static capitalism would be a contradiction. Schumpeter establishes five cases of innovation:

1. • The introduction of a new good.

2. • The introduction of a new method of production or marketing of existing goods.

3. • The opening of new markets.

4. • The conquest of a new source of raw materials.

5. • The creation of a new monopoly or the destruction of an existing one.

An essential element of the innovation economy is credit creation, or credit expansion. The innovation process in the markets of goods and services coincides with the implementation of financial innovation, which is in itself an extremely risky process (e.g. generating an economic cycle of speculation "Speculation (economy)")>bankruptcy) but a necessary process for innovation. Without financial innovation, there are no innovative ventures, and therefore there is no creation of wealth and employment. In this way, Schumpeter attributes to banks, and the secondary creation of money, a fundamental role in capitalism.

The following text appears to be the source of the phrase "Schumpeter's Gale" to refer to creative destruction:

The film Other People's Money (1991) offers contrasting views on creative destruction, presented in two speeches about the acquisition of a publicly traded wire and cable company in a small New England town. One speech is from a corporate attacker, and the other is given by the company's CEO, who is primarily interested in protecting his employees and the people.

• - Creativity techniques.

• - Disruptive technology.

• - Mass extinction.

• - Fallacy of the broken window.

• - Leapfrogging.

• - Philippe Aghion and Peter Howitt. A Model of growth through Creative Destruction. Econometrica 60:2 (1992), pp. 323–51.

• - Philippe Aghion and Peter Howitt. Endogenous Growth Theory. MIT Press. 1997.

• - Richard Foster and Sarah Kaplan. "Creative Destruction: Why Companies that are Built to Last Underperform the Market – And how to Successfully Transform Them." Currency publisher. 2001.

• - David Harvey. "Neo-liberalism as Creative Destruction Archived March 8, 2021, at the Wayback Machine." Geogr. Ann., 88 B (2): 145–158. 2006.

• - J. Stanley Metcalfe. Evolutionary Economics and Creative Destruction (Graz Schumpeter Lectures, 1). Routledge. 1998.

• - Joan Morro, Schumpeter's Creative Destruction. Its historical significance and current projection. Pompeu Frabra University. 2019.

• - Richard L. Nolan and David C. Croson, Creative Destruction: A Six-Stage Process for Transforming the Organization. Harvard Business School Press. 1995.

• - Max Page. The Creative Destruction of Manhattan, 1900–1940. University of Chicago Press. 1999.

• - Hugo Reinert and Erik S. Reinert. "Creative Destruction in Economics: Nietzsche, Sombart, Schumpeter." In J.G. Backhaus and W. Drechsler, eds. Friedrich Nietzsche: Economy, and Society. Springer. 2006.

• - Joseph A. Schumpeter. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (New York: Harper, 1975) [orig. pub. 1942].

• - Thomas G. Osenton. The Death of Demand: Finding Growth in a Saturated Global Economy (New Jersey: Financial Times Prentice Hall, 2004).

• - James M. Utterback. Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation. Harvard Business School Press. 1996.

• - Thomas Homer-Dixon"). Upside of Down: Catastrophe, Creativity, and the Renewal of Civilization")[1]. Island Press. 2006.

• - Stanley I. Kutler"), Privilege and Creative Destruction: The Charles River Bridge Case, The Norton Library, 1971.

• - Schumpeter and the economics of innovation, Thomas K. McCraw. Prophet of Innovation. Joseph Schumpeter and Creative Destruction. Harvard University Press. Review by Agustín Mackinlay.

In Marx's thought

Although Marx does not explicitly use the modern term "creative destruction", it comes widely from his analyses, particularly the work of Werner Sombart (whom Engels described as the only German professor who understood Marx's Capital)[13]​ and Joseph Schumpeter, who thoroughly discusses the origin of the ideas in Marx's work (see below).

In the Communist Manifesto of 1848, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels describe the crisis tendencies of capitalism in terms of "imposed destruction of a mass of productive forces":.

A few years later, in Grundrisse, Marx wrote about "the violent destruction of capital not by relations external to it, but by the condition of its self-preservation."[5] In other words, he establishes a necessary link between the creative or generating forces of production in capitalism and the destruction of the value of capital as one of the key means by which capitalism attempts to overcome its internal contradictions:

In The Production of Relative Surplus Value ("Section 4" of Capital, 1863), Marx refines this theory to distinguish between scenarios where the destruction of (commodity) values ​​affects use values ​​or exchange values ​​or both together.[9]​ The destruction of exchange value combined with the preservation of use value presents clear opportunities for new capital investments and, therefore, for the repetition of the production-devaluation cycle:.

Social geographer David Harvey summarizes the differences between Marx's use of these concepts and Schumpeter's: "Both Karl Marx and Joseph Schumpeter wrote in depth about the 'creator-destroyer' tendencies inherent in capitalism. While Marx clearly admired the creativity of capitalism he...strongly highlighted its self-destructiveness. Schumpeterians have always gloried in the infinite creativity of capitalism, while treating destructiveness as a matter of the normal costs of doing business".[16]​.

Another early use

In The Origin of Species, which was published in 1859, Charles Darwin wrote that "the extinction of old forms is the almost inevitable consequence of the production of new forms." A notable exception to this rule is how the extinction of the dinosaurs facilitated the adaptive radiation of mammals. In this case, creation was the consequence, rather than the cause, of destruction.

In philosophical terms, the concept of "creative destruction" is close to Hegel's concept of sublation. In German economic discourse it was taken from the writings of Marx by Werner Sombart, particularly in his 1913 text Krieg und Kapitalismus:[17]​.

Hugo Reinert has argued that Sombart's formulation of the concept was influenced by Eastern mysticism, specifically the image of the Hindu god Shiva, who presents himself in the paradoxical aspect of simultaneous destroyer and creator.[2] Possibly this influence passed on from Johann Gottfried Herder, who brought Hindu thought to German philosophy in his Philosophy of Human History (Ideen zur Philosophie der Geschichte der Menschheit). (Herder 1790–92), specifically volume III, pp. 41–64.[2]​ through Arthur Schopenhauer and the orientalist Friedrich Maier") through the writings of Friedrich Nietzsche. Nietzsche represented the creative destruction of modernity through the mythical figure of Dionysus, a figure he saw as both "destructively creative" and "creatively destructive".[18]​ In the following passage from The Genealogy of Morals (1887), Nietzsche defends a universal principle of a cycle of creation and destruction, so that each creative act has its destructive consequence:

Other century formulations of this idea include the Russian anarchist Mikhail Bakunin, who wrote in 1842, "The passion for destruction is also a creative passion!" contradictions in the case of Marx and Schumpeter).

Contenido

La expresión "destrucción creativa" fue popularizada por Joseph Schumpeter y está más asociada a él, particularmente en su libro Capitalismo, Socialismo y Democracia"), publicado por primera vez en 1942. Ya en su libro Ciclos económicos de 1939, intentó refinar las ideas innovadoras de Nikolai Kondratieff y su ciclo de onda larga que Schumpeter creía que fue impulsado por la innovación tecnológica.[20]​ Tres años más tarde, en Capitalismo, Socialismo y Democracia, Schumpeter introdujo el término "destrucción creativa", que derivó explícitamente del pensamiento marxista (analizado extensamente en la Parte I del libro) y lo usó para describir el proceso disruptivo de transformación que acompaña a tal innovación:.

En la visión del capitalismo de Schumpeter, la entrada innovadora de los emprendedores fue la fuerza disruptiva que sostuvo el crecimiento económico, incluso cuando destruyó el valor de las empresas y los trabajadores establecidos que disfrutaban de cierto grado de poder de monopolio derivado de paradigmas tecnológicos, organizativos, regulatorios y económicos anteriores.[21]​ Sin embargo, Schumpeter fue pesimista acerca de la sostenibilidad de este proceso, y lo vio como un eventual debilitamiento de los propios marcos institucionales del capitalismo:.

Sin embargo, Schumpeter elaboró el concepto, haciéndolo central en su teoría económica, y más tarde fue tomado como una doctrina principal de la llamada Escuela Austriaca de pensamiento económico de libre mercado.

Examples

Schumpeter (1949) in one of his examples used "the railroadization of the Middle East as pioneered by the Illinois Central." He wrote: "The Illinois Central not only meant very good business while it was being built and while new towns were built around it and the land was cultivated, but it spelled the death penalty for the [old] agriculture of the West."[22]​.

Companies that once revolutionized and dominated new industries, for example, Xerox in photocopiers[23]​ or Polaroid in instant photography, have seen their profits decline and their dominance fade as rivals release improved designs or reduce manufacturing costs. In technology, the cassette tape replaced the 8-track, only to be replaced in turn by the compact disc, which was undermined by downloads to MP3 players, which are now being usurped by streaming web services.[24] Companies that made money from technology becoming obsolete do not necessarily adapt well to the business environment created by new technologies.

An example of this is the way ad-supported online news sites like The Huffington Post are leading to the creative destruction of the traditional newspaper. The Christian Science Monitor announced in January 2009[25]​ that it would no longer continue to publish a daily paper edition, but would instead be available online daily and provide a weekly print edition. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer became online-only in March 2009.[26]​ Nationally in the U.S., employment in the newspaper business fell from 455,700 in 1990 to 225,100 in 2013. During that same period, employment in Internet publishing and broadcasting rose from 29,400 to 121,200.[27]​ Traditional French alumni networks, which generally charge their students to connect online or through paper directories, are in danger of creative destruction caused by free social networking sites such as LinkedIn and Viadeo.[28]​.

Indeed, successful innovation is typically a source of temporary power in the market, eroding the profits and position of old firms, but ultimately succumbing to the pressure of new inventions marketed by other competitors. Creative destruction is a powerful economic concept because it can explain many of the dynamics or kinetics of industrial change: the transition from a competitive market to a monopolistic market, and vice versa.[29]​ It has been the inspiration for endogenous growth theory and also evolutionary economics.[30]​.

David Ames Wells (1890), who was a leading authority on the effects of technology on the economy at the turn of the century, gave many examples of creative destruction (without using the term) caused by improvements in the efficiency of the steam engine, transportation, the international telegraph network, and agricultural mechanization.[31]

David Harvey

Geographer and historian David Harvey in a series of works since the 1970s (Social Justice and the City, 1973;[32]​ The Limits to Capital, 1982;[33]​ The Urbanization of Capital, 1985;[34]​ Spaces of Hope, 2000;[35]​ Spaces of Capital, 2001;[36]​ Spaces of Neoliberalization, 2005;[37]​ The Enigma of Capital and the Crises of Capitalism, 2010[38]​), elaborated Marx's thinking on the systemic contradictions of capitalism, particularly in relation to the production of the urban environment (and with the production of space in general). He developed the notion that capitalism finds a "spatial solution"[39]​ to its periodic crises of overaccumulation through investment in fixed assets of infrastructure, buildings, etc.: "The built environment which constitutes a vast field of collective means of production and consumption absorbs large amounts of capital in both its construction and maintenance. Urbanization is a way of absorbing surplus capital."[40]​ While the creation of the built environment can act as a form of crisis displacement, It can also constitute a limit in itself, since it tends to freeze productive forces in a fixed spatial form. As capital cannot withstand a limit to profitability, increasingly frenetic forms of "time-space compression"[41]​ emerge (increased speed of turnover, ever faster transport and communications infrastructure innovation, "flexible accumulation"[42]​), often driving technological innovation. Such innovation, however, is a double-edged sword:

Globalization can be seen as a definitive form of space-time compression, allowing capital investment to move almost instantaneously from one corner of the world to another, devaluing fixed assets and laying off labor in an urban conglomerate while opening new manufacturing centers in more profitable sites for production operations. Therefore, in this continuous process of creative destruction, capitalism does not resolve its contradictions and crises, but simply "moves them geographically".[44]

Marshall Berman

In his 1987 book All That is Solid Melts into Air: The Experience of Modernity,[10]​ particularly in the chapter titled "Innovative Self-Destruction" (pp. 98-104), Marshall Berman offers a reading of Marxist "creative destruction" to explain key processes at work within modernity. The title of the book is taken from a well-known passage from the Communist Manifesto. Berman elaborates this into a kind of Zeitgeist that has profound social and cultural consequences:.

Here Berman emphasizes Marx's perception of the fragility and evanescence of the immense creative forces of capitalism, and makes this apparent contradiction one of the key explanatory figures of modernity.

Manuel Castells

The sociologist Manuel Castells, in his trilogy on The information age: economy, society and culture (whose first volume, The network society, appeared in 1996),[11] reinterpreted the processes by which capitalism invests in certain regions of the world, while detaching itself from others, using the new paradigm of "information networks". In the era of globalization, capitalism is characterized by almost instantaneous flow, creating a new spatial dimension, "the space of flows."[46] While technological innovation has enabled this unprecedented fluidity, this same process causes entire areas and redundant populations to be ignored by information networks. In fact, Castells defines the new spatial form of the megacity or megalopolis as having the contradictory quality of being "connected globally and disconnected locally, physically and socially."[47] Castells explicitly links these arguments to the notion of creative destruction:

Daniele Archibugi

Developing the Schumpeterian legacy, the Science Policy Research Unit school at the University of Sussex has further detailed the importance of creative destruction by exploring, in particular, how new technologies are often idiosyncratic with existing productive regimes and will lead to bankrupt companies and even industries that fail to keep up with the rate of change. Chris Freeman and Carlota Pérez have developed these ideas.[49]​ More recently, Daniele Archibugi and Andrea Filippetti have associated the economic crisis of 2008 with the slowdown in the opportunities offered by information and communication technologies (ICT).[50]​ Using the film Blade Runner as a metaphor, Archibugi has argued that of the innovations described in the film in 1982, all those associated with ICT have become part of our lives. everyday. But, on the contrary, none of those in the field of biotechnology have been fully commercialized. A new economic recovery will occur when some key technological opportunities are identified and sustained.[51]​.

Others

In 1992, Philippe Aghion and Peter Howitt put forward the idea of ​​creative destruction in formal mathematical terms,[53] providing an alternative model of endogenous growth compared to Paul Romer's expanding varieties model. In 2025, they received the Nobel Prize in Economics "for the theory of sustained growth through creative destruction." [54]​.

In 1995, Harvard Business School authors Richard L. Nolan and David C. Croson released Creative Destruction: A Six-Stage Process for Transforming the Organization. The book advocated downsizing to free up slack resources, which could then be reinvested to create a competitive advantage.

More recently, the idea of ​​"creative destruction" was used by Max Page in his 1999 book, The Creative Destruction of Manhattan, 1900-1940. The book charts the constant reinvention of Manhattan, often at the expense of preserving a particular past. Describing this process as "creative destruction," Page explains the complex historical circumstances, economics, social conditions, and personalities that have produced crucial changes in Manhattan's urban landscape.[55]​.

In addition to Max Page, others have used the term "creative destruction" to describe the process of urban renewal and modernization. T.C. Chang and Shirlena Huang made reference to "creative destruction" in their paper Recreating place, replacing memory: Creative Destruction at the Singapore River. The authors explored efforts to redevelop a waterfront area that reflected a vibrant new culture while paying sufficient homage to the region's history. Rosemary Wakeman chronicled the evolution of an area in central Paris, France, known as Les Halles. Les Halles was home to a vibrant market from the 19th century onwards. Finally, in 1971, the markets were relocated and the pavilions demolished. In its place, there is now a train, metro and bus hub. Les Halles is also the site of France's largest shopping center and the controversial Center Georges Pompidou.[57]​.

The term "creative destruction" has been applied to the arts. Alan Ackerman and Martin Puncher (2006) edited a collection of essays under the title Against the theater: creative destruction on the modernist stage. They detail the changes and causal motivations experienced in theater as a result of the modernization of both show production and the underlying economy. They talk about how theater has reinvented itself in the face of anti-theatricality, pushing the limits of the traditional to include more physical productions, which could be considered avant-garde staging techniques.[58]​.

In his 1999 book, Still the New World, American Literature in a Culture of Creative Destruction, Philip Fisher analyzes the themes of creative destruction at play in literary works of the century, including the works of authors such as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Walt Whitman, Herman Melville, Mark Twain, and Henry James, among others. Fisher argues that creative destruction exists within literary forms just as it does within changing technology.[59]​.

The innovative entrepreneur, as described by Schumpeter, is an individual who is unusual in his vitality and energy, even in the face of temporary failures. The innovator is not an inventor. The latter is generally a genius, a professional or professional technician/scientist. The entrepreneur creates markets for the inventions of geniuses. The innovator also stands out for his perseverance and ambition, not for his genius. His motivation would not be mere wealth, or simple hedonism: the Schumpeterian entrepreneur—who comes from any social class—dreams of creating an economic empire, a business dynasty (a name, a brand).

For Schumpeter the essence of capitalism is dynamism, thus a static capitalism would be a contradiction. Schumpeter establishes five cases of innovation:

1. • The introduction of a new good.

2. • The introduction of a new method of production or marketing of existing goods.

3. • The opening of new markets.

4. • The conquest of a new source of raw materials.

5. • The creation of a new monopoly or the destruction of an existing one.

An essential element of the innovation economy is credit creation, or credit expansion. The innovation process in the markets of goods and services coincides with the implementation of financial innovation, which is in itself an extremely risky process (e.g. generating an economic cycle of speculation "Speculation (economy)")>bankruptcy) but a necessary process for innovation. Without financial innovation, there are no innovative ventures, and therefore there is no creation of wealth and employment. In this way, Schumpeter attributes to banks, and the secondary creation of money, a fundamental role in capitalism.

The following text appears to be the source of the phrase "Schumpeter's Gale" to refer to creative destruction:

The film Other People's Money (1991) offers contrasting views on creative destruction, presented in two speeches about the acquisition of a publicly traded wire and cable company in a small New England town. One speech is from a corporate attacker, and the other is given by the company's CEO, who is primarily interested in protecting his employees and the people.

• - Creativity techniques.

• - Disruptive technology.

• - Mass extinction.

• - Fallacy of the broken window.

• - Leapfrogging.

• - Philippe Aghion and Peter Howitt. A Model of growth through Creative Destruction. Econometrica 60:2 (1992), pp. 323–51.

• - Philippe Aghion and Peter Howitt. Endogenous Growth Theory. MIT Press. 1997.

• - Richard Foster and Sarah Kaplan. "Creative Destruction: Why Companies that are Built to Last Underperform the Market – And how to Successfully Transform Them." Currency publisher. 2001.

• - David Harvey. "Neo-liberalism as Creative Destruction Archived March 8, 2021, at the Wayback Machine." Geogr. Ann., 88 B (2): 145–158. 2006.

• - J. Stanley Metcalfe. Evolutionary Economics and Creative Destruction (Graz Schumpeter Lectures, 1). Routledge. 1998.

• - Joan Morro, Schumpeter's Creative Destruction. Its historical significance and current projection. Pompeu Frabra University. 2019.

• - Richard L. Nolan and David C. Croson, Creative Destruction: A Six-Stage Process for Transforming the Organization. Harvard Business School Press. 1995.

• - Max Page. The Creative Destruction of Manhattan, 1900–1940. University of Chicago Press. 1999.

• - Hugo Reinert and Erik S. Reinert. "Creative Destruction in Economics: Nietzsche, Sombart, Schumpeter." In J.G. Backhaus and W. Drechsler, eds. Friedrich Nietzsche: Economy, and Society. Springer. 2006.

• - Joseph A. Schumpeter. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy (New York: Harper, 1975) [orig. pub. 1942].

• - Thomas G. Osenton. The Death of Demand: Finding Growth in a Saturated Global Economy (New Jersey: Financial Times Prentice Hall, 2004).

• - James M. Utterback. Mastering the Dynamics of Innovation. Harvard Business School Press. 1996.

• - Thomas Homer-Dixon"). Upside of Down: Catastrophe, Creativity, and the Renewal of Civilization")[1]. Island Press. 2006.

• - Stanley I. Kutler"), Privilege and Creative Destruction: The Charles River Bridge Case, The Norton Library, 1971.

• - Schumpeter and the economics of innovation, Thomas K. McCraw. Prophet of Innovation. Joseph Schumpeter and Creative Destruction. Harvard University Press. Review by Agustín Mackinlay.