IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cep/cepdps/dp2116.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Polarized Technologies

Author

Listed:
  • Gaia Dossi
  • Marta Morando

Abstract

We document that inventors patent and cite technologies aligned with the views of their political party. We link inventors to US voter registration data and map politically polarized issues to technologies. Compared to Republicans, Democrats are one-third more likely to patent technologies addressing climate change mitigation or women's reproductive health and one-third less likely to patent weapons. This holds across economic returns and organization characteristics. Republicans and Democrats are also 20% differently likely to cite these technologies. These findings highlight the importance of inventors' identity - specifically, their party affiliation - in shaping the content and diffusion of their innovation.

Suggested Citation

  • Gaia Dossi & Marta Morando, 2025. "Polarized Technologies," CEP Discussion Papers dp2116, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    • Handle: RePEc:cep:cepdps:dp2116
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cep.lse.ac.uk/pubs/download/dp2116.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jacob R. Brown & Enrico Cantoni & Sahil Chinoy & Martin Koenen & Vincent Pons, 2023. "The Effect of Childhood Environment on Political Behavior: Evidence from Young U.S. Movers, 1992–2021," NBER Working Papers 31759, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Manuel Trajtenberg, 1990. "A Penny for Your Quotes: Patent Citations and the Value of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 21(1), pages 172-187, Spring.
    3. 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.
    4. Gordon B. Dahl & Runjing Lu & William Mullins, 2022. "Partisan Fertility and Presidential Elections," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 4(4), pages 473-490, December.
    5. Leonid Kogan & Dimitris Papanikolaou & Amit Seru & Noah Stoffman, 2017. "Technological Innovation, Resource Allocation, and Growth," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 132(2), pages 665-712.
    6. Philippe Aghion & Mathias Dewatripont & Jeremy C. Stein, 2008. "Academic freedom, private‐sector focus, and the process of innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 39(3), pages 617-635, September.
    7. Ajay Bhaskarabhatla & Luis Cabral & Deepak Hegde & Thomas Peeters, 2021. "Are Inventors or Firms the Engines of Innovation?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 3899-3920, June.
    8. Allcott, Hunt & Boxell, Levi & Conway, Jacob & Gentzkow, Matthew & Thaler, Michael & Yang, David, 2020. "Polarization and public health: Partisan differences in social distancing during the coronavirus pandemic," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 191(C).
    9. Kaustia, Markku & Torstila, Sami, 2011. "Stock market aversion? Political preferences and stock market participation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 98-112, April.
    10. Benjamin F. Jones, 2010. "Age and Great Invention," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(1), pages 1-14, February.
    11. Ina Ganguli & Jeffrey Lin & Nicholas Reynolds, 2020. "The Paper Trail of Knowledge Spillovers: Evidence from Patent Interferences," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 12(2), pages 278-302, April.
    12. Fos, Vyacheslav & Kempf, Elisabeth & Tsoutsoura, Margarita, 2021. "The Political Polarization of Corporate America," Working Papers 313, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
    13. 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.
    14. Matthew Gentzkow & Jesse M. Shapiro, 2011. "Ideological Segregation Online and Offline," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(4), pages 1799-1839.
    15. Ufuk Akcigit & Salomé Baslandze & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2016. "Taxation and the International Mobility of Inventors," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(10), pages 2930-2981, October.
    16. Elias Einio & Josh Feng & Xavier Jaravel, 2022. "Social push and the direction of innovation," CEP Discussion Papers dp1861, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    17. Benjamin F. Jones, 2009. "The Burden of Knowledge and the "Death of the Renaissance Man": Is Innovation Getting Harder?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(1), pages 283-317.
    18. Marianne Bertrand & Emir Kamenica, 2023. "Coming Apart? Cultural Distances in the United States over Time," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 100-141, October.
    19. Scott Stern, 2004. "Do Scientists Pay to Be Scientists?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(6), pages 835-853, June.
    20. Jörg L. Spenkuch & Edoardo Teso & Guo Xu, 2023. "Ideology and Performance in Public Organizations," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 91(4), pages 1171-1203, July.
    21. Christopher McConnell & Yotam Margalit & Neil Malhotra & Matthew Levendusky, 2018. "The Economic Consequences of Partisanship in a Polarized Era," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 62(1), pages 5-18, January.
    22. Kaltenberg, Mary & Jaffe, Adam B. & Lachman, Margie E., 2023. "Invention and the life course: Age differences in patenting," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(1).
    23. Gerber, Alan S. & Huber, Gregory A., 2009. "Partisanship and Economic Behavior: Do Partisan Differences in Economic Forecasts Predict Real Economic Behavior?," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 103(3), pages 407-426, August.
    24. Einiö, Elias & Feng, Josh & Jaravel, Xavier Laurent, 2022. "Social push and the direction of innovation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 117951, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    25. Lea Cassar & Stephan Meier, 2018. "Nonmonetary Incentives and the Implications of Work as a Source of Meaning," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 32(3), pages 215-238, Summer.
    26. Alma Cohen & Crystal S. Yang, 2019. "Judicial Politics and Sentencing Decisions," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 11(1), pages 160-191, February.
    27. Jasjit Singh, 2005. "Collaborative Networks as Determinants of Knowledge Diffusion Patterns," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 51(5), pages 756-770, May.
    28. Caroline Viola Fry, 2023. "Crisis and the Trajectory of Science: Evidence from the 2014 Ebola Outbreak," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 105(4), pages 1028-1038, July.
    29. Manuel Trajtenberg & Adam B. Jaffe & Michael S. Fogarty, 2000. "Knowledge Spillovers and Patent Citations: Evidence from a Survey of Inventors," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 90(2), pages 215-218, May.
    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. Dossi, Gaia & Morando, Marta, 2023. "Political ideology and innovation," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 126760, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    2. Gaia Dossi & Marta Morando, 2023. "Political ideology and innovation," CEP Discussion Papers dp1969, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    3. Sarah Kaplan & Keyvan Vakili, 2015. "The double-edged sword of recombination in breakthrough innovation," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(10), pages 1435-1457, October.
    4. Alex Bell & Raj Chetty & Xavier Jaravel & Neviana Petkova & John Van Reenen, 2019. "Who Becomes an Inventor in America? The Importance of Exposure to Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(2), pages 647-713.
    5. 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.
    6. Paola Giuri & Myriam Mariani & Stefano Brusoni & Gustavo Crespi & Dominique Francoz & Alfonso Gambardella & Walter Garcia-Fontes & Aldo Geuna & Raul Gonzales & Dietmar Harhoff & Karin Hoisl & Christia, 2005. "Everything you Always Wanted to Know about Inventors (but Never Asked): Evidence from the PatVal-EU Survey," LEM Papers Series 2005/20, Laboratory of Economics and Management (LEM), Sant'Anna School of Advanced Studies, Pisa, Italy.
    7. Ufuk Akcigit & John Grigsby & Tom Nicholas & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2018. "Taxation and Innovation in the 20th Century," NBER Working Papers 24982, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Giuri, Paola & Mariani, Myriam, 2007. "Inventors and invention processes in Europe: Results from the PatVal-EU survey," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(8), pages 1105-1106, October.
    9. Aditi Mehta & Marc Rysman & Tim Simcoe, 2006. "Identifying the Age Profile of Patent Citations," Boston University - Department of Economics - Working Papers Series WP2006-022, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    10. Chloe Kim Glaeser & Stephen Glaeser & Eva Labro, 2023. "Proximity and the Management of Innovation," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(5), pages 3080-3099, May.
    11. Yusuke Oh & Koji Takahashi, 2020. "R&D and Innovation: Evidence from Patent Data," Bank of Japan Working Paper Series 20-E-7, Bank of Japan.
    12. Jungpyo Lee & So Young Sohn, 2017. "What makes the first forward citation of a patent occur earlier?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 279-298, October.
    13. Brian C. Fujiy, 2024. "The Geography of Inventors and Local Knowledge Spillovers in R&D," Working Papers 24-59, Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Census Bureau.
    14. Xiao, Hongyu & Wu, Andy & Kim, Jaeho, 2021. "Commuting and innovation: Are closer inventors more productive?," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    15. Pauly, Stefan & Stipanicic, Fernando, 2021. "The creation and diffusion of knowledge: Evidence from the Jet Age," CEPREMAP Working Papers (Docweb) 2112, CEPREMAP.
    16. 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.
    17. Jannati, Sima, 2020. "Geographic spillover of dominant firms’ shocks," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    18. Feng Zhang & Guohua Jiang, 2019. "Combination of Complementary Technological Knowledge to Generate “Hard to Imitate” Technologies," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 18(02), pages 1-24, June.
    19. Crescenzi, Riccardo & Nathan, Max & Rodríguez-Pose, Andrés, 2016. "Do inventors talk to strangers? On proximity and collaborative knowledge creation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 177-194.
    20. Ajay Bhaskarabhatla & Luis Cabral & Deepak Hegde & Thomas Peeters, 2021. "Are Inventors or Firms the Engines of Innovation?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 3899-3920, June.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:cep:cepdps:dp2116. 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://cep.lse.ac.uk/_new/publications/discussion-papers/ .

    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.