Australia’s economic landscape is shifting rapidly in 2025, with tech innovation, demographic changes, and a focus on sustainable growth dominating the headlines. But at the foundation of modern economic thinking lies neoclassical growth theory—a framework that has shaped policy and debate for decades. How well does it stand up to the realities of today’s Australia, and where might it fall short?
Neoclassical growth theory, developed in the mid-20th century by economists such as Robert Solow, provides a model for understanding how economies expand over time. At its core, it argues that economic growth is driven by three main factors:
The theory assumes that, over time, economies will reach a ‘steady state’ where growth slows unless there is ongoing technological innovation. It’s a powerful idea that underpins much of the policy thinking around education, investment, and research funding—even in Australia’s 2025 federal budget.
In 2025, Australia’s government and Reserve Bank are grappling with persistent productivity challenges, an aging population, and the need to decarbonise. Neoclassical theory’s focus on capital deepening and technological progress is reflected in several key policy moves:
These initiatives all trace their intellectual roots to the neoclassical tradition: invest in capital, improve skills, and foster innovation to lift the growth trajectory. But are these levers enough in the face of 2025’s unique challenges?
While neoclassical growth theory remains influential, it faces criticism—especially as Australia navigates a more complex global environment:
For example, in 2024 and early 2025, Australia’s productivity growth lagged despite high capital investment, largely due to skills mismatches and supply chain disruptions—factors that neoclassical models often treat as ‘temporary frictions’ but which can persist in the real world.
As policymakers and business leaders look ahead, there’s growing recognition that neoclassical growth theory needs to be supplemented—not replaced. Newer models, like endogenous growth theory, emphasise the role of ideas, institutions, and network effects. Australia’s 2025 Productivity Commission review, for instance, recommends:
Real-world example: The government’s National Reconstruction Fund, launched in late 2024, targets advanced manufacturing and clean tech—sectors where knowledge spillovers and public-private collaboration are vital, and where neoclassical models alone can’t capture the full story.
Neoclassical growth theory remains a cornerstone of economic policy in Australia, guiding investment in capital, skills, and innovation. But in the face of 2025’s complex challenges, it’s clear that a broader toolkit is needed—one that embraces uncertainty, prioritises inclusion, and puts sustainability at the centre of the growth story.