IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/ecdequ/v22y2008i3p187-199.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Emergence of Nanodistricts in the United States

Author

Listed:
  • Philip Shapira

    (University of Manchester, UK, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta)

  • Jan Youtie

    (Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta)

Abstract

Multiple economic development theories suggest that research and innovation in emerging technologies will cluster in certain locations rather than being equally distributed among all regions. If this is the case, this distributional pattern has implications for where future economic opportunities and future risks will be concentrated. In this article, the authors probe nanotechnology research and commercialization at a regional level. The study examines the top 30 U.S. “nanodistricts,†or metropolitan areas that lead in nanotechnology research activity, during the 1990 to 2006 time frame. The authors explore the factors underlying the emergence of these 30 metropolitan areas through exploratory cluster analysis. The results indicate that although most of the leading nanodistricts are similar to top cities in previous rounds of emerging technologies, new geographic concentrations of nanotechnology research have surfaced as a result of having made concentrated investments in nanotechnology R&D into a single institution.

Suggested Citation

  • Philip Shapira & Jan Youtie, 2008. "Emergence of Nanodistricts in the United States," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 22(3), pages 187-199, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:ecdequ:v:22:y:2008:i:3:p:187-199
    DOI: 10.1177/0891242408320968
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0891242408320968
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/0891242408320968?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stuart J. H. Graham & Maurizio Iacopetta, 2014. "Nanotechnology and the Emergence of a General Purpose Technology," Annals of Economics and Statistics, GENES, issue 115-116, pages 25-55.
    2. Krugman, Paul, 1991. "Increasing Returns and Economic Geography," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 99(3), pages 483-499, June.
    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. Jan Youtie & Maurizio Iacopetta & Stuart Graham, 2008. "Assessing the nature of nanotechnology: can we uncover an emerging general purpose technology?," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(3), pages 315-329, June.
    5. Audretsch, David B & Feldman, Maryann P, 1996. "R&D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 630-640, June.
    6. Philip Shapira & Jan Youtie & Sushanta Mohapatra, 2003. "Linking research production and development outcomes at the regional level," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 12(2), pages 105-116, August.
    7. Barak S. Aharonson & Joel A.C. Baum & Maryann P. Feldman, 2004. "Industrial Clustering and the Returns to Inventive Activity Canadian Biotechnology Firms, 1991-2000," DRUID Working Papers 04-03, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    8. Zucker, Lynne G. & Darby, Michael R. & Furner, Jonathan & Liu, Robert C. & Ma, Hongyan, 2007. "Minerva unbound: Knowledge stocks, knowledge flows and new knowledge production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 850-863, July.
    9. Bozeman, Barry & Rogers, Juan D., 2002. "A churn model of scientific knowledge value: Internet researchers as a knowledge value collective," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 769-794, July.
    10. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    11. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby, 2005. "Socio-economic Impact of Nanoscale Science: Initial Results and NanoBank," NBER Working Papers 11181, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Zucker, Lynne G & Darby, Michael R & Brewer, Marilynn B, 1998. "Intellectual Human Capital and the Birth of U.S. Biotechnology Enterprises," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(1), pages 290-306, March.
    13. Mangematin, V. & Rip, A. & Delemarle, A. & Robinson, D.K.R., 2005. "The role of regional institutional entrepreneurs in the emergence of clusters in nanotechnologies," Working Papers 200515, Grenoble Applied Economics Laboratory (GAEL).
    14. Agrawal, Ajay & Cockburn, Iain, 2003. "The anchor tenant hypothesis: exploring the role of large, local, R&D-intensive firms in regional innovation systems," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 21(9), pages 1227-1253, November.
    15. Audretsch, David B & Stephan, Paula E, 1996. "Company-Scientist Locational Links: The Case of Biotechnology," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 641-652, June.
    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. Fredin, Sabrina, 2013. "New Perspectives on Innovative Entrepreneurship and Path Dependence – A Regional Approach," Working Papers 2013/06, Blekinge Institute of Technology, Department of Industrial Economics.
    2. Edurne Magro Montero & Mari Jose Aranguren & Mikel Navarro, 2011. "Smart Specialisation Strategies: The Case of the Basque Country," Working Papers 2011R07, Orkestra - Basque Institute of Competitiveness.
    3. Claudia Werker & Vladimir Korzinov & Scott Cunningham, 2019. "Formation and output of collaborations: the role of proximity in German nanotechnology," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 697-719, April.
    4. Mario Coccia & Ugo Finardi & Diego Margon, 2012. "Current trends in nanotechnology research across worldwide geo-economic players," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 37(5), pages 777-787, October.
    5. Mario Coccia, 2011. "Evolutionary dynamics and scientific flows of nanotechnology research across geo-economic areas," CERIS Working Paper 201101, CNR-IRCrES Research Institute on Sustainable Economic Growth - Torino (TO) ITALY - former Institute for Economic Research on Firms and Growth - Moncalieri (TO) ITALY.
    6. Maj Andersen, 2011. "Silent innovation: corporate strategizing in early nanotechnology evolution," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(6), pages 680-696, December.
    7. Can Huang & Ad Notten & Nico Rasters, 2011. "Nanoscience and technology publications and patents: a review of social science studies and search strategies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 145-172, April.
    8. Fredin, Sabrina, 2012. "The Dynamics and Evolution of Local Industries – The case of Linköping," Papers in Innovation Studies 2012/7, Lund University, CIRCLE - Centre for Innovation Research.
    9. Scott W. Cunningham & Claudia Werker, 2012. "Proximity and collaboration in European nanotechnology," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 91(4), pages 723-742, November.

    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. Lynne G. Zucker & Michael R. Darby, 2009. "Star Scientists, Innovation and Regional and National Immigration," Chapters, in: David B. Audretsch & Robert E. Litan & Robert Strom (ed.), Entrepreneurship and Openness, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Jan Youtie & Philip Shapira, 2008. "Mapping the nanotechnology enterprise: a multi-indicator analysis of emerging nanodistricts in the US South," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 33(2), pages 209-223, April.
    3. Dirk Crass & Christian Rammer & Birgit Aschhoff, 2019. "Geographical clustering and the effectiveness of public innovation programs," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 44(6), pages 1784-1815, December.
    4. Vestal, Alex & Danneels, Erwin, 2018. "Knowledge exchange in clusters: The contingent role of regional inventive concentration," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(10), pages 1887-1903.
    5. Ferretti, Marco & Guerini, Massimiliano & Panetti, Eva & Parmentola, Adele, 2022. "The partner next door? The effect of micro-geographical proximity on intra-cluster inter-organizational relationships," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    6. Zoltán J. Ács & Pontus Braunerhjelm & David B. Audretsch & Bo Carlsson, 2015. "The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 7, pages 129-144, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Walter Powell & Kenneth Koput & James Bowie & Laurel Smith-Doerr, 2002. "The Spatial Clustering of Science and Capital: Accounting for Biotech Firm-Venture Capital Relationships," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 36(3), pages 291-305.
    8. 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.
    9. Brian T. McCann & Timothy B. Folta, 2009. "Demand‐ and Supply‐Side Agglomerations: Distinguishing between Fundamentally Different Manifestations of Geographic Concentration," Journal of Management Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(3), pages 362-392, May.
    10. Francesco Quatraro & Stefano Usai, 2017. "Are knowledge flows all alike? Evidence from European regions," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(8), pages 1246-1258, August.
    11. Zucker, Lynne G. & Darby, Michael R. & Furner, Jonathan & Liu, Robert C. & Ma, Hongyan, 2007. "Minerva unbound: Knowledge stocks, knowledge flows and new knowledge production," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 850-863, July.
    12. Joshua Drucker & Harvey Goldstein, 2007. "Assessing the Regional Economic Development Impacts of Universities: A Review of Current Approaches," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 30(1), pages 20-46, January.
    13. Matthias Firgo & Peter Mayerhofer, 2015. "Wissens-Spillovers und regionale Entwicklung - welche strukturpolitische Ausrichtung optimiert des Wachstum?," Working Paper Reihe der AK Wien - Materialien zu Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft 144, Kammer für Arbeiter und Angestellte für Wien, Abteilung Wirtschaftswissenschaft und Statistik.
    14. 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.
    15. Rosina Moreno & Ernest Miguélez, 2012. "A Relational Approach To The Geography Of Innovation: A Typology Of Regions," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(3), pages 492-516, July.
    16. Tobias Schlegel & Curdin Pfister & Dietmar Harhoff & Uschi Backes-Gellner, 2022. "Innovation effects of universities of applied sciences: an assessment of regional heterogeneity," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 63-118, February.
    17. Aurélie LALANNE & Guillaume POUYANNE, 2012. "Ten years of metropolization in economics: a bibliometric approach (In French)," Cahiers du GREThA (2007-2019) 2012-11, Groupe de Recherche en Economie Théorique et Appliquée (GREThA).
    18. Haasnoot, Cornelis W. & de Vaal, Albert, 2022. "Heterogeneous firms and cluster externalities: how asymmetric effects at the firm level affect cluster productivity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    19. Fosfuri, Andrea & Rønde, Thomas, 2003. "High-Tech Clusters, Technology Spillovers and Trade Secret Laws," CEPR Discussion Papers 4130, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Feldman, Maryann P. & Kogler, Dieter F., 2010. "Stylized Facts in the Geography of Innovation," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 0, pages 381-410, Elsevier.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    nanotechnology; regional clusters;

    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:sae:ecdequ:v:22:y:2008:i:3:p:187-199. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.