IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i4p462-d1370569.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Impact of Land-Use Mix on Technological Innovation: Evidence from a Grid-Cell-Level Analysis of Shanghai, China

Author

Listed:
  • Hong Jiang

    (Department of Urban Planning, School of Architecture, Southeast University, No. 2 Sipailou, Nanjing 210096, China)

  • Weiting Xiong

    (Department of Urban Planning, College of Landscape Architecture, Nanjing Forestry University, No. 159 Longpan Road, Nanjing 210037, China)

Abstract

While the benefits of land-use mix have been widely analyzed with regard to transportation, public health, and economic development, relatively little attention has been paid to empirically investigating the impact of land-use mix on technological innovation at the intra-urban level. Drawing upon a database of geo-coded patents that are used to reflect the capacity of technological innovation, this paper takes Shanghai as a case study and analyzes how the intra-urban distribution of technological innovation has been associated with land-use mix at the 1 km × 1 km grid cell level. Empirical results, which are robust when the grids are divided at the 2 km × 2 km level, show that the degree of land-use mix is positively associated with the number of patents for a given grid, suggesting that grids with a higher level of land-use mix are likely to have more patents, ceteris paribus. Moreover, the results demonstrate an inverted U-curve relationship between land-use mix and technological innovation, indicating that a too much higher level of land-use mix could lead to a smaller number of patents for a certain grid. In addition, the empirical results suggest the existence of spatial dependence in the effect of land-use mix on technological innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Hong Jiang & Weiting Xiong, 2024. "The Impact of Land-Use Mix on Technological Innovation: Evidence from a Grid-Cell-Level Analysis of Shanghai, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:4:p:462-:d:1370569
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/4/462/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/4/462/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hans R.A. Koster & Jan Rouwendal, 2012. "The Impact Of Mixed Land Use On Residential Property Values," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(5), pages 733-761, December.
    2. Reid Ewing & Robert Cervero, 2010. "Travel and the Built Environment," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 76(3), pages 265-294.
    3. Yingcheng Li & Rui Du, 2022. "Polycentric urban structure and innovation: evidence from a panel of Chinese cities," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(1), pages 113-127, January.
    4. Jarno Hoekman & Koen Frenken & Frank Oort, 2009. "The geography of collaborative knowledge production in Europe," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 43(3), pages 721-738, September.
    5. Alexander Donges & Jean-Marie Meier & Rui C. Silva, 2023. "The Impact of Institutions on Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(4), pages 1951-1974, April.
    6. Andres Rodriguez-Pose & Riccardo regstdcenzi, 2008. "Research and Development, Spillovers, Innovation Systems, and the Genesis of Regional Growth in Europe," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 42(1), pages 51-67.
    7. Hamidi, Shima & Zandiatashbar, Ahoura & Bonakdar, Ahmad, 2019. "The relationship between regional compactness and regional innovation capacity (RIC): Empirical evidence from a national study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 394-402.
    8. Hongyu Zheng & Yuefei Zhuo & Zhongguo Xu & Cifang Wu & Jianhong Huang & Qi Fu, 2021. "Measuring and characterizing land use mix patterns of China’s megacities: A case study of Shanghai," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 52(4), pages 2509-2539, December.
    9. Leyden, K.M., 2003. "Social Capital and the Built Environment: The Importance of Walkable Neighborhoods," American Journal of Public Health, American Public Health Association, vol. 93(9), pages 1546-1551.
    10. Mario A. Maggioni & Mario Nosvelli & Teodora Erika Uberti, 2007. "Space versus networks in the geography of innovation: A European analysis," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 86(3), pages 471-493, August.
    11. Ernest Miguelez & Rosina Moreno, 2018. "Relatedness, external linkages and regional innovation in Europe," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(5), pages 688-701, May.
    12. Sofia Wixe, 2018. "Neighbourhood related diversity, human capital and firm innovation," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 97(2), pages 217-252, June.
    13. 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.
    14. Richard Florida & Patrick Adler & Charlotta Mellander, 2017. "The city as innovation machine," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(1), pages 86-96, January.
    15. Mohammad Javad Kamelifar & Behzad Ranjbarnia & Houshmand Masoumi, 2022. "The Determinants of Walking Behavior before and during COVID-19 in Middle-East and North Africa: Evidence from Tabriz, Iran," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-20, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Marrocu, Emanuela & Paci, Raffaele & Usai, Stefano, 2013. "Proximity, networking and knowledge production in Europe: What lessons for innovation policy?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 80(8), pages 1484-1498.
    2. Ernest Miguélez & Rosina Moreno, 2013. "Skilled labour mobility, networks and knowledge creation in regions: a panel data approach," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 51(1), pages 191-212, August.
    3. De Noni, Ivan & Ganzaroli, Andrea & Orsi, Luigi, 2017. "The impact of intra- and inter-regional knowledge collaboration and technological variety on the knowledge productivity of European regions," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 108-118.
    4. Sara Amoroso & Alex Coad & Nicola Grassano, 2017. "European R&D networks: A snapshot from the 7th EU Framework Programme," JRC Working Papers on Corporate R&D and Innovation JRC107546, Joint Research Centre (Seville site).
    5. 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.
    6. Ernest Miguélez & Rosina Moreno, 2013. "Do Labour Mobility and Technological Collaborations Foster Geographical Knowledge Diffusion? The Case of European Regions," Growth and Change, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 321-354, June.
    7. Calvo, Nuria & Fernández-López, Sara & Rodríguez-Gulías, María Jesús & Rodeiro-Pazos, David, 2022. "The effect of population size and technological collaboration on firms' innovation," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    8. Koen Frenken & Roderik Ponds & Frank Van Oort, 2010. "The citation impact of research collaboration in science‐based industries: A spatial‐institutional analysis," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 89(2), pages 351-271, June.
    9. Broekel, Tom & Fornahl, Dirk & Morrison, Andrea, 2015. "Another cluster premium: Innovation subsidies and R&D collaboration networks," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1431-1444.
    10. Mafini Dosso & Antonio Vezzani, 2020. "Firm market valuation and intellectual property assets," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(7), pages 705-729, August.
    11. Sara Amoroso & Alex Coad & Nicola Grassano, 2018. "European R&D networks: a snapshot from the 7th EU Framework Programme," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(5-6), pages 404-419, August.
    12. Mario Maggioni & Teodora Uberti & Mario Nosvelli, 2014. "Does intentional mean hierarchical? Knowledge flows and innovative performance of European regions," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 53(2), pages 453-485, September.
    13. Filippopoulos, Nikolaos & Fotopoulos, Georgios, 2022. "Innovation in economically developed and lagging European regions: A configurational analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(2).
    14. Kangmin Wu & Yang Wang & Yuyao Ye & Hongou Zhang & Guangqing Huang, 2019. "Relationship Between the Built Environment and the Location Choice of High-Tech Firms: Evidence from the Pearl River Delta," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(13), pages 1-21, July.
    15. Thomas Scherngell & Michael Barber, 2011. "Distinct spatial characteristics of industrial and public research collaborations: evidence from the fifth EU Framework Programme," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 46(2), pages 247-266, April.
    16. Agustí Segarra-Blasco & Josep-Maria Arauzo-Carod & Mercedes Teruel, 2018. "Innovation and geographical spillovers: new approaches and empirical evidence," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(5), pages 603-607, May.
    17. Enrique López-Bazo & Elisabet Motellón, 2016. "“Innovation, heterogeneous firms, and the region”," AQR Working Papers 201607, University of Barcelona, Regional Quantitative Analysis Group, revised Apr 2016.
    18. Janssen, Matthijs J. & Abbasiharofteh, Milad, 2022. "Boundary spanning R&D collaboration: Key enabling technologies and missions as alleviators of proximity effects?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    19. Lorenzo Cassi & Anne Plunket, 2014. "Proximity, network formation and inventive performance: in search of the proximity paradox," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 53(2), pages 395-422, September.
    20. Fan, Xiaomin & Xu, Yingzhi, 2023. "Does high-speed railway promote urban innovation? Evidence from China," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).

    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:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:4:p:462-:d:1370569. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.