IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/igg/jide00/v4y2013i2p25-39.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

On the Geographic Allocation of Open Source Software Activities

Author

Listed:
  • Sebastian von Engelhardt

    (Department of Economics, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Jena, Germany)

  • Andreas Freytag

    (Department of Economics, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena, Jena, Germany)

  • Christoph Schulz

    (Department of Business Service and Infrastructure, Carl Zeiss AG, Jena, Germany)

Abstract

This article contributes to research on the geographic origin of open source software (OSS) developers by analyzing the geographic allocation of active OSS developers and OSS activities. Based on data from the SourceForge Research Data Archive, the authors exploit information about developers’ IP address, email address, and indicated time-zone. This enables them to assign 94% of all registered users in 2006. As proxy for activity the authors use information about the number of posted messages. Thus they provide a detailed picture of the world-wide allocation of OSS activities. Such country data about the supply-side of OSS is a valuable stock for both cross-country studies on OSS and country-specific research and policy advice.

Suggested Citation

  • Sebastian von Engelhardt & Andreas Freytag & Christoph Schulz, 2013. "On the Geographic Allocation of Open Source Software Activities," International Journal of Innovation in the Digital Economy (IJIDE), IGI Global, vol. 4(2), pages 25-39, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:igg:jide00:v:4:y:2013:i:2:p:25-39
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://services.igi-global.com/resolvedoi/resolve.aspx?doi=10.4018/jide.2013040103
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Engelhardt, Sebastian v. & Freytag, Andreas, 2013. "Institutions, culture, and open source," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 90-110.
    2. Josh Lerner, 2005. "The Scope of Open Source Licensing," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(1), pages 20-56, April.
    3. Eilhard, Jan, 2008. "Firms on SourceForge," MPRA Paper 7809, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Gonzalez-Barahona, Jesus M. & Robles, Gregorio & Andradas-Izquierdo, Roberto & Ghosh, Rishab Aiyer, 2008. "Geographic origin of libre software developers," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 356-363, December.
    5. Comino, Stefano & Manenti, Fabio M. & Parisi, Maria Laura, 2007. "From planning to mature: On the success of open source projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(10), pages 1575-1586, December.
    6. Paul A. David & Francesco Rullani, 2008. "Dynamics of innovation in an “open source” collaboration environment: lurking, laboring, and launching FLOSS projects on SourceForge," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 17(4), pages 647-710, August.
    7. Josh Lerner & Parag A. Pathak & Jean Tirole, 2006. "The Dynamics of Open-Source Contributors," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(2), pages 114-118, May.
    8. Giuri, Paola & Ploner, Matteo & Rullani, Francesco & Torrisi, Salvatore, 2010. "Skills, division of labor and performance in collective inventions: Evidence from open source software," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 54-68, January.
    9. Chaim Fershtman & Neil Gandal, 2008. "Microstructure of Collaboration: The Network of Open Source Software," Working Papers 08-01, NET Institute, revised Apr 2008.
    10. Justin Pappas Johnson, 2002. "Open Source Software: Private Provision of a Public Good," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 11(4), pages 637-662, December.
    11. von Krogh, Georg & Spaeth, Sebastian & Lakhani, Karim R., 2003. "Community, joining, and specialization in open source software innovation: a case study," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1217-1241, July.
    12. den Besten, Matthijs & Dalle, Jean-Michel & Galia, Fabrice, 2008. "The allocation of collaborative efforts in open-source software," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 316-322, December.
    13. Giuri, Paola & Rullani, Francesco & Torrisi, Salvatore, 2008. "Explaining leadership in virtual teams: The case of open source software," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 305-315, December.
    14. Fershtman, Chaim & Gandal, Neil, 2008. "Microstructure of Collaboration: The 'Social Network' of Open Source Software," CEPR Discussion Papers 6789, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    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. Engelhardt, Sebastian v. & Freytag, Andreas, 2013. "Institutions, culture, and open source," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 90-110.
    2. Stephany, Fabian & Braesemann, Fabian & Graham, Mark, 2019. "Coding Together - Coding Alone: The Role of Trust in Collaborative Programming," SocArXiv 8rf2h, Center for Open Science.
    3. Knut Blind & Torben Schubert, 2024. "Estimating the GDP effect of Open Source Software and its complementarities with R&D and patents: evidence and policy implications," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 466-491, April.

    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. Engelhardt, Sebastian v. & Freytag, Andreas, 2013. "Institutions, culture, and open source," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 90-110.
    2. Becker, Markus C. & Rullani, Francesco & Zirpoli, Francesco, 2021. "The role of digital artefacts in early stages of distributed innovation processes," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(10).
    3. Nicolai j. Foss & Lars Frederiksen & Francesco Rullani, 2016. "Problem‐formulation and problem‐solving in self‐organized communities: How modes of communication shape project behaviors in the free open‐source software community," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(13), pages 2589-2610, December.
    4. Rullani, Francesco & Haefliger, Stefan, 2013. "The periphery on stage: The intra-organizational dynamics in online communities of creation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(4), pages 941-953.
    5. Bitzer, Jürgen & Geishecker, Ingo, 2010. "Who contributes voluntarily to OSS? An investigation among German IT employees," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(1), pages 165-172, February.
    6. David, Paul A. & Shapiro, Joseph S., 2008. "Community-based production of open-source software: What do we know about the developers who participate?," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 364-398, December.
    7. Michael Schwarz & Yuri Takhteyev, 2009. "Half a Century of Public Software Institutions: Open Source as a Solution to Hold-Up Problem," NBER Working Papers 14946, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Giuri, Paola & Ploner, Matteo & Rullani, Francesco & Torrisi, Salvatore, 2010. "Skills, division of labor and performance in collective inventions: Evidence from open source software," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 28(1), pages 54-68, January.
    9. Comino, Stefano & Manenti, Fabio M., 2011. "Dual licensing in open source software markets," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 234-242.
    10. A. Yalta & A. Yalta, 2010. "Should Economists Use Open Source Software for Doing Research?," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 35(4), pages 371-394, April.
    11. Cerquera Dussán, Daniel & Müller, Bettina, 2009. "Open Source, ICT infrastructure and firm performance," ZEW Discussion Papers 09-089, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    12. Dongryul Lee & Byung Kim, 2013. "Motivations for Open Source Project Participation and Decisions of Software Developers," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 41(1), pages 31-57, January.
    13. Fershtman, Chaim & Gandal, Neil, 2011. "A Brief Survey of the Economics of Open Source Software," CEPR Discussion Papers 8434, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Michael Schwarz & Yuri Takhteyev, 2010. "Half a Century of Public Software Institutions: Open Source as a Solution to Hold‐Up Problem," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 12(4), pages 609-639, August.
    15. Sharon Belenzon & Mark Schankerman, 2015. "Motivation and sorting of human capital in open innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(6), pages 795-820, June.
    16. Bitzer, Jürgen & Schrettl, Wolfram & Schröder, Philipp J.H., 2006. "Intrinsic Motivation versus Signaling in Open Source Software Development," Working Papers 06-7, University of Aarhus, Aarhus School of Business, Department of Economics.
    17. Sherae Daniel & Ritu Agarwal & Katherine J. Stewart, 2013. "The Effects of Diversity in Global, Distributed Collectives: A Study of Open Source Project Success," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 24(2), pages 312-333, June.
    18. Paul A. David & Francesco Rullani, 2008. "Dynamics of innovation in an “open source” collaboration environment: lurking, laboring, and launching FLOSS projects on SourceForge," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 17(4), pages 647-710, August.
    19. Sebastian von Engelhardt, 2010. "Quality Competition or Quality Cooperation? License-Type and the Strategic Nature of Open Source vs. Closed Source Business Models," Jena Economics Research Papers 2010-034, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    20. Belenzon, Sharon & Schankerman, Mark, 2015. "Motivation and sorting of human capital in open innovation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 58514, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L17 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Open Source Products and Markets
    • C81 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Data Collection and Data Estimation Methodology; Computer Programs - - - Methodology for Collecting, Estimating, and Organizing Microeconomic Data; Data Access
    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software

    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:igg:jide00:v:4:y:2013:i:2:p:25-39. 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: Journal Editor (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.igi-global.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.