IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/eecrev/v118y2019icp126-147.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The agricultural roots of Chinese innovation performance

Author

Listed:
  • Zhu, Jiong
  • Ang, James B.
  • Fredriksson, Per G.

Abstract

A debate is brewing in the literature on whether legacies of rice and wheat cultivation in China matters for cultural attributes, in particular individualism vs. collectivism. In turn, this important cultural dimension has recently been shown to affect the pattern of innovation across countries. However, the previous literature has not firmly connected agricultural legacies and innovation rates, and has consistently used low resolution data. We study the role of agricultural legacy for innovation performance using unique patent data from close to two thousand Chinese counties. We provide robust evidence that counties with a legacy of rice cultivation generate fewer patent applications than other counties, and a legacy of wheat production tends to be associated with more patent applications. The results for rice are robust to, e.g., controlling for temperature, precipitation, irrigation, disease burden, religiosity, and corruption, as well as accounting for migration patterns. Our results firmly establish the importance of agricultural legacy for shaping the culture of innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhu, Jiong & Ang, James B. & Fredriksson, Per G., 2019. "The agricultural roots of Chinese innovation performance," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 126-147.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:eecrev:v:118:y:2019:i:c:p:126-147
    DOI: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2019.05.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0014292119300893
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2019.05.006?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alessandra Fogli & Laura Veldkamp, 2021. "Germs, Social Networks, and Growth [Unbundling Institutions]," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 88(3), pages 1074-1100.
    2. Louis Putterman & David N. Weil, 2010. "Post-1500 Population Flows and The Long-Run Determinants of Economic Growth and Inequality," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 125(4), pages 1627-1682.
    3. Vanina Guernier & Michael E Hochberg & Jean-François Guégan, 2004. "Ecology Drives the Worldwide Distribution of Human Diseases," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 2(6), pages 1-1, June.
    4. repec:hrv:faseco:33077825 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Lee, Angela Y. & Aaker, Jennifer L. & Gardner, Wendi L., 2000. "The Pleasures and Pains of Distinct Self-Construals: The Role of Interdependence in Regulatory Focus," Research Papers 1577r, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    6. Nathan Nunn & Nancy Qian, 2011. "The Potato's Contribution to Population and Urbanization: Evidence From A Historical Experiment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 126(2), pages 593-650.
    7. Xu, Gang & Yano, Go, 2017. "How does anti-corruption affect corporate innovation? Evidence from recent anti-corruption efforts in China," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 498-519.
    8. Heidi L. Williams, 2013. "Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation: Evidence from the Human Genome," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(1), pages 1-27.
    9. Easterly, William, 2007. "Inequality does cause underdevelopment: Insights from a new instrument," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 755-776, November.
    10. Daron Acemoglu & Joshua Linn, 2004. "Market Size in Innovation: Theory and Evidence from the Pharmaceutical Industry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 119(3), pages 1049-1090.
    11. Josh Lerner, 2002. "150 Years of Patent Protection," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(2), pages 221-225, May.
    12. Daron Acemoglu, 2010. "When Does Labor Scarcity Encourage Innovation?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(6), pages 1037-1078.
    13. Kenneth S. Chan & Jean-Pierre Laffargue, 2012. "Foreign Threats, Technological Progress And The Rise And Decline Of Imperial China," Pacific Economic Review, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 17(2), pages 280-303, May.
    14. Ruan, Jianqing & Xie, Zhuan & Zhang, Xiaobo, 2015. "Does rice farming shape individualism and innovation?," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 51-58.
    15. Hugo A. Hopenhayn & Francesco Squintani, 2016. "Patent Rights and Innovation Disclosure," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 83(1), pages 199-230.
    16. Roland Bénabou & Davide Ticchi & Andrea Vindigni, 2015. "Religion and Innovation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(5), pages 346-351, May.
    17. James B. Ang & Jakob B. Madsen, 2012. "Risk capital, private credit, and innovative production," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 45(4), pages 1608-1639, November.
    18. Nordhaus, William D, 1969. "An Economic Theory of Technological Change," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(2), pages 18-28, May.
    19. Yuriy Gorodnichenko & Gerard Roland, 2017. "Culture, Institutions, and the Wealth of Nations," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 99(3), pages 402-416, July.
    20. Matthew Cole & Robert Elliott & Jing Zhang, 2009. "Corruption, Governance and FDI Location in China: A Province-Level Analysis," Journal of Development Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 45(9), pages 1494-1512.
    21. Ang, James B. & Fredriksson, Per G., 2017. "Wheat agriculture and family ties," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 236-256.
    22. Julia I. Lane & John C. Haltiwanger & James Spletzer, 1999. "Productivity Differences across Employers: The Roles of Employer Size, Age, and Human Capital," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(2), pages 94-98, May.
    23. Li, Pei & Lu, Yi & Wang, Jin, 2016. "Does flattening government improve economic performance? Evidence from China," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 18-37.
    24. Shane, Scott A., 1992. "Why do some societies invent more than others?," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 29-46, January.
    25. Suzanne Scotchmer, 1991. "Standing on the Shoulders of Giants: Cumulative Research and the Patent Law," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 29-41, Winter.
    26. Greif, Avner, 1994. "Cultural Beliefs and the Organization of Society: A Historical and Theoretical Reflection on Collectivist and Individualist Societies," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(5), pages 912-950, October.
    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. Jayasekara, Dinithi N., 2021. "Can traditional farming practices explain attitudes towards scientific progress?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 320-339.
    2. Zhu, Jiong & Liu, Shouying & Li, Yihao, 2021. "Removing the “Hats of Poverty”: Effects of ending the national poverty county program on fiscal expenditures," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 69(C).
    3. Mohanty, Aatishya & Sharma, Swati, 2022. "COVID-19 regulations, culture, and the environment," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    4. Jayasekara, Dinithi N. & Fredriksson, Per G., 2021. "Culture, intellectual property rights, and technology adoption," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 317-330.

    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. Zhu, J., 2018. "The agricultural root of innovation in China," 2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia 277219, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    2. Ang, James B. & Madsen, Jakob B. & Wang, Wen, 2021. "Rice farming, culture and democracy," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    3. Ang, James B. & Fredriksson, Per G., 2018. "Culture, legal heritage and the regulation of labor," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 616-633.
    4. Ang, James B. & Fredriksson, Per G., 2017. "Wheat agriculture and family ties," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 236-256.
    5. James B. Ang, 2015. "Agricultural Legacy, Individualistic Culture, and Techology Adoption," Economic Growth Centre Working Paper Series 1506, Nanyang Technological University, School of Social Sciences, Economic Growth Centre.
    6. Daniel L. Bennett & Boris Nikolaev, 2021. "Individualism, pro-market institutions, and national innovation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 57(4), pages 2085-2106, December.
    7. Nancy Gallini, 2017. "Do patents work? Thickets, trolls and antibiotic resistance," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(4), pages 893-926, November.
    8. Klasing, Mariko J., 2013. "Cultural dimensions, collective values and their importance for institutions," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(2), pages 447-467.
    9. Assmann, Daisy & Ehrl, Philipp, 2021. "Individualistic culture and entrepreneurial opportunities," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 1248-1268.
    10. Eric Budish & Benjamin Roin & Heidi Williams, 2013. "Do fixed patent terms distort innovation? Evidence from cancer clinical trials," Discussion Papers 13-001, Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research.
    11. Broadberry, Stephen & Ghosal, Sayantan & Proto, Eugenio, 2017. "Anonymity, efficiency wages and technological progress," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 379-394.
    12. Heidi L. Williams, 2016. "Intellectual Property Rights and Innovation: Evidence from Health Care Markets," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(1), pages 53-87.
    13. Maseland, Robbert, 2021. "Contingent determinants," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 151(C).
    14. Cline, Brandon N. & Williamson, Claudia R. & Xiong, Haoyang, 2021. "Culture and the regulation of insider trading across countries," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    15. Leonardo M. Klüppel & Lamar Pierce & Jason A. Snyder, 2018. "Perspective—The Deep Historical Roots of Organization and Strategy: Traumatic Shocks, Culture, and Institutions," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(4), pages 702-721, August.
    16. Bhaven Sampat & Heidi L. Williams, 2019. "How Do Patents Affect Follow-On Innovation? Evidence from the Human Genome," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 109(1), pages 203-236, January.
    17. Casey, Gregory & Klemp, Marc, 2016. "Instrumental Variables in the Long Run," MPRA Paper 68696, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    18. Nunn, Nathan, 2014. "Historical Development," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 7, pages 347-402, Elsevier.
    19. Jayasekara, Dinithi N., 2021. "Can traditional farming practices explain attitudes towards scientific progress?," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 320-339.
    20. Castellani, Marco, 2019. "Does culture matter for the economic performance of countries? An overview of the literature," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 41(4), pages 700-717.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Innovation; patents; agriculture; culture; rice; wheat; long-run comparative development;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O30 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - General
    • Q01 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - Sustainable Development

    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:eee:eecrev:v:118:y:2019:i:c:p:126-147. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eer .

    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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/eer .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.