IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

On specifying heterogeneity in knowledge production functions

  • Giovanni Guastella

    ()

  • Frank van Oort

Within the Geography of Innovation literature, the Knowledge Production Function approach has become a reference framework to investigate the presence of localized knowledge spillovers and spatial econometric tools have been applied to study interregional spillovers. A linear specification for the KPF is assumed linking patents to R&D expenditure. This approach however suffers of different drawbacks. First patent applications are count data in nature. Patents per inhabitants may produce an unrealistic picture of the spatial distribution of innovative activities. Secondly, spatial heterogeneity is not usually observed, producing both omitted variables bias and spatial correlation in the error structure. Third, a positive R&D-patents linkage may arise as a spurious correlation if market size is not observed, causing R&D to be endogenous. This paper uses a regional cross section model to study the spatial distribution of high tech patents across 232 European regions in the period 2005/2006 to address these issues. Two main processes drive technological change in the model: research activities and knowledge generated outside firms and in a second moment embedded through either formal or informal acquisition. Among the different knowledge sources we particularly focus on the role of firms working in Knowledge Intensive Business Services and on that of universities. In developing the empirical model we take into account that a) patents are count data; b) the exclusion of market size will cause biased and inconsistent model parameters estimates; c) estimates of interregional spillovers may be biased by the omission of heterogeneity in the model specification. Empirical results indicate that, as expected, a count data distribution best fits the data, producing less spatially autocorrelated residuals. Regional innovative activity is explained by both investments in research and localization of KIBS, but only the first generates positive interregional externalities. Scientific universities do not directly affect the production of new knowledge. However, different knowledge production processes characterize regions with and without scientific universities, with R&D driving innovation in the sooner and KIBS in the latter. Finally, most of what are assumed to be interregional spillovers reveal to be, at a more careful inquiry, effect due to unaccounted spatial heterogeneity in regional innovation.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa11/e110830aFinal01114.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by European Regional Science Association in its series ERSA conference papers with number ersa11p1114.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: Sep 2011
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa11p1114
Contact details of provider: Postal: Welthandelsplatz 1, 1020 Vienna, Austria
Web page: http://www.ersa.org

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Zvi Griliches, 1979. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 92-116, Spring.
  2. Manishi Prasad & Peter Wahlqvist & Rich Shikiar & Ya-Chen Tina Shih, 2004. "A," PharmacoEconomics, Springer Healthcare | Adis, vol. 22(4), pages 225-244.
  3. G�ran Therborn & K.C. Ho, 2009. "Introduction," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 53-62, March.
  4. Lydia Greunz, 2003. "Geographically and technologically mediated knowledge spillovers between European regions," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer, vol. 37(4), pages 657-680, December.
  5. Slavtchev, Viktor & Fritsch, Michael, 2005. "The Role of Regional Knowledge Sources for Innovation: An Empirical Assessment," Freiberg Working Papers 2005,15, TU Bergakademie Freiberg, Faculty of Economics and Business Administration.
  6. Breschi, Stefano & Lissoni, Francesco, 2000. "Knowledge Spillovers And Local Innovation Systems: A Critical Survey," ERSA conference papers ersa00p362, European Regional Science Association.
  7. Nickerson, Jack A., 1999. "Learning by Doing in Markets, Firms, and Countries. Edited by Naomi R. Lamoreaux, Daniel M. G. Raff, and Peter Temin. A National Bureau of Economic Research conference report. Chicago: University of C," The Journal of Economic History, Cambridge University Press, vol. 59(03), pages 854-855, September.
  8. Bottazzi, Laura & Peri, Giovanni, 2003. "Innovation and spillovers in regions: Evidence from European patent data," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(4), pages 687-710, August.
  9. Naomi R. Lamoreaux & Daniel Raff & Peter Temin, 1999. "Introduction to "Learning by Doing in Markets, Firms, and Countries"," NBER Chapters, in: Learning by Doing in Markets, Firms, and Countries, pages 1-18 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  10. Jaffe, Adam B, 1989. "Real Effects of Academic Research," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(5), pages 957-70, December.
  11. Jaffe, A.B. & Trajtenberg, M., 1992. "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations," Papers 14-92, Tel Aviv.
  12. Rosina Moreno & Raffaele Paci & Stefano Usai, 2004. "Spatial spillovers and innovation activity in European regions," ERSA conference papers ersa04p588, European Regional Science Association.
  13. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
  14. J. Barkley Rosser, 2009. "Introduction," Chapters, in: Handbook of Research on Complexity, chapter 1 Edward Elgar.
  15. Michael Fritsch & Viktor Slavtchev, 2007. "Universities and Innovation in Space," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 201-218.
  16. Naomi R. Lamoreaux & Kenneth L. Sokoloff, 1997. "Inventors, Firms, and the Market for Technology in the Late Nineteenth and Early Twentieth Centuries," NBER Historical Working Papers 0098, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  17. Naomi R. Lamoreauxn & Daniel M.G. Raff & Peter Temin, 1999. "Review article – Learning by Doing in Markets, Firms and Countries," Journal of Economic Studies, Emerald Group Publishing, vol. 26(6), pages 497-509, October.
  18. Tomas Del Barrio-Castro & Jose Garcia-Quevedo, 2005. "Effects of university research on the geography of innovation," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(9), pages 1217-1229.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa11p1114. 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: (Gunther Maier)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.