Editing Creativity (section)

=== Economics ===
Economic approaches to creativity have focused on three aspects – the impact of creativity on economic growth, methods of modeling markets for creativity, and the maximization of economic creativity (innovation).<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Artige |first1=Lionel |last2=Lubart |first2=Todd |title=Economic Perspectives on Creativity |journal=Encyclopedia of Creativity |date=2020 |pages=411–416 |doi=10.1016/B978-0-12-809324-5.23721-8 |hdl=2268/241305 |isbn=978-0-12-815615-5 |access-date=13 August 2024 |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337255290|hdl-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Williams |first1=Leslie K. |last2=McGuire |first2=Stephen J. |title=Economic creativity and innovation implementation: the entrepreneurial drivers of growth? Evidence from 63 countries |journal=Small Business Economics |date=May 2010 |volume=34 |issue=4 |pages=391–412 |doi=10.1007/s11187-008-9145-7 |access-date=13 August 2024 |url=https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11187-008-9145-7}}</ref>

In the early 20th century, [[Joseph Schumpeter]] introduced the economic theory of ''[[creative destruction]]'' to describe the way in which old ways of doing things are destroyed and replaced by the new. Some economists (such as [[Paul Romer]]) view creativity as an important element in the recombination of elements to produce new technologies and products and, consequently, economic growth. Creativity leads to [[capital (economics)|capital]], and creative products are protected by [[intellectual property]] laws.

Mark A. Runco and Daniel Rubenson have tried to describe a "[[Behavioral economics|psychoeconomic]]" model of creativity.<ref name="RubRunc1992">{{cite journal |last1=Rubenson |first1=Daniel L. |last2=Runco |first2=Mark |year=1992 |title=The psychoeconomic approach to creativity |journal=New Ideas in Psychology |volume=10 |issue=2 |pages=131–147 |doi=10.1016/0732-118X(92)90021-Q}}</ref> In such a model, creativity is the product of endowments and active investments in creativity; the costs and benefits of bringing creative activity to market determine the supply of creativity. Such an approach has been criticized for its view of creativity consumption as always having positive [[utility]], and for the way it prematurely analyzes the value of future innovations.<ref name="Diamond1992">{{cite journal |last=Diamond |first=Arthur M. |year=1992 |title=Creativity and Interdisciplinarity: A Response to Rubenson and Runco |journal=New Ideas in Psychology |volume=10 |issue=2 |pages=157–160 |doi=10.1016/0732-118X(92)90023-S}}</ref>

In his 2002 book, ''The Rise of the Creative Class'', [[economist]] [[Richard Florida]] popularized the notion that regions with "3 T's of economic development: Technology, Talent, and Tolerance" also have high concentrations of [[creative professional]]s and tend to have a higher level of economic development.<ref name="Florida 2002">{{cite book |last1=Florida |first1=Richard |url=https://archive.org/details/riseofcreativecl00flor_1 |title=The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life |publisher=Basic Books |year=2002 |isbn=978-0-465-02476-6}}</ref>