IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Productivity of Nanobiotechnology Research and Education in U.S. Universities


  • Xia, Yin


The National Science Foundation (NSF) estimates that nanotechnology will become a trillion-dollar industry by 2015 and that 800,000 workers will be needed in this field in the United States. Nanobiotechnology ― the interface of nanotechnology and the life sciences ― is one of the most active and promising application frontiers in nanotechnology. To assess the productivity of basic and applied research and education in this field, I construct a structural model composed of a system of three equations which respectively represent the productions of a university’s scientific publications, patents, and graduate training outputs. The model is estimated using a unique data set on thirty universities that participated in nanobiotechnology during the 1990-2005 period. Ten of them are private universities, ten are public land-grant universities, and ten are public non-land-grant universities. Universities indeed serve as a principal seedbed for future development of the cutting-edge nanobiotechnology. NSF investment in nanobiotechnology strongly affects the university’s basic science research and graduate education. The university’s research expenditures in life sciences, engineering, and physical sciences contribute to its nanobiotechnology fields. Importantly, there is no evidence that science and graduate training compete strongly with one another. Rather, basic science research and graduate education serve as strong complements to one another, while basic science and applied research, and applied research and graduate education serve as weak complements. On average, public non-land-grant universities are more efficient in applied research. Such characteristics of universities, however, do not significantly affect the universities’ efficiencies in basic research and graduate education in nanobiotechnology. Presence of a nanotechnology research center on campus enhances the university’s basic science research and a formal nanotechnology education program promotes the university’s graduate education.

Suggested Citation

  • Xia, Yin, 2009. "Productivity of Nanobiotechnology Research and Education in U.S. Universities," 2009 Annual Meeting, July 26-28, 2009, Milwaukee, Wisconsin 49442, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:aaea09:49442

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2003. "Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 170-192, March.
    2. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2004. "Trade Costs," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 42(3), pages 691-751, September.
    3. Feenstra, Robert C, 2002. "Border Effects and the Gravity Equation: Consistent Methods for Estimation," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 49(5), pages 491-506, December.
    4. Jason H. Grant & Dayton M. Lambert, 2008. "Do Regional Trade Agreements Increase Members' Agricultural Trade?," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 90(3), pages 765-782.
    5. Grant, Jason H. & Lambert, Dayton M., 2005. "Regionalism in World Agricultural Trade: Lessons from Gravity Model Estimation," 2005 Annual meeting, July 24-27, Providence, RI 19269, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    6. Baier, Scott L. & Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., 2007. "Do free trade agreements actually increase members' international trade?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 72-95, March.
    7. Laszlo Matyas, 1997. "Proper Econometric Specification of the Gravity Model," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 20(3), pages 363-368, May.
    8. J. M. C. Santos Silva & Silvana Tenreyro, 2006. "The Log of Gravity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 641-658, November.
    9. Carsten Kowalczyk & Raymond Riezman, 2009. "Trade Agreements," CESifo Working Paper Series 2660, CESifo Group Munich.
    10. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Publishing House "SINERGIA PRESS", vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    11. Gibson, Paul R. & Wainio, John & Whitley, Daniel B. & Bohman, Mary, 2001. "Profiles Of Tariffs In Global Agricultural Markets," Agricultural Economics Reports 34055, United States Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.
    12. Thomas L. Vollrath & Mark J. Gehlhar & Charles B. Hallahan, 2009. "Bilateral Import Protection, Free Trade Agreements, and Other Factors Influencing Trade Flows in Agriculture and Clothing," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 60(2), pages 298-317.
    13. Peter Egger & Michael Pfaffermayr, 2003. "The proper panel econometric specification of the gravity equation: A three-way model with bilateral interaction effects," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 571-580, July.
    14. Gert-Jan M. Linders & Henri L.F. de Groot, 2006. "Estimation of the Gravity Equation in the Presence of Zero Flows," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 06-072/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    nanotechnology; graduate education; university research; productivity; Productivity Analysis; Research and Development/Tech Change/Emerging Technologies;

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:ags:aaea09:49442. 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: (AgEcon Search). General contact details of provider: .

    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.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.

    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.