IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/egu/wpaper/2408.html

Inventing modern invention: the professionalization of technological progress in the US

Author

Listed:
  • Matte Hartog
  • Andres Gomez-Lievano
  • Ricardo Hausmann
  • Frank Neffke

Abstract

Between the mid-19th and mid-20th century, the US transformed from an agri- cultural economy to the frontier in science, technology and industry. We study how the US transitioned from traditional craftsmanship-based to today’s science-based innovation. To do so, we digitize half a million pages of patent yearbooks that describe inventors, organizations and technologies on over 1.6M patent and add demo- graphic information from US census records and information on corporate research activities from large-scale repeated surveys on industrial research labs. Starting in 1920, the 19th-century craftsmanship-based invention was, within just 20 years, overtaken by a rapidly emerging new system based on teamwork and a new specialist class of inventors, engineers. This new system relied on a social innovation: industrial research labs. These labs supported high-skill teamwork, replacing the collaborations within families with professional ties in firms and industrial research labs. This shift had wide-ranging consequences. It not only altered the division of labor in invention, but also reshaped the geography of innovation, reestablishing large cities as epicenters of technological progress and introduced new barriers to patenting for women and foreign-born inventors that have persisted into the 21st century.

Suggested Citation

  • Matte Hartog & Andres Gomez-Lievano & Ricardo Hausmann & Frank Neffke, 2024. "Inventing modern invention: the professionalization of technological progress in the US," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2408, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Apr 2024.
  • Handle: RePEc:egu:wpaper:2408
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://econ.geo.uu.nl/peeg/peeg2408.pdf
    File Function: Version April 2024
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lingfei Wu & Dashun Wang & James A. Evans, 2019. "Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology," Nature, Nature, vol. 566(7744), pages 378-382, February.
    2. Rachata Muneepeerakul & José Lobo & Shade T Shutters & Andrés Goméz-Liévano & Murad R Qubbaj, 2013. "Urban Economies and Occupation Space: Can They Get “There” from “Here”?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(9), pages 1-8, September.
    3. Ufuk Akcigit & John Grigsby & Tom Nicholas, 2017. "Immigration and the Rise of American Ingenuity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 327-331, May.
    4. Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Konstantin Kosenko & Jungkyu Suh & Yishay Yafeh, 2025. "The Rise of Scientific Research in Corporate America," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(4), pages 1466-1488, July.
    5. Winter, Sidney G., 1984. "Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 287-320.
    6. Robert J. Gordon, 2016. "Perspectives on The Rise and Fall of American Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 72-76, May.
    7. Rebecca Henderson & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 1998. "Universities As A Source Of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis Of University Patenting, 1965-1988," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(1), pages 119-127, February.
    8. Hall, B. & Jaffe, A. & Trajtenberg, M., 2001. "The NBER Patent Citations Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools," Papers 2001-29, Tel Aviv.
    9. 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.
    10. Lenoir, Timothy, 1998. "Revolution from Above: The Role of the State in Creating the German Research System, 1810-1910," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(2), pages 22-27, May.
    11. Goldin, Claudia, 1998. "America's Graduation from High School: The Evolution and Spread of Secondary Schooling in the Twentieth Century," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 58(2), pages 345-374, June.
    12. Hanlon, W. Walker, 2022. "The Rise of the Engineer: Inventing the Professional Inventor During the Industrial Revolution," CEPR Discussion Papers 17013, Centre for Economic Policy Research.
    13. Pezzoni, Michele & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Visentin, Fabiana, 2022. "How fast is this novel technology going to be a hit? Antecedents predicting follow-on inventions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    14. W Walker Hanlon, 2025. "The Rise of the Engineer: Inventing the Professional Inventor During the Industrial Revolution," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 135(670), pages 1749-1781.
    15. Goldin, Claudia & Katz, Lawrence F., 2000. "Education and Income in the Early Twentieth Century: Evidence from the Prairies," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 60(3), pages 782-818, September.
    16. Nicholas Bloom & Charles I. Jones & John Van Reenen & Michael Webb, 2020. "Are Ideas Getting Harder to Find?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(4), pages 1104-1144, April.
    17. Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Andrea Patacconi & Jungkyu Suh, 2020. "The Changing Structure of American Innovation: Some Cautionary Remarks for Economic Growth," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(1), pages 39-93.
    18. Bittlingmayer, George, 1985. "Did Antitrust Policy Cause the Great Merger Wave?," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 28(1), pages 77-118, April.
    19. Esposito, Christopher R., 2023. "The geography of breakthrough invention in the United States over the 20th century," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(7).
    20. Strumsky, Deborah & Lobo, José, 2015. "Identifying the sources of technological novelty in the process of invention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1445-1461.
    21. Gary S. Becker & Kevin M. Murphy, 1994. "The Division of Labor, Coordination Costs, and Knowledge," NBER Chapters, in: Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education, Third Edition, pages 299-322, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    22. Matt Marx & Aaron Fuegi, 2020. "Reliance on science: Worldwide front‐page patent citations to scientific articles," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(9), pages 1572-1594, September.
    23. Breschi, Stefano & Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2000. "Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 388-410, April.
    24. Kenneth L. Sokoloff & Naomi R. Lamoreaux, 2001. "Market Trade in Patents and the Rise of a Class of Specialized Inventors in the 19th-Century United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 39-44, May.
    25. Bryan Kelly & Dimitris Papanikolaou & Amit Seru & Matt Taddy, 2021. "Measuring Technological Innovation over the Long Run," American Economic Review: Insights, American Economic Association, vol. 3(3), pages 303-320, September.
    26. William R. Kerr, 2013. "U.S. High-Skilled Immigration, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship: Empirical Approaches and Evidence," NBER Working Papers 19377, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    27. Clancy, Matthew S., 2018. "Inventing by combining pre-existing technologies: Patent evidence on learning and fishing out," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 252-265.
    28. Claudia Goldin & Lawrence F. Katz, 1999. "The Shaping of Higher Education: The Formative Years in the United States, 1890 to 1940," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 13(1), pages 37-62, Winter.
    29. Matt Marx & Aaron Fuegi, 2022. "Reliance on science by inventors: Hybrid extraction of in‐text patent‐to‐article citations," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(2), pages 369-392, April.
    30. Paul Almeida & Anupama Phene & Sali Li, 2015. "The Influence of Ethnic Community Knowledge on Indian Inventor Innovativeness," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 198-217, February.
    31. Neffke, Frank M.H. & Otto, Anne & Weyh, Antje, 2017. "Inter-industry labor flows," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 275-292.
    32. 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.
    33. Matthew B. Ross & Britta M. Glennon & Raviv Murciano-Goroff & Enrico G. Berkes & Bruce A. Weinberg & Julia I. Lane, 2023. "Author Correction: Women are credited less in science than men," Nature, Nature, vol. 621(7979), pages 41-41, September.
    34. Jeffrey L. Furman & Megan MacGarvie, 2007. "Academic Science and the Birth of Industrial Research Laboratories in the U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry," NBER Chapters, in: Academic Science and Entrepreneurship: Dual Engines of Growth, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    35. Li, Yang & Neffke, Frank M.H., 2024. "Evaluating the principle of relatedness: Estimation, drivers and implications for policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
    36. Frank Neffke & Martin Henning, 2013. "Skill relatedness and firm diversification," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 297-316, March.
    37. Chesbrough, Henry, 2002. "Graceful Exits and Missed Opportunities: Xerox's Management of its Technology Spin-off Organizations," Business History Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 76(4), pages 803-837, January.
    38. Gary S. Becker & Kevin M. Murphy, 1994. "The Division of Labor, Coordination Costs, and Knowledge," NBER Chapters, in: Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education, Third Edition, pages 299-322, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    39. Naomi R. Lamoreaux & Kenneth L. Sokoloff, 1999. "Inventors, Firms, and the Market for Technology in the Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries," NBER Chapters, in: Learning by Doing in Markets, Firms, and Countries, pages 19-60, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    40. Righi, Cesare & Simcoe, Timothy, 2019. "Patent examiner specialization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 137-148.
    41. Pakes, Ariel & Griliches, Zvi, 1980. "Patents and R&D at the firm level: A first report," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 377-381.
    42. Verhoeven, Dennis & Bakker, Jurriën & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2016. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 707-723.
    43. Nicholas, Tom, 2010. "The Role of Independent Invention in U.S. Technological Development, 1880–1930," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 70(1), pages 57-82, March.
    44. Francesco Lissoni & Ernest Miguelez, 2024. "Migration and Innovation: Learning from Patent and Inventor Data," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 38(1), pages 27-54, Winter.
    45. Alje van Dam & Andres Gomez‐Lievano & Frank Neffke & Koen Frenken, 2023. "An information‐theoretic approach to the analysis of location and colocation patterns," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(1), pages 173-213, January.
    46. Frank van der Wouden, 2020. "A history of collaboration in US invention: changing patterns of co-invention, complexity and geography," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 29(3), pages 599-619.
    47. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    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. Frank Neffke & Angelica Sbardella & Ulrich Schetter & Andrea Tacchella, 2024. "Economic Complexity Analysis," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2430, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Oct 2024.

    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. Balland, Pierre-Alexandre & Broekel, Tom & Diodato, Dario & Giuliani, Elisa & Hausmann, Ricardo & O'Clery, Neave & Rigby, David, 2022. "Reprint of The new paradigm of economic complexity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(8).
    2. Jinyoung Kim & Kanghyock Koh, 2023. "Jack of fewer trades: Evolution of specialization in research," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 56(2), pages 423-452, May.
    3. Choi, Jin-Uk & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2022. "The differential effects of basic research on firm R&D productivity: The conditioning role of technological diversification," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    4. Dongqing Lyu & Kaile Gong & Xuanmin Ruan & Ying Cheng & Jiang Li, 2021. "Does research collaboration influence the “disruption” of articles? Evidence from neurosciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 287-303, January.
    5. Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Konstantin Kosenko & Jungkyu Suh & Yishay Yafeh, 2025. "The Rise of Scientific Research in Corporate America," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(4), pages 1466-1488, July.
    6. Andrews, Michael J. & Whalley, Alexander, 2022. "150 years of the geography of innovation," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    7. Esposito, Christopher R., 2023. "The geography of breakthrough invention in the United States over the 20th century," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(7).
    8. Yang, Alex J., 2025. "Text vs. citations: A comparative analysis of breakthrough and disruption metrics in patent innovation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(8).
    9. Amit Jain & Will Mitchell, 2022. "Specialization as a double‐edged sword: The relationship of scientist specialization with R&D productivity and impact following collaborator change," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(5), pages 986-1024, May.
    10. Deyu Li & Floor Alkemade & Koen Frenken & Gaston Heimeriks, 2023. "Catching up in clean energy technologies: a patent analysis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 693-715, April.
    11. Denter, Nils M. & Waterstraat, Joe & Moehrle, Martin G., 2025. "Avoiding the pitfalls of direct linkage: A novelty-driven approach to measuring scientific impact on patents," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 19(2).
    12. Jieshu Wang & Andrew Maynard, 2025. "Gender disparity in U.S. patenting," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 12(1), pages 1-26, December.
    13. Kim, Jinyoung, 2022. "Teamwork in innovation under time pressure," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    14. Michael J. Andrews, 2021. "Historical patent data: A practitioner's guide," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 368-397, May.
    15. Balland, Pierre-Alexandre & Broekel, Tom & Diodato, Dario & Giuliani, Elisa & Hausmann, Ricardo & O'Clery, Neave & Rigby, David, 2022. "The new paradigm of economic complexity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    16. Fontana, Magda & Iori, Martina & Montobbio, Fabio & Sinatra, Roberta, 2020. "New and atypical combinations: An assessment of novelty and interdisciplinarity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(7).
    17. 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.
    18. Singh, Anuraag & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2021. "Technological improvement rate predictions for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    19. Stefano Bianchini & Moritz Müller & Pierre Pelletier, 2022. "Artificial intelligence in science: An emerging general method of invention," Post-Print hal-03958025, HAL.
    20. Kim, Jinyoung, 2017. "Racing against Time in Research: A Study of the 1995 U.S. Patent Law Amendment," IZA Discussion Papers 10815, IZA Network @ LISER.

    More about this item

    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:2408. 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 The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask the person in charge to update the entry or send us the correct address (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.