IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa11p1114.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

On specifying heterogeneity in knowledge production functions

Author

Listed:
  • Giovanni Guastella

    ()

  • Frank van Oort

Abstract

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.

Suggested Citation

  • Giovanni Guastella & Frank van Oort, 2011. "On specifying heterogeneity in knowledge production functions," ERSA conference papers ersa11p1114, European Regional Science Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa11p1114
    as

    Download full text from publisher

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

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lydia Greunz, 2003. "Geographically and technologically mediated knowledge spillovers between European regions," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 37(4), pages 657-680, December.
    2. Göran Therborn & K.C. Ho, 2009. "Introduction," City, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(1), pages 53-62, March.
    3. Robert Pahre, 2009. "Introduction," International Interactions, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(4), pages 418-419, November.
    4. 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.
    5. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 108(3), pages 577-598.
    6. Rosina Moreno & Raffaele Paci & Stefano Usai, 2005. "Spatial spillovers and innovation activity in European regions," Environment and Planning A, Pion Ltd, London, vol. 37(10), pages 1793-1812, October.
    7. Michael Fritsch & Viktor Slavtchev, 2007. "Universities and Innovation in Space," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(2), pages 201-218.
    8. Breschi, Stefano & Lissoni, Francesco, 2001. "Knowledge Spillovers and Local Innovation Systems: A Critical Survey," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(4), pages 975-1005, December.
    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 957-970, December.
    11. Nicholas Bardsley & Robin Cubitt & Graham Loomes & Peter Moffatt & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 2009. "Introduction," Introductory Chapters,in: Experimental Economics: Rethinking the Rules Princeton University Press.
    12. 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.
    13. Zvi Griliches, 1998. "Issues in Assessing the Contribution of Research and Development to Productivity Growth," NBER Chapters,in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 17-45 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    14. 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.
    15. 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.
    16. 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.
    17. 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.
    18. Ron Boschma, 2005. "Proximity and Innovation: A Critical Assessment," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 39(1), pages 61-74.
    19. J. Barkley Rosser, 2009. "Introduction," Chapters,in: Handbook of Research on Complexity, chapter 1 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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: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). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.