IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/hig/fsight/v13y2019i3p41-49.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Russian Technograds: The Technological Profiles of the Cities

Author

Listed:
  • Ekaterina Streltsova

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics, Russia)

  • Gleb Kuzmin

    (National Research University Higher School of Economics, Russia)

Abstract

The paper discusses the technological specialization and patent portfolios of the Russian ‘technograds’ — the cities which are the key actors in contributing to the development of new technologies in the country. A patent analysis used for the study allowed us to identify technological domains where these cities have a significant competitive advantage and high potential for further growth. According to the research-intensity of the domains prevailing in their technological specialization, the technograds might be divided into three categories: oriented towards mostly high technologies (Moscow, St Petersburg, Tomsk), low technologies (Krasnodar, Perm), and those with mixed specialization including both high and low tech (Voronezh, Ufa, Kazan, Novosibirsk, Ekaterinburg, and Samara). To achieve the aim of the research, a new methodological approach was elaborated upon to analyze patent data for individual cities and other smaller geographical units. As a result, the paper might be of interest not only for practitioners and decision makers on the regional and municipal levels, but also for researchers in the fields of regional economics, economic geography, and economics of science, technology, and innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Ekaterina Streltsova & Gleb Kuzmin, 2019. "Russian Technograds: The Technological Profiles of the Cities," Foresight and STI Governance (Foresight-Russia till No. 3/2015), National Research University Higher School of Economics, vol. 13(3), pages 41-49.
    • Handle: RePEc:hig:fsight:v:13:y:2019:i:3:p:41-49
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://foresight-journal.hse.ru/data/2019/10/04/1543331358/4-Streltsova-41-49.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Archibugi, Daniele & Pianta, Mario, 1992. "Specialization and size of technological activities in industrial countries: The analysis of patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 79-93, February.
    2. Ron Boschma, 2015. "Towards an Evolutionary Perspective on Regional Resilience," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(5), pages 733-751, May.
    3. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(3), pages 577-598.
    4. Pierre-Alexandre Balland & David Rigby & Ron Boschma, 2015. "The technological resilience of US cities," Cambridge Journal of Regions, Economy and Society, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 8(2), pages 167-184.
    5. Deborah Strumsky & José Lobo & Sander van der Leeuw, 2012. "Using patent technology codes to study technological change," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 267-286, April.
    6. Glaeser, Edward L & Hedi D. Kallal & Jose A. Scheinkman & Andrei Shleifer, 1992. "Growth in Cities," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 100(6), pages 1126-1152, December.
      • Edward L. Glaeser & Hedi D. Kallal & Jose A. Scheinkman & Andrei Shleifer, 1991. "Growth in Cities," NBER Working Papers 3787, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
      • Glaeser, Edward Ludwig & Kallal, Hedi D. & Scheinkman, Jose A. & Shleifer, Andrei, 1992. "Growth in Cities," Scholarly Articles 3451309, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    7. Fleming, Lee & Sorenson, Olav, 2001. "Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1019-1039, August.
    8. Carlino, Gerald & Kerr, William R., 2015. "Agglomeration and Innovation," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 349-404, Elsevier.
    9. Jörg C. Mahlich & Werner Pascha (ed.), 2007. "Innovation and Technology in Korea," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-7908-1914-4, December.
    10. Pierre-Alexandre Balland & Ron Boschma & Koen Frenken, 2015. "Proximity and Innovation: From Statics to Dynamics," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(6), pages 907-920, June.
    11. Dieter Franz Kogler & Gaston Heimeriks & Loet Leydesdorff, 2018. "Patent portfolio analysis of cities: statistics and maps of technological inventiveness," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 26(11), pages 2256-2278, November.
    12. Ha, Sung Ho & Liu, Weina & Cho, Hune & Kim, Sang Hyun, 2015. "Technological advances in the fuel cell vehicle: Patent portfolio management," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 277-289.
    13. Patel, Pari & Pavitt, Keith, 1997. "The technological competencies of the world's largest firms: Complex and path-dependent, but not much variety," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 26(2), pages 141-156, May.
    14. David L. Rigby, 2015. "Technological Relatedness and Knowledge Space: Entry and Exit of US Cities from Patent Classes," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(11), pages 1922-1937, November.
    15. Olof Ejermo, 2005. "Technological Diversity and Jacobs’ Externality Hypothesis Revisited," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(2), pages 167-195, June.
    16. Dieter F. Kogler & David L. Rigby & Isaac Tucker, 2013. "Mapping Knowledge Space and Technological Relatedness in US Cities," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(9), pages 1374-1391, September.
    17. Cantwell, John & Vertova, Giovanna, 2004. "Historical evolution of technological diversification," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 511-529, April.
    18. Ekaterina Khramova & Dirk Meissner & Galina Sagieva, 2013. "Statistical patent analysis indicators as a means of determining country technological specialisation," HSE Working papers WP BRP 09/STI/2013, National Research University Higher School of Economics.
    19. repec:hig:wpaper:wp-brp-09-sti-2013 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Fernando Galindo-Rueda & Fabien Verger, 2016. "OECD Taxonomy of Economic Activities Based on R&D Intensity," OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers 2016/4, OECD Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Streltsova, E., 2022. "Global flows of technological knowledge: The position of Russia," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 57(5), pages 39-54.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Gergő Tóth & Zoltán Elekes & Adam Whittle & Changjun Lee & Dieter F. Kogler, 2022. "Technology Network Structure Conditions the Economic Resilience of Regions," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 98(4), pages 355-378, August.
    2. Melissa Haller & David L. Rigby, 2020. "The geographic evolution of optics technologies in the United States, 1976–2010," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 99(6), pages 1539-1559, December.
    3. Ron Boschma & Pierre-Alexandre Balland & Dieter Franz Kogler, 2015. "Relatedness and technological change in cities: the rise and fall of technological knowledge in US metropolitan areas from 1981 to 2010," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 24(1), pages 223-250.
    4. Sandro Montresor & Gianluca Orsatti & Francesco Quatraro, 2023. "Technological novelty and key enabling technologies: evidence from European regions," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(6), pages 851-872, August.
    5. Ron Boschma & Koen Frenken, 2015. "Evolutionary Economic Geography," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1518, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised May 2015.
    6. Sándor Juhász & Tom Broekel & Ron Boschma, 2021. "Explaining the dynamics of relatedness: The role of co‐location and complexity," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 100(1), pages 3-21, February.
    7. Francesco Lamperti & Franco Malerba & Roberto Mavilia & Giorgio Tripodi, 2019. "Does the Position in the Inter-sectoral Knowledge Space affect the International Competitiveness of Industries?," LEM Papers Series 2019/23, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    8. Tubiana, Matteo & Miguelez, Ernest & Moreno, Rosina, 2022. "In knowledge we trust: Learning-by-interacting and the productivity of inventors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    9. Dieter F. Kogler & Jürgen Essletzbichler & David L. Rigby, 2017. "The evolution of specialization in the EU15 knowledge space," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 17(2), pages 345-373.
    10. Mathieu P A Steijn & Pierre-Alexandre Balland & Ron Boschma & David L Rigby, 2023. "Technological diversification of U.S. cities during the great historical crises," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 23(6), pages 1303-1344.
    11. Pierre-Alexandre Balland & David L. Rigby, 2015. "The geography and evolution of complex knowledge," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1502, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jan 2015.
    12. Thomas J. Hannigan & Alessandra Perri & Vittoria Giada Scalera, 2016. "The Dispersed Multinational: Does Connectedness Across Spatial Dimensions Lead to Broader Technological Search?," Working Papers 11, Department of Management, Università Ca' Foscari Venezia.
    13. Dario Diodato & Andrea Morrison, 2019. "Technological regimes and the geography of innovation: a long-run perspective on US inventions," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1924, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jul 2019.
    14. Maryann Feldman & Dieter Kogler & David Rigby, 2013. "rKnowledge: The Spatial Diffusion of rDNA Methods," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1311, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2013.
    15. Tom Broekel & Rune Dahl Fitjar & Silje Haus-Reve, 2021. "The roles of diversity, complexity, and relatedness in regional development – What does the occupational perspective add?," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2135, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Nov 2021.
    16. Adam Whittle, 2017. "Local and Non-Local Knowledge Typologies: Technological Complexity in the Irish Knowledge Space," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1728, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Nov 2017.
    17. Frederic Gaschet & Mathieu Becue & Vanessa Bouaroudj & Marina Flamand & André Meunie & Guillaume Pouyanne & Damien Talbot, 2017. "Related variety and the dynamics of European photonic clusters," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(8), pages 1292-1315, August.
    18. Nils Grashof & Stefano Basilico, 2023. "The dark side of green innovation? Green transition and regional inequality in Europe," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2314, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jun 2023.
    19. Pinheiro, Flávio L. & Hartmann, Dominik & Boschma, Ron & Hidalgo, César A., 2022. "The time and frequency of unrelated diversification," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(8).
    20. Fritsch, Michael & Changoluisa, Javier, 2017. "New business formation and the productivity of manufacturing incumbents: Effects and mechanisms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 32(3), pages 237-259.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    technological specialization; technological development; technological resilience; cities; patent analysis; Russia;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O18 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Urban, Rural, Regional, and Transportation Analysis; Housing; Infrastructure
    • O38 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Government Policy

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hig:fsight:v:13:y:2019:i:3:p:41-49. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Nataliya Gavrilicheva or Mikhail Salazkin (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/hsecoru.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.