IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/20921.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cities and Ideas

Author

Listed:
  • Mikko Packalen
  • Jay Bhattacharya

Abstract

Faster technological progress has long been considered a key potential benefit of agglomeration. Physical proximity to others may help inventors adopt new ideas in their work by increasing awareness about which new ideas exist and by enhancing understanding of the properties and usefulness of new ideas through a vigorous debate on the ideas' merits (Marshall, 1920). We test a key empirical prediction of this theory: that inventions in large cities build on newer ideas than inventions in smaller cities. We analyze the idea inputs of nearly every US patent granted during 1836–2010. We find that a larger city size provided a considerable advantage in inventive activities during most of the 20th century but that in recent decades this advantage has eroded.

Suggested Citation

  • Mikko Packalen & Jay Bhattacharya, 2015. "Cities and Ideas," NBER Working Papers 20921, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:20921
    Note: DAE EH PR
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w20921.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Rebecca Henderson & Adam Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2005. "Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: A Reassessment: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 461-464, March.
    3. Yasusada Murata & Ryo Nakajima & Ryosuke Okamoto & Ryuichi Tamura, 2013. "Localized knowledge spillovers and patent citations: A distance-based approach (revised version)," GRIPS Discussion Papers 12-18, National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies.
    4. Brezis, Elise S & Krugman, Paul R, 1997. "Technology and the Life Cycle of Cities," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 2(4), pages 369-383, December.
    5. Eric von Hippel, 1994. ""Sticky Information" and the Locus of Problem Solving: Implications for Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 429-439, April.
    6. Mikko Packalen & Jay Bhattacharya, 2015. "New Ideas in Invention," NBER Working Papers 20922, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Benjamin F. Jones, 2010. "Age and Great Invention," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(1), pages 1-14, February.
    8. Bronwyn H. Hall & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 2001. "The NBER Patent Citation Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," NBER Working Papers 8498, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Peter Thompson & Melanie Fox-Kean, 2005. "Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: A Reassessment: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 465-466, March.
    10. Peter Thompson & Melanie Fox-Kean, 2005. "Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: A Reassessment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 450-460, March.
    11. Mikko Packalen & Jay Bhattacharya, 2012. "Words in Patents: Research Inputs and the Value of Innovativeness in Invention," NBER Working Papers 18494, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Peter Thompson, 2006. "Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: Evidence from Inventor- and Examiner-added Citations," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(2), pages 383-388, May.
    13. Mikko Packalen & Jay Bhattacharya, 2015. "Age and the Trying Out of New Ideas," NBER Working Papers 20920, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Jiwu Wang & Nina Liu & Yichen Ruan, 2020. "Influence Factors of Spatial Distribution of Urban Innovation Activities Based on Ensemble Learning: A Case Study in Hangzhou, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, January.
    2. Li Fang, 2019. "Manufacturing Clusters and Firm Innovation," Economic Development Quarterly, , vol. 33(1), pages 6-18, February.
    3. Keith Head & Yao Amber Li & Asier Minondo, 2019. "Geography, Ties, and Knowledge Flows: Evidence from Citations in Mathematics," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(4), pages 713-727, October.
    4. Mikko Packalen, 2019. "Edge factors: scientific frontier positions of nations," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 118(3), pages 787-808, March.
    5. Bergeaud, Antonin & Verluise, Cyril, 2024. "A new dataset to study a century of innovation in Europe and in the US," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(1).
    6. Enrico Berkes & Olivier Deschênes & Ruben Gaetani & Jeffrey Lin & Christopher Severen, 2020. "Lockdowns and Innovation: Evidence from the 1918 Flu Pandemic," Working Papers 20-46, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    7. Mikko Packalen & Jay Bhattacharya, 2017. "Neophilia ranking of scientific journals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 110(1), pages 43-64, January.
    8. Hanlon, W.Walker & Heblich, Stephan, 2022. "History and urban economics," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    9. Li Fang, 2020. "Agglomeration and innovation: Selection or true effect?," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(2), pages 423-448, March.
    10. Timothy R Wojan & Timothy F Slaper, 2020. "Are the problem spaces of economic actors increasingly virtual? What geo-located web activity might tell us about economic dynamism," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-22, September.
    11. Enrico Berkes & Ruben Gaetani, 2021. "The Geography of Unconventional Innovation," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 131(636), pages 1466-1514.
    12. Jay Bhattacharya & Mikko Packalen, 2020. "Stagnation and Scientific Incentives," NBER Working Papers 26752, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Jing-Xiao Zhang & Jia-Wei Cheng & Simon Patrick Philbin & Pablo Ballesteros-Perez & Martin Skitmore & Ge Wang, 2023. "Influencing factors of urban innovation and development: a grounded theory analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 2079-2104, March.
    14. Zhipeng Han & Liguo Wang & Feifei Zhao & Zijun Mao, 2022. "Does Low-Carbon City Policy Improve Industrial Capacity Utilization? Evidence from a Quasi-Natural Experiment in China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-26, September.

    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. Adam B. Jaffe & Gaétan de Rassenfosse, 2017. "Patent citation data in social science research: Overview and best practices," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(6), pages 1360-1374, June.
    2. 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.
    3. Soonwoo Kwon & Jihong Lee & Sokbae (Simon) Lee, 2014. "International trends in technological progress: stylized facts from patent citations, 1980-2011," CeMMAP working papers CWP16/14, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    4. Li, Yao Amber, 2014. "Borders and distance in knowledge spillovers: Dying over time or dying with age?—Evidence from patent citations," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 152-172.
    5. Yasusada Murata & Ryo Nakajima & Ryosuke Okamoto & Ryuichi Tamura, 2014. "Localized Knowledge Spillovers and Patent Citations: A Distance-Based Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(5), pages 967-985, December.
    6. Heide Fier & Andreas Pyka, 2014. "Against the one-way-street: analyzing knowledge transfer from industry to science," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 219-246, April.
    7. Figueiredo, Octávio & Guimarães, Paulo & Woodward, Douglas, 2015. "Industry localization, distance decay, and knowledge spillovers: Following the patent paper trail," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 21-31.
    8. Po‐Hsuan Hsu & Hai‐Ping Hui & Hsiao‐Hui Lee & Kevin Tseng, 2022. "Supply chain technology spillover, customer concentration, and product invention," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 393-417, April.
    9. Soonwoo Kwon & Jihong Lee & Sokbae (Simon) Lee, 2014. "International trends in technological progress: stylized facts from patent citations, 1980-2011," CeMMAP working papers 16/14, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    10. Hyuk-Soo Kwon & Jihong Lee & Sokbae Lee & Ryungha Oh, 2022. "Knowledge spillovers and patent citations: trends in geographic localization, 1976–2015," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(3), pages 123-147, April.
    11. Emanuele Bacchiocchi & Fabio Montobbio, 2010. "International Knowledge Diffusion and Home‐bias Effect: Do USPTO and EPO Patent Citations Tell the Same Story?," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 112(3), pages 441-470, September.
    12. Keith Head & Yao Amber Li & Asier Minondo, 2019. "Geography, Ties, and Knowledge Flows: Evidence from Citations in Mathematics," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(4), pages 713-727, October.
    13. William R. Kerr, 2010. "Breakthrough Inventions and Migrating Clusters of Innovation," NBER Chapters, in: Cities and Entrepreneurship, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. William R. Kerr & Scott Duke Kominers, 2015. "Agglomerative Forces and Cluster Shapes," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 97(4), pages 877-899, October.
    15. 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.
    16. Edward L. Glaeser & William R. Kerr, 2009. "Local Industrial Conditions and Entrepreneurship: How Much of the Spatial Distribution Can We Explain?," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(3), pages 623-663, September.
    17. Ronald J. Mann & Marian Underweiser, 2012. "A New Look at Patent Quality: Relating Patent Prosecution to Validity," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(1), pages 1-32, March.
    18. NAGAOKA Sadao & NISHIMURA Yoichiro, 2015. "Use of Grace Periods and Their Impact on Knowledge Flow: Evidence from Japan," Discussion papers 15072, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    19. Johnson, Daniel K.N. & Acri nee Lybecker, Kristina M. & Moore, Jeffrey, 2019. "Sure, but who has the energy? The importance of location for knowledge transfer in the energy sector," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 582-588.
    20. Dechezlepretre, Antoine & Martin, Ralf & Mohnen, Myra, 2014. "Knowledge spillovers from clean and dirty technologies," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60501, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O18 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Urban, Rural, Regional, and Transportation Analysis; Housing; Infrastructure
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O33 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Technological Change: Choices and Consequences; Diffusion Processes
    • R12 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Size and Spatial Distributions of Regional Economic Activity; Interregional Trade (economic geography)

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:nbr:nberwo:20921. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.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.