Evolution of the geography of innovation: Evidence from patent data

Growth and Change

Volumn 33, Issue 4, 2002, Pages 393-423

  Co, Catherine ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEBRASKA AT OMAHA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INNOVATION; RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT; SKILLED LABOR; TECHNOLOGY DIFFUSION;

UNITED STATES;

EID: 0036764663     PISSN: 00174815     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/1468-2257.00204     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Acs, Z., and D. Audretsch. 1989. Patents as a measure of innovative activity, Kyklos 42: 171-180.
2. Anselin, L., A. Varga, and Z. Acs. 2000a. Geographical spillovers and university research: a spatial econometric perspective, Growth and Change 31: 501-515.
3. Anselin, L., 2000b. Geographic and sectoral characteristics of academic knowledge externalities, Papers in Regional Science 79: 435-443.
4. Anselin, L., 1997. Local geographical spillovers between university research and high technology innovations. Journal of Urban Economics 42: 422-448.
5. Aghion, P., and P. Howitt. 1998. Endogenous growth theory. Cambridege: MIT Press.
6. Archibugi, D., and M. Pianta. 1992. The technological specialization of advanced countries: a report to the EEC on international science and technology activities. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
7. Audretsch, D., and M. Feldman. 1996. R&D spillovers and the geography of innovation and production, American Economic Review 86: 630-640.
8. Barro, R., and X. Sala-i-Martin. 1992. Convergence, Journal of Political Economy 100: 223-251.
9. Caniëls, M. 2000. Knowledge spillovers and economic growth. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
10. Carlino, G., and L. Mills. 1993. Are U.S. regional incomes converging? A Time Series Analysis, Journal of Monetary Economics 32: 335-346.
11. Coburn, C., and D. Berglund. 1995. Partnerships: a compendium of state and federal cooperative technology programs. Columbus: Battelle.
12. Devinney, T. 1992. How well do patents measure new product activity? Economics Letters 41: 447-50.
13. Dumais, G., G. Ellison and E. Glaeser. 2002. Geographic concentration as a dynamic process, The Review of Economics and Statistics 84: 193-204.
14. Feldman, M. 1994. The geography of innovation. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
15. Feldman, M., and M. Kelley. 2002. How states augment the capabilities of technology-pioneering firms, Growth and Change 33: 173-195.
16. Feldman, M., and D. Audretsch. 1999. Innovation in cities: science-based diversity, specialization and localized competition, European Economic Review 43: 409-429.
17. Feldman, M., and R. Florida. 1994. The geographic sources of innovation: technological infrastructure and product innovation in the United States, Annals of the Association of American Geographers 84: 210-229.
18. Feller, I. 1997. Federal and state government roles in science and technology, Economic Development Quarterly 11: 283-295.
19. Greene, W. 1997. Econometric analysis, Third Edition. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
20. Griliches, Z. 1990. Patent statistics as economic indicators: a survey, Journal of Economic Literature 28: 1661-1707.
21. Grossman, G., and E. Helpman. 1991a. Innovation and growth in the global economy, Cambridge: MIT Press.
22. Grossman, G., 1991b. Quality ladders in the theory of growth, Review of Economic Studies 58: 43-61.
23. Hall, B.H., A.B. Jaffe, and M. Trajtenberg. 2001. The NBER patent citations data file: lessons, insights and methodological tools, Working Paper No. 8498, National Bureau of Economic Research.
24. Jacobs, J. 1969. The economy of cities. New York: Random House.
25. Jaffe, A., M. Trajtenberg, and R. Henderson. 1993. Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations, Quarterly Journal of Economics 108: 577-598.
26. Jones, C. 1995a. R&D-based models of economic growth, Journal of Political Economy 103: 759-784.
27. Jones, C. 1995b. Time series tests of endogenous growth models, Quarterly Journal of Economics 110: 495-525.
28. Khan, Z., and K. Sokoloff. 1993. Schemes of practical utility: entrepreneurship and innovation among "great inventors" in the United States, 1790-1865, Journal of Economic History 53: 289-307.
29. Krugman, P. 1991. Economic geography and trade. Cambridge: MIT Press.
30. Lanjouw, J.O., and M. Schankerman. 2001. Characteristics of patent litigation: A window on competition, Rand Journal of Economics 32: 129-51.
31. Levin, R., A. Klevorick, R. Nelson and S. Winter. 1987. Appropriating the returns from industrial research and development, Brookings Papers on Economic Activity 3: 783-820.
32. Luger, M., and H. Goldstein. 1991. Technology in the garden: research parks and regional economic development. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
33. Malerba, F., L. Orsenigo, and P. Peretto. 1997. Persistence of innovative activities, sectoral patterns of innovation and international technological specialization, International Journal of Industrial Organization 15: 801-826.
34. National Science Foundation. 1999. What is the state government role in the R&D enterprise? Arlington: NSF 99-348.
35. National Science Foundation. 1996. Science and engineering indicators- 1996. Arlington: NSF 96-21.
36. Ö hUallacháin, B. 1999. Patent places: size matters, Journal of Regional Science 39: 613-636.
37. Poot, J. 2000. A synthesis of empirical research on the impact of government on long-run growth, Growth and Change 31: 516-546.
38. Powell, W., K. Koput, L. Smith-Doerr, and J. Owen-Smith. 1999. Network position and firm performance: organizational returns to collaboration in the biotechnology industry, in S. Andrews and D. Knoke, (eds.), Research in the Sociology of Organizations. Greenwich: JAI Press, pp. 129-159.
39. Romer, P. 1990. Endogenous technological change, Journal of Political Economy 98: 571-102.
40. Schmookler, J. 1966. Invention and economic growth. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
41. Sokoloff, K. and Z. Khan. 1990. The democratization of invention during early industrialization: evidence from the United States, 1790-1846, Journal of Economic History 50: 363-378.
42. Sokoloff, K. 1988. Inventive activity in early industrial America: evidence from patent records, 1790-1846, Journal of Economic History 48: 813-850.
43. Smith, P. 1999. Do knowledge spillovers contribute to U.S. state output and growth? Journal of Urban Economics 45: 331-353.
44. State Science and Technology Institute. 1996. State funding for cooperative technology programs. Columbus: Battelle.
45. Suarez-Villa, L. 1993. Innovative capacity, infrastructure and regional policy, in D. Batten and C. Karlsson (eds.), Infrastructure and the complexity of economic development. Berlin: Springer, pp. 251-269.
46. Varga, A. 1999. Time-space patterns of U.S. innovation: stability or change? in M.M. Fischer and L. Suarez-Villa, (eds.), Innovation, networks and localities. Berlin: Springer, pp. 215-234.