Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- Notes on contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Abstracts
- List of abbreviations and acronyms
- Part I Concepts and measurements in innovation
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Measurement of the clustering and dispersion of innovation
- 3 Measuring the geography of innovation: a literature review
- 4 Employment growth and clusters dynamics of creative industries in Great Britain
- Part II Institutional and spatial aspects of information and knowledge flows
- Part III Institutions and innovation systems
- Index
- References
3 - Measuring the geography of innovation: a literature review
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 22 September 2009
Edited by
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- Notes on contributors
- Acknowledgments
- Abstracts
- List of abbreviations and acronyms
- Part I Concepts and measurements in innovation
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Measurement of the clustering and dispersion of innovation
- 3 Measuring the geography of innovation: a literature review
- 4 Employment growth and clusters dynamics of creative industries in Great Britain
- Part II Institutional and spatial aspects of information and knowledge flows
- Part III Institutions and innovation systems
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
Innovation has a spatial distribution. Many researchers, including those we review in this chapter, have recently studied the spatial distribution and concentration of innovation, or “innovation geography” for short, and the underlying mechanisms by which innovation occurs and spreads/concentrates. Any empirical study of innovation geography requires measurement. However, as Carter discusses (2006, chapter 2 this volume), measuring innovation and its geography is difficult both conceptually and empirically. Indeed, measurement continues to be one of the most challenging issues in the studies of innovation geography. As Zvi Griliches (1994) pointed out, many unresolved empirical issues in economics are just measurement problems. The same is true for studies of innovation geography. Although limited data availability is a major obstacle to studying innovation geography, inadequate theoretical models and conceptual precision also weaken the ability of analysts to determine appropriate data and to devise robust empirical indicators, indices, tests, and analyses of innovation. In other words, precise measurement of innovation geography requires precise concepts and definitions.
Nevertheless, innovation-geography analysts have found data and attempted ingenious ways to measure innovation and its distributive patterns, mainly using indicators and indices, often by adopting and adjusting various available indicators of regional growth. First, we discuss the different data they use to measure different aspects of innovation, in general, to illustrate that innovation is still a broad and poorly defined concept. Of the several extensive reviews of measurement issues in science, technology, and innovation (STI) studies, we have found some to be especially relevant.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Economic Geography of Innovation , pp. 30 - 59Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2007
References
, , and , 2002. “Patents and Innovation Counts as Measures of Regional Production of New Knowledge,” Research Policy, 31(7): 1069–1085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , 1990. Innovation and the Small Firm, Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology PressGoogle Scholar
Adams, J. D., 1990. “Fundamental Stocks of Knowledge and Productivity Growth,” Journal of Political Economy, 98(4): 673–702
2002. “Comparative Localization of Academic and Industrial Spillovers,” Journal of Economic Geography, 2: 253–278CrossRef
and , 2002. “Bounding the Effects of R&D: An Investigation Using Matched Firm and Establishment Data,” Rand Journal of Economics, 27: 700–721CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agrawal A. and I. M. Cockburn, 2002. “University Research, Industrial R&D, and the Anchor Tenant Hypothesis,” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper, 9212, Cambridge, MA
Alecke, B., C. Alsleben, F. Scharr, and G. Untiedt, 2003. “New Evidence on the Geographic Concentration of German Industries: Do High-Tech Clusters Really Matter?,” Presented at the Uddevalla Symposium on Entrepreneurship, Spatial Industrial Clusters and Inter-Firm Networks, Uddevalla
1996. “Knowledge Sourcing by Foreign Multinationals: Patent Citation Analysis in the US Semiconductor Industry,” Strategic Management Journal, 17: 155–165CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , 1997. “The Exploration of Technological Diversity and the Geographic Localization of Innovation,” Small Business Economics, 9(1): 21–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and 2000. “Geographical Spillovers and University Research: A Spatial Econometric Approach,” Growth and Change, 31: 501–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1989. Spatial Data Configuration in the Statistical Analysis of Regional Economics and Related Problems, Dordrecht: KluwerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , 1996. “Measuring Technological Change through Patents and Innovation Surveys,” Technovation, 16(9): 451–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1996. “Industrial Districts as ‘Learning Regions’: A Condition for Prosperity?,” European Planning Studies, 4(4): 379–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , 1996. “R&D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production,” American Economic Review, 86(3): 630–640Google Scholar
Branstetter, L. G., 2000. “Measuring the Link between Academic Science and Industrial Innovation: The Case of California's Research Universities,” Presented at the 2000 National Bureau of Economic Research Summer Institute, Cambridge, MA
, 2000. “The Geography of Innovation: A Cross-Industry Analysis,” Regional Studies, 34: 213–229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breschi, S., F. Lissoni, and F. Malerba, 2003. “Knowledge Networks from Patent Citations? Methodological Issues and Preliminary Results,” Presented at the Danish Research Unity for Industrial Dynamics Summer Conference 2003 on Creating, Sharing, and Transferring Knowledge: The Role of Geography, Institutions and Organizations, Copenhagen, June 12–14
, 1997. “Concentración geográfica de la industria y economías de aglomeración,” Economía Industrial, 317: 61–68Google Scholar
Carter, A. P., 2006. “Measurement of the Clustering and Dispersion of Innovation,” chapter 2 in this volume
, , and , 1996. “A Literature-Based Innovation Output Indicator,” Research Policy, 25: 403–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Criscuolo, P., 2005. “The ‘Home Advantage’ Effect and Patent Families: A Comparison of Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Triadic Patents, the US Patent and Trademark Office and the European Patent Office,” Paper presented at the EPIP Conference, Copenhagen, March 10–11
, 1975. “Patterns of Interorganizational Communications and Diffusion of a Major Technological Innovation in a Competitive Industrial Community,” Academy of Management Journal, 18(1): 6–24Google Scholar
and , 1991. “Networks of Innovators: A Review and Introduction to the Issue,” Research Policy, 20(5): 363–379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devereux, M. P., R. Griffith, and H. Simpson, 1999. “The Geographic Distribution of Production Activity in the United Kingdom,” The Institute for Fiscal Studies, Working Paper, 26/99
and , 1984. “Characteristics of Innovations Introduced on the US Market in 1982,” Washington, DC: Future Groups for the US Small Business AdministrationGoogle Scholar
and , 1997. “Geographic Concentration in US Manufacturing Industries: A Dartboard Approach,” Journal of Political Economy, 105(5): 879–927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2002. “The Internet Revolution and the Geography of Innovation,” International Social Science Journal, 54: 47–56CrossRef
and , 1998. “The Interaction between Public and Private R&D Investment: Cross-Country Evidence from European Community's R&D Information Service,” Annales d'Economie et de Statistique, 49–50: 199–222Google Scholar
Fingleton, B., D. Igliori, and B. Moore, 2003. “Employment Growth of Small Computing Services Firms and the Role of Horizontal Clusters: Evidence from Great Britain 1991–2000,” in (ed.), Regional Growth in Europe, Berlin: Springer Verlag: 267–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Godin, B., 2002a. “Measuring Output: When Economics Drives Science and Technology Measurements,” Project on the History and Sociology of S&T Statistics, Paper 14
2002b. “Outline for a History of Science Measurement,” Science, Technology and Human Values, 27(1): 3–27CrossRef
and , 2001. “The Development of Corporate Social Capital in Complex Innovation Processes,” in and (eds.), Research in the Sociology of Organizations: Social Capital of Organizations, 18: 107–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1990. “Patent Statistics as Economic Indicators: A Survey,” Journal of Economic Literature, 28: 1661–1707Google Scholar
1994. “Productivity, R&D, and the Data Constraint,” American Economic Review, 84(1): 1–23
, 1994. “The Measurement of Technical Performance of Innovations by Technometrics and its Impact on Established Technology Indicators,” Research Policy, 23(2): 175–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and 1997. “Spatial Distribution of Patents in Spain: Determining Factors and Consequences on Regional Development,” Regional Studies, 31(4): 381–390Google Scholar
, 2003. “Innovation Performance Across Europe,” Economics of Innovation and New Technology, 12(2): 145–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 2002. Patents, Citations, and Innovations: A Window on the Knowledge Economy, Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology PressGoogle Scholar
, , and , 1993. “Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(3): 577–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and , 2000. Industry Characteristics Linked to Establishment Concentrations in Nonmetropolitan Areas,” Journal of Regional Science, 40(2): 231–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , 1993. New Concepts in Innovation Output Measurement, New York: St. Martin's PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knoke, D., S. Yang, and F. J. Granados, 2002. “Dynamics of Strategic Alliance Networks in the Global Information Sector, 1989–2000,” Presented at the Standing Working Group for Business Network Research “The Dynamics of Networks,” 18th EGOS Colloquium, Barcelona, July 4–6
, 1991. Geography and Trade, Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology PressGoogle Scholar
Krumme, G., 2004. Analysis of Interdependence Structures: Networks, at http://faculty.washington.edu/krumme/lot/networks.html, accessed on July 25, 2004
, 2001. “The Co-Evolution of Individual and Network,” Journal of Mathematical Sociology, January: 69–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundvall, B. Å., 1996. “National Systems of Innovation and Input-Output Analysis,” in et al. (eds.), Economic Interdependence and Innovative Activity, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar: 356–363Google Scholar
. and , 1994. “The Learning Economy,” Journal of Industry Studies, 1(2): 23–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lundvall, B.-Å., B. Johnson, E. S. Andersen, and B. Dalum, 2006. “National Systems of Production, Innovation, and Competence Building,” chapter 10 in this volume
, 2002. Clustering Dynamics and the Location of High-Tech Firms, New York: Physica-VerlagCrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1985. “Industrial Location and Corporate Organization of High-Technology Industries,” Economic Geography, 61: 345–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1986. “Research and Development and the Geography of High-Technology Complexes,” in (ed.), Technology, Regions, and Policy, Totowa NJ:, Rowman & LittlefieldGoogle Scholar
and , 1999. “A Measure of the Geographic Concentration in French Manufacturing Industries,” Regional Science and Urban Economics, 29(5): 575–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maurseth, P. B. and B. Verspagen, 1999. “Knowledge Spillovers in Europe. A Patent Citation Analysis,” Presented at the CRENOS conference on Technological Externalities and Spatial Localization, University of Cagliari
Mayerhofer, P. and G. Palme, 2001. “Strukturpolitik und Raumplaung in den Regionen an der mitteleuropäischen European Union-Außengrenze zur Vorbereitung auf die European Union-Osterweiterung,” Teilprojekt 6/1: Sachgüterproduktion und Dienstleistungen: Sektorale Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und regionale Integrationsfolgen, at http://www.preparity.wsr.ac.at/public/veroeffentlichungen/at/veroeffentlichungen_a6.htm
, , and (eds.), 2004. Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S&T Systems, Dordrecht: KluwerGoogle Scholar
, , and , 1998. “Technological Overlap and Interfirm Cooperation: Implications for the Resource-Based View of the Firm,” Research Policy, 27(5): 507–523CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , and , 1997. “The Increasing Linkage Between US Technology and Public Science,” Research Policy, 26(3): 317–330CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . 1998. “Linkage between Patents and Papers: An Interim European Patent Office/US Comparison,” Scientometrics, 41(1–2): 51–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1984. High Technology Small Firms: Regional Development in Britain and the United States, New York: St. Martin's PressGoogle Scholar
and , 2003. “Measuring Concentration in the Biotechnology R&D Industry: Adjusting for Interfirm Transfer of Genetic Materials,” AgBioForum, 6(3): 134–140Google Scholar
Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development), 1992. Proposed Standard Practice for Collecting and Interpreting Technological Innovation Data – Oslo Manual, Paris: OECD
1994. The Measurement of Scientific and Technological Activities: Using Patent Data as Science and Technology Indicators – Patent Manual, Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
and , 1999. The New Challenge to America's Prosperity: Findings from the Innovation Index, Washington, DC: Council on CompetitivenessGoogle Scholar
, , and , 1996. “Interorganizational Collaboration and the Locus of Innovation: Networks of Learning in Biotechnology,” Administrative Science Quarterly, 41: 116–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, , , and , 2001. “Technological Innovation in Brazilian Industry: An Assessment Based on the São Paulo Innovation Survey,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 67(2–3): 203–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roelandt, T. J. A. and P. den Hertog, 1999. “Cluster Analysis and Cluster-Based Policy Making in Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Countries: Introduction to the Theme,” in Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Boosting Innovation: The Cluster Approach, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Proceedings, Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development: 9–23.
Saxenian, A., 1985. “Silicon Valley and Route 128: Regional Prototypes of Historical Exceptions?,” in (ed.), High-Technology, Space, and Society, Beverly Hills, CA: SageGoogle Scholar
1990. “Regional Networks and the Resurgence of Silicon Valley,” California Management Review, 33(1): 89–112CrossRef
Schmoch, U. and N. Kirsch, 1993. “Analysis of International Patent Flows,” Final Report to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, Karlsruhe: FhG-Institute for Scientific Information
and , 2002. “How Innovative is Swedish Industry? A Factor and Cluster Analysis of Community Innovation Survey II,” International Review of Applied Economics, 16(3): 319–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shibli, S. A. R., 2004. “The Big Picture: issues and problems,” AI-GEOSTATS FAQ, at www.ai-geostats.org/geostats_faq/Syed/bigpicture.html, accessed on October 10, 2005
, 1998. “Old and New Paradigms in the Measurement of R&D,” Science and Public Policy, 25(5): 305–311Google Scholar
, 2002. Geographic Concentration of Production and Unemployment in Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Countries, Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and DevelopmentGoogle Scholar
Suzigan, W., J. Furtado, R. Garcia, and S. Sampaio, 2003. “Local Production and Innovation Systems in the State of São Paulo, Brazil,” The 43rd European Congress of the Regional Science Association – ERSA 2003, Jyvaskyla, August 27–30
Thompson, W. R., 1962. “Locational Differences in Inventive Effort and Their Determinants,” in (ed.), The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
(ed.), 1988. Handbook of Quantitative Studies of Science Policy, Amsterdam: Elsevier Science PublishersGoogle Scholar
, 1998. University Research and Regional Innovation: A Spatial Econometric Analysis of Academic Technology Transfers, Amsterdam: KluwerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
and , 2004. “The Spatial Dimension of Patenting by Multinational Firms in Europe,” Journal of Economic Geography, 4(1): 23–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 2002. Partnerships and Networking in Science and Technology for Development, New York: United NationsGoogle Scholar
, 2001. “An Empirical Test of Geographic Knowledge Spillovers Using Geographic Information Systems and Firm-Level Data,” Regional Science and Urban Economics, 31(5): 571–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, 1997. “Divergent Inequalities: Theory and Empirical Results,” Review of Income and Wealth, 43: 401–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zucker, L. G., M. R. Darby, and M. B. Brewer, 1994. “Intellectual Human Capital and the Birth of US Biotechnology,” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 4653, Cambridge, MA
- 17
- Cited by