IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/egu/wpaper/1918.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Using structural diversity to measure the complexity of technologies

Author

Listed:
  • Tom Broekel

Abstract

The paper introduces structural diversity as a new approach to quantify the complexity of technologies. By modeling technologies as combinatorial networks, a measure of technological complexity is derived that represents the diversity of (sub-)network topologies in these networks. It is further argued that this measure can be empirically approximated with the Network Diversity Score (NDS). The paper also presents an application of this approach to European patent data from 1980 to 2015. On this basis, the measure of structural diversity is shown to replicate a number of stylized facts commonly associated with technological complexity: Complexity increases over time and younger technologies are more complex than older technologies. Complex technologies are also associated to larger R&D efforts and require more collaborative R&D activities. Lastly, when controlling for technologies? size, technologies scoring high on structural diversity are also shown to concentrate in space.

Suggested Citation

  • Tom Broekel, 2019. "Using structural diversity to measure the complexity of technologies," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1918, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised May 2019.
    • Handle: RePEc:egu:wpaper:1918
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://econ.geo.uu.nl/peeg/peeg1918.pdf
    File Function: Version May 2019
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bruce Kogut & Udo Zander, 1992. "Knowledge of the Firm, Combinative Capabilities, and the Replication of Technology," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 3(3), pages 383-397, August.
    2. Prencipe, Andrea, 2000. "Breadth and depth of technological capabilities in CoPS: the case of the aircraft engine control system," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 29(7-8), pages 895-911, August.
    3. Cesar A. Hidalgo & Ricardo Hausmann, 2009. "The Building Blocks of Economic Complexity," Papers 0909.3890, arXiv.org.
    4. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 287-343, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Coad, Alex & Rao, Rekha, 2008. "Innovation and firm growth in high-tech sectors: A quantile regression approach," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 633-648, May.
    6. Alberto Dalmazzo, 2002. "Technological Complexity, Wage Differentials and Unemployment," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 104(4), pages 515-530, December.
    7. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    8. David J. Teece, 2008. "Technology Transfer By Multinational Firms: The Resource Cost Of Transferring Technological Know-How," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: The Transfer And Licensing Of Know-How And Intellectual Property Understanding the Multinational Enterprise in the Modern World, chapter 1, pages 1-22, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Udo Zander & Bruce Kogut, 1995. "Knowledge and the Speed of the Transfer and Imitation of Organizational Capabilities: An Empirical Test," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 6(1), pages 76-92, February.
    10. repec:fth:harver:1473 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Pierre-Alexandre Balland & David Rigby, 2017. "The Geography of Complex Knowledge," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 93(1), pages 1-23, January.
    12. Pavitt, Keith, 1998. "Technologies, Products and Organization in the Innovating Firm: What Adam Smith Tells Us and Joseph Schumpeter Doesn't," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 7(3), pages 433-452, September.
    13. Jan W. Rivkin, 2000. "Imitation of Complex Strategies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 46(6), pages 824-844, June.
    14. Olav Sorenson & Jan W. Rivkin & Lee Fleming, 2010. "Complexity, Networks and Knowledge Flows," Chapters, in: Ron Boschma & Ron Martin (ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, chapter 15, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Nelson, Richard R & Winter, Sidney G, 1982. "The Schumpeterian Tradeoff Revisited," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(1), pages 114-132, March.
    16. Madsen, Jakob B., 2007. "Are there diminishing returns to R&D?," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 95(2), pages 161-166, May.
    17. Olav Sorenson, 2005. "Social networks and industrial geography," Springer Books, in: Uwe Cantner & Elias Dinopoulos & Robert F. Lanzillotti (ed.), Entrepreneurships, the New Economy and Public Policy, pages 55-69, Springer.
    18. 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.
    19. Zoltan J. Acs & Luc Anselin & Attila Varga, 2008. "Patents and Innovation Counts as Measures of Regional Production of New Knowledge," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 11, pages 135-151, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    20. Sungho Kim & Jaideep (Jay) Anand, 2018. "Knowledge complexity and the performance of inter‐unit knowledge replication structures," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(7), pages 1959-1989, July.
    21. Carbonell, Pilar & Rodriguez, Ana I., 2006. "Designing teams for speedy product development: The moderating effect of technological complexity," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 59(2), pages 225-232, February.
    22. Olav Sorenson, 2005. "Social Networks, Informational Complexity and Industrial Geography," International Studies in Entrepreneurship, in: Dirk Fornahl & Christian Zellner & David B. Audretsch (ed.), The Role of Labour Mobility and Informal Networks for Knowledge Transfer, chapter 0, pages 79-96, Springer.
    23. Peter Howitt, 1999. "Steady Endogenous Growth with Population and R & D Inputs Growing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 107(4), pages 715-730, August.
    24. Fleming, Lee & Sorenson, Olav, 2001. "Technology as a complex adaptive system: evidence from patent data," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 30(7), pages 1019-1039, August.
    25. Mihaela Iulia Pintea & Peter Thompson, 2007. "Technological Complexity and Economic Growth," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 10(2), pages 276-293, April.
    26. Fai, Felicia & von Tunzelmann, Nicholas, 2001. "Industry-specific competencies and converging technological systems: evidence from patents," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 12(2), pages 141-170, July.
    27. Dirk Fornahl & Christian Zellner & David B. Audretsch (ed.), 2005. "The Role of Labour Mobility and Informal Networks for Knowledge Transfer," International Studies in Entrepreneurship, Springer, number 978-0-387-23140-2, November.
    28. repec:bla:scandj:v:104:y:2002:i:4:p:515-30 is not listed on IDEAS
    29. Sorenson, Olav & Fleming, Lee, 2004. "Science and the diffusion of knowledge," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(10), pages 1615-1634, December.
    30. Arundel, Anthony & Kabla, Isabelle, 1998. "What percentage of innovations are patented? empirical estimates for European firms," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 127-141, June.
    31. Jaffe, Adam B., 1989. "Characterizing the "technological position" of firms, with application to quantifying technological opportunity and research spillovers," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 87-97, April.
    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. Mewes, Lars & Broekel, Tom, 2022. "Technological complexity and economic growth of regions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(8).
    2. Pierre-Alexandre Balland & David L. Rigby, 2015. "The geography and evolution of complex knowledge," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1502, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Jan 2015.
    3. Nast, Carolin & Broekel, Tom & Entner, Doris, 2024. "Fueling the fire? How government support drives technological progress and complexity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(6).
    4. Sándor Juhász & Tom Broekel & Ron Boschma, 2021. "Explaining the dynamics of relatedness: The role of co‐location and complexity," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 100(1), pages 3-21, February.
    5. Tubiana, Matteo & Miguelez, Ernest & Moreno, Rosina, 2022. "In knowledge we trust: Learning-by-interacting and the productivity of inventors," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(1).
    6. Olav Sorenson & Jan W. Rivkin & Lee Fleming, 2010. "Complexity, Networks and Knowledge Flows," Chapters, in: Ron Boschma & Ron Martin (ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Economic Geography, chapter 15, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    7. Parcu, Pier Luigi & Innocenti, Niccolò & Carrozza, Chiara, 2022. "Ubiquitous technologies and 5G development. Who is leading the race?," Telecommunications Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(4).
    8. Maleki, Ali & Rosiello, Alessandro, 2019. "Does knowledge base complexity affect spatial patterns of innovation? An empirical analysis in the upstream petroleum industry," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 273-288.
    9. Zoltán J. Ács & Pontus Braunerhjelm & David B. Audretsch & Bo Carlsson, 2015. "The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 7, pages 129-144, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    10. Choi, Mincheol & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2021. "Technological diversification and R&D productivity: The moderating effects of knowledge spillovers and core-technology competence," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).
    11. Melissa Haller & David L. Rigby, 2020. "The geographic evolution of optics technologies in the United States, 1976–2010," Papers in Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 99(6), pages 1539-1559, December.
    12. Dibiaggio, Ludovic & Nasiriyar, Maryam & Nesta, Lionel, 2014. "Substitutability and complementarity of technological knowledge and the inventive performance of semiconductor companies," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(9), pages 1582-1593.
    13. Pierre-Alexandre Balland & Cristian Jara-Figueroa & Sergio G. Petralia & Mathieu P. A. Steijn & David L. Rigby & César A. Hidalgo, 2020. "Complex economic activities concentrate in large cities," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 4(3), pages 248-254, March.
    14. Rakas, Marija & Hain, Daniel S., 2019. "The state of innovation system research: What happens beneath the surface?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1-1.
    15. Jan W. Rivkin, 2001. "Reproducing Knowledge: Replication Without Imitation at Moderate Complexity," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 12(3), pages 274-293, June.
    16. Ning, Lutao & Guo, Rui & Chen, Kaihua, 2023. "Does FDI bring knowledge externalities for host country firms to develop complex technologies? The catalytic role of overseas returnee clustering structures," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(6).
    17. Silvia Rita Sedita & Ivan De Noni & Roberta Apa & Luigi Orsi, 2016. "Measuring how the knowledge space shapes the technological progress of European regions," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 1624, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Aug 2016.
    18. David Audretsch & Marcel Hülsbeck & Erik Lehmann, 2012. "Regional competitiveness, university spillovers, and entrepreneurial activity," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 587-601, October.
    19. Xiao, Fenglong, 2022. "Non-competes and innovation: Evidence from medical devices," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(6).
    20. Pintar, Nico & Scherngell, Thomas, 2022. "The complex nature of regional knowledge production: Evidence on European regions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(8).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Complexity; technology; patents; technological complexity; network; diversity;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • O11 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Economic Development - - - Macroeconomic Analyses of Economic Development
    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • N70 - Economic History - - Economic History: Transport, International and Domestic Trade, Energy, and Other Services - - - General, International, or Comparative

    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:egu:wpaper:1918. 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://edirc.repec.org/data/deguunl.html .

    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.