IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa05p816.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A model of the learning process with local knowledge externalities illustrated with an integrated graphical framework

Author

Listed:
  • Mário Alexandre Silva

  • Aurora A. C. Teixeira

Abstract

In this paper we present a theoretical model of the learning process with knowledge externalities to R&D and other learning inputs within a region, a technological district, an industry or a technological cluster with fast rates of accumulation of new technological knowledge. As there are several definitions of localized technological and learning opportunities (according to the technical space, or to the regional space) and of localized technological knowledge, we can therefore find several possible applications to the generic model. The analysis of the learning firm interacting with a specific region in the production of new technological knowledge is just one of them. The analytical model we develop is amenable to a graphical representation. Thus we provide in the first place a unifying graphical framework, consisting of a four-quadrant picture to analyze the process of knowledge accumulation by learning firms located and operating in a specific region or industry, which simultaneously stresses the nature of the basic learning process and the importance of true knowledge spillovers in the generation of new knowledge. We adopt the following approach to the construction of spillover stocks or pools. First, the magnitude of the state of aggregate knowledge in a region or industry is reconstructed through the historic accumulation of flows of knowledge. Thus, the aggregate level of knowledge can always be updated after every learning loop, or at every moment of discrete time, whose unit of measurement we might assume at the outset of our analysis. Secondly, every firm within a region or industry is treated symmetrically regarding spillover effects and magnitudes. Such statement meaning that the amount of aggregate knowledge borrowed from any available source, either the region or industry under analysis or some other distant region or industry, is regarded as the same by every firm. And finally, we model both the loss of appropriation of benefits from innovation and the distance between different technological bases or regional sources in terms of single parameters, or instantaneous rates of growth, weighting respectively the leakage and the absorption intensities of flows and stocks of knowledge. Several theoretical predictions about the direction and magnitude of the knowledge spillovers can therefore be deducted from parametric changes in the leakage and absorption functions of our model arising from, among other things: - Improvements in information technology and falling communication costs observed in the economic system at general. - Improvements in technological communication systems within specific technological districts. - The establishment of explicit cooperative relations and effective access to the pool of collective knowledge, or instead any improvements of the mutuality and trust conditions, within the group of firms located and operating within a specific region. - The increasing of competitive pressures, or the working of any other mechanism for lowering the appropriation of a firmÂ’s gains from innovation, in an array of industrial sectors. One interesting theoretical result is then derived from our full model. With such purpose in mind, we consider first the existence of a relevant competitive situation where appropriation and communication are both dependent upon the number of receiving and sending firms within the region. Whereas the amount of technological leakage per firm increases with the number of firms effectively operating within the region, ceteris paribus; the extent of absorption per firm also increases with the number of firms effectively communicating within the region, ceteris paribus. Apparently, there is a trade-off between such appropriation conditions and communication conditions. In the long-run, the addition of firms eventually exhausts the net positive effects of taking part in an effective network, and so we can establish an equilibrium number of firms operating in the region.

Suggested Citation

  • Mário Alexandre Silva & Aurora A. C. Teixeira, 2005. "A model of the learning process with local knowledge externalities illustrated with an integrated graphical framework," ERSA conference papers ersa05p816, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa05p816
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa05/papers/816.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Romer, Paul M, 1990. "Endogenous Technological Change," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(5), pages 71-102, October.
    2. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2001. "The Microeconomics of Technological Systems," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199245536.
    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. Quatraro, Francesco & Scandura, Alessandra, 2019. "Academic Inventors and the Antecedents of Green Technologies. A Regional Analysis of Italian Patent Data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 156(C), pages 247-263.
    2. Grimaud, Andre & Rouge, Luc, 2003. "Non-renewable resources and growth with vertical innovations: optimum, equilibrium and economic policies," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 45(2, Supple), pages 433-453, March.
    3. H. R. Seddighi & P. J. Huntley, 2007. "R&D Activities In a Peripheral Region: an Empirical Study with Special Reference to the North East Region of the UK," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(3), pages 211-225.
    4. Luis Garicano & Thomas N. Hubbard, 2016. "The Returns to Knowledge Hierarchies," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 32(4), pages 653-684.
    5. Jati Sengupta, 2002. "Economics of efficiency measurement by the DEA approach," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(9), pages 1133-1139.
    6. Grimaud, Andre & Rouge, Luc, 2005. "Polluting non-renewable resources, innovation and growth: welfare and environmental policy," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(2), pages 109-129, June.
    7. B. Bhaskara Rao & Arusha Cooray, 2012. "How useful is growth literature for policies in the developing countries?," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(6), pages 671-681, February.
    8. Alessandro STERLACCHINI, 2006. "Innovation, Knowledge and Regional Economic Performances: Regularities and Differences in the EU," Working Papers 260, Universita' Politecnica delle Marche (I), Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali.
    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. Galiani, Sebastian & Jaitman, Laura & Weinschelbaum, Federico, 2020. "Crime and durable goods," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 173(C), pages 146-163.
    11. Rongrong Xu & Yongxiang Wu & Ming Chen & Xuan Zhang & Wei Wu & Long Tan & Gaoxu Wang & Yi Xu & Bing Yan & Yuedong Xia, 2019. "Calculation of the contribution rate of China’s hydraulic science and technology based on a feedforward neural network," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-22, September.
    12. Alex R. Horenstein & Manuel S. Santos, 2012. "A Cross-Country Analysis of Health Care Expenditures," Working Papers 2013-05, University of Miami, Department of Economics.
    13. Weisbrod, Julian & Vollmer, Sebastian & Holzmann, Hajo, 2007. "Perspectives on the World Income Distribution: Beyond Twin Peaks Towards Welfare Conclusions," Proceedings of the German Development Economics Conference, Göttingen 2007 32, Verein für Socialpolitik, Research Committee Development Economics.
    14. Andrés Rodríguez-Clare, 2005. "Coordination Failure, Clusters, and Microeconomic Interventions," Economía Journal, The Latin American and Caribbean Economic Association - LACEA, vol. 0(Fall 2005), pages 1-41.
    15. Jan Fagerberg & Maryann Feldman & Martin Srholec, 2011. "Technological Dynamics and Social Capability: Comparing U.S. States and European Nations," Working Papers on Innovation Studies 20111114, Centre for Technology, Innovation and Culture, University of Oslo.
    16. João Pereira & Aurora Galego, 2014. "Inter-Regional Wage Differentials in Portugal: An Analysis Across the Wage Distribution," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 48(9), pages 1529-1546, September.
    17. Andreas Schäfer & Maik T. Schneider, 2010. "Endogenous Intellectual Property Rights and North-South Trade," DEGIT Conference Papers c015_058, DEGIT, Dynamics, Economic Growth, and International Trade.
    18. Kalle Kukk, 2007. "Fiscal Policy Effects on Economic Growth: Short Run vs Long Run," Working Papers 167, Tallinn School of Economics and Business Administration, Tallinn University of Technology.
    19. Sina T. Ates & Felipe E. Saffie, 2013. "Project Heterogeneity and Growth: The Impact of Selection," PIER Working Paper Archive 13-011, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    20. Galetovic, Alexander, 1996. "Specialization, intermediation, and growth," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 549-559, December.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O31 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Innovation and Invention: Processes and Incentives
    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • R19 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General Regional Economics - - - Other

    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa05p816. 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: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    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.