Technological change, an overwhelming fact in recent socioeconomic history, involves, as Joseph A. Schumpeter famously put it, “creative destruction” on a large scale: it gives rise to new goods, production methods, firms, organisations, and jobs, while rendering some received ones obsolete. Its impact extends beyond the economy and affects society, culture, politics, and the mind-set of people. While it allows solving certain problems, it causes new ones, inducing further technological change. Against this background, the paper attempts to provide a detailed, yet concise exploration of the historical evolution and measurement of technological change in economics. It touches upon various questions that have been raised since Adam Smith and by economic and social theorists after him until today living through several waves of new technologies. These questions include: (1) Which concepts and theories did the leading authors elaborate to describe and analyse the various forms of technological progress they observed? (2) Did they think that different forms of technological progress requested the elaboration of different concepts and theories – horses for courses, so to speak? (3) How do different forms of technological progress affect and are shaped by various strata and classes of society? Issues such as these have become particularly crucial in the context of the digitisation of the economy and the widespread use of AI. Finally, the paper explores the impact of emerging technologies on the established theoretical frameworks and empirical measurements of technological change, points to new measurements linked to the rise of these technologies, and evaluates their pros and cons vis-à-vis traditional approaches.
Written by Eric Pichon.
African and European Heads of State or Government will meet in Luanda (Angola) on 24 and 25 November 2025 for the Seventh European Union (EU)-African Union Summit. The Africa-EU partnership faces significant challenges, including global geopolitical shifts and shrinking development finance. Central to the EU’s new approach, the Global Gateway strategy aims to mobilise €150 billion by 2027 to boost Africa’s digital connectivity, transport infrastructure, and energy transition. However, questions remain over ownership and whether African priorities are genuinely reflected. To ensure the partnership remains effective, it must deliver on the commitments made at the 2022 summit and strengthen accountability mechanisms. This means addressing persistent challenges in implementation, such as lack of coordination, inconsistent reporting, and data gaps.
The European Parliament has consistently advocated for a people-centred partnership that genuinely benefits both Europeans and Africans.
This briefing provides an insight into the broad context that will set the scene for discussions. Detailed specifics of the four pillars of the partnership are discussed in separate publications: Prosperity (economy and connectivity; natural resources, health, research and education), Peace (security and governance), People (migration and mobility) and Planet (multilateralism).
It is crucial for the next summit to embody a partnership of equals, supporting sustainable development, peace, and prosperity for both continents.
Read the complete briefing on ‘EU-African Union Summit 2025: Setting the scene – Delivering on commitments in a shifting global landscape‘ in the Think Tank pages of the European Parliament.
Solid waste management is one of the most pressing urban governance issues in low- and middle-income countries. Because waste volumes are increasing, the associated fiscal, environmental and health costs will also rise. The idea of working with informal waste workers to address this problem is often suggested but rarely implemented. Based on the case of Irbid, Jordan’s second-biggest city, we show why it was successful there and draw recommendations for other municipalities.
Irbid used an approach that combined what we call “frontloading trust” and “prioritising integration over training”. First, the mayor and municipal managers invited informal waste worker representatives to a structured dialogue about waste management challenges in the city, about the role of informal workers, and about potential solutions. During this months-long process, they overcame class differences, stigma and distrust and agreed on how to work together in the future. Then, rather than requiring extensive prior training of informal workers, they started to work together, which allowed workers to show what they were able to contribute (“prioritising integration over training”).
Based on this process, the municipality and informal worker representatives signed the first Memorandum of Understanding of its kind in Jordan, legalising the work of informal workers, providing them with official badges and safety equipment and piloting their integration into municipal sorting facilities. After only a few months, data showed that the integration of informal workers had reduced landfill waste, had saved the municipality a lot of money, had improved waste services for residents, and had increased respect, protection and income for informal waste workers.
This case shows that challenges like urban waste management require not only technical but social and governance innovations that include rather than exclude informal workers, and that can thereby contribute to improved livelihoods for all concerned.