The Annals of Regional Science

, Volume 43, Issue 3, pp 739–756 | Cite as

Applying social network analysis in economic geography: framing some key analytic issues

Open Access
Special Issue Paper

Abstract

Social network analysis attracts increasing attention in economic geography. We claim social network analysis is a promising tool for empirically investigating the structure and evolution of inter-organizational interaction and knowledge flows within and across regions. However, the potential of the application of network methodology to regional issues is far from exhausted. The aim of our paper is twofold. The first objective is to shed light on the untapped potential of social network analysis techniques in economic geography: we set out some theoretical challenges concerning the static and dynamic analysis of networks in geography. Basically, we claim that network analysis has a huge potential to enrich the literature on clusters, regional innovation systems and knowledge spillovers. The second objective is to describe how these challenges can be met through the application of network analysis techniques, using primary (survey) and secondary (patent) data. We argue that the choice between these two types of data has strong implications for the type of research questions that can be dealt with in economic geography, such as the feasibility of dynamic network analysis.

JEL Classification

D85 O31 R11 

Notes

Open Access

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution,and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

References

  1. Ahuja G (2000) Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: a longitudinal study. Adm Sci Q 45: 425–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arora A, Fosfuri A, Gambardella A (2001) Markets for technology. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Asheim BT, Isaksen A (2002) Regional Innovation Systems: The Integration of Local ‘Sticky’ and Global ‘Ubiquitous’ Knowledge. J Technol Transf 27: 77–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Balconi M, Breschi S, Lissoni F (2004) Networks of inventors and the role of academia: an exploration of Italian patent data. Res Policy 33: 127–145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barabasi AL, Albert R (1999) Emergence of scaling in random networks. Science 286: 509–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baum JAC, Shipilov AV, Rowley TJ (2003) Where do small worlds come from? Ind Corp Change 12: 697–725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bessen J, Hunt RM (2007) An empirical look at software patents. J Econ Manage Strateg 16: 157–189Google Scholar
  8. Blind K, Edler J, Frietsch R, Schmoch U (2006) Motives to patent: empirical evidence from Germany. Res Pol 35: 655–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Borgatti SP, Everett MG, Freeman LC (2002) Ucinet for Windows: software for social network analysis. Analytic Technologies, HarvardGoogle Scholar
  10. Boschma RA (2005) Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment. Reg Stud 39: 61–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Boschma RA, Iammarino S (2007) Related variety and regional growth in Italy: working paper no. 162, SPRU. University of Sussex, BrightonGoogle Scholar
  12. Boschma RA, Lambooy JG (2002) Knowledge, market structure, and economic coordination: dynamics of industrial districts. Growth Change 33: 291–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Boschma RA, Ter Wal ALJ (2007) Knowledge networks and innovative performance in an industrial district: the case of a footwear district in the South of Italy. Ind Innov 14: 177–199CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Breschi S, Lissoni F (2003) Mobility and social networks: local knowledge spillovers revisited: CESPRI, working paper no. 142Google Scholar
  15. Breschi S, Lissoni F (2004) Knowledge networks from patent data: methodological issues and research targets. In: Moed H, Glänzel W, Schmoch U (ed) Handbook of quantitative science and technology research: the use of publication and patent statistics in studies on S&T systems. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  16. Burt RS (2004) Structural holes and good ideas. Am J Soc 110: 349–399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cantner U, Graf H (2006) The network of innovators in Jena: an application of social network analysis. Res Pol 35: 463–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Cantner U, Meder A (2006) Determinants influencing the choice of a cooperation partner. Working paper, Friedrich-Schiller University, JenaGoogle Scholar
  19. Carrington PJ, Scott J, Wasserman S (2005) Models and methods in social network analysis. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. Castells M (1996) The rise of the network society. Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  21. Cooke P (2001) Regional innovation systems, clusters, and the knowledge economy. Ind Corp Change 10: 945–974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Cowan R, Jonard N, Özman M (2004) Knowledge dynamics in a network industry. Technol Forecast Soc Change 71: 469–484CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dahl MS, Pedersen CØR (2004) Knowledge flows through informal contacts in industrial clusters: myth or reality? Res Pol 33: 1673–1686CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ejermo O, Karlsson C (2006) Interregional inventor networks as studied by patent coinventorships. Res Pol 35: 412–430CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ellison G, Glaeser EL (1997) Geographic concentration in US manufacturing industries: a dartboard approach. J Polit Econ 105: 889–927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gay B, Dousset B (2005) Innovation and network structural dynamics: study of the alliance network of a major sector of biotechnology industry. Res Pol 34Google Scholar
  27. Geuna A, Nesta LJJ (2006) University patenting and its effects on academic research: the emerging European evidence. Res Pol 35: 790–807CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Giuliani E (2007) The structure of knowledge networks. Uneven and selective, not pervasive and collective. In: Frenken K (ed) Applied evolutionary economics and economic geography. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham/NorthamptonGoogle Scholar
  29. Giuliani E, Bell M (2005) The micro-determinants of meso-level learning and innovation: evidence from a Chilean wine cluster. Res Pol 34: 47–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Giuri P, Mariani M (2005) Everything you always wanted to know about inventors (but never asked): evidence from the Patval-Eu survey: LEM working paper series 2005–2020Google Scholar
  31. Glückler J (2007) Economic geography and the evolution of networks. J Econ Geogr 7: 619–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Grabher G, Ibert O (2006) Bad company? The ambiguity of personal knowledge networks. J Econ Geogr 6: 251–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Granovetter M (1973) The strength of weak ties. Am J Soc 78: 1360–1380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Guimera R, Amaral LAN (2004) Modeling the world-wide airport network. Eur Phys J B 38: 381–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Gulati R (1999) Network location and learning: the influence of network resources and firm capabilities on alliance formation. Strateg Manage J 20: 397–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Hagedoorn J (2003) Sharing intellectual property rights—an exploratory study of joint patenting amongst companies. Ind Corp Change 12: 1035–1050CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Jaffe AB, Trajtenberg M, Henderson R (1993) Geographic localisation of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Q J Econ 108: 577–598CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Laforgia F, Lissoni F (2006) What do you mean by “Mobile”? Multiple applicant inventors in the European biotech industry: DRUID working paper 06–15Google Scholar
  39. Maggioni MA (2002) Clustering dynamics and the location of high-tech firms. Physica, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  40. Mitchell W, Singh K (1996) Survival of businesses using collaborative relationships to commercialize complex goods. Strateg Manage J 17: 169–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Morrison A (2008) Gatekeepers of knowledge within industrial districts: who they are, how they interact. Reg Stud 42: 817–835CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Oinas P, Malecki EJ (2002) The evolution of technologies in time and space: from national and regional to spatial innovation systems. Int Reg Sci Rev 25: 102–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Orsenigo L, Pammolli F, Riccaboni M, Bonaccorsi A, Turchetti G (1998) The evolution of knowledge and the dynamics of an industry network. J Manage Gov 1: 147–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pakes A (1986) Patents as options: some estimates of the value of holding European patent stocks. Econometrica 54: 755–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Ponds R, Van Oort FG, Frenken K (2007) The geographical and institutional proximity of research collaboration. Reg Sci 86:423–443 at the 46th ERSA conference, Volos, GreeceGoogle Scholar
  46. Powell WW, White DR, Koput KW, Owen-Smith J (2005) Network dynamics and field evolution: the growth of inter-organizational collaboration in the life sciences. Am J Soc 110: 1132–1205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Snijders TAB (2001) The statistical evaluation of social network dynamics. In: SobelME, Becker MP (ed) Sociological methodology 2001. Blackwell, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  48. Snijders TAB, Steglich CEG, Schweinberger M, Huisman M (2007) Manual for siena version 3: University of Groningen and University of OxfordGoogle Scholar
  49. Sorensen O (2003) Social networks and industrial geography. J Evol Econ 13: 513–527CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Stuart TE (1998) Network positions and propensities to collaborate: an investigation of strategic alliance formation in a high-technology industry. Adm Sci Q 43: 668–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Ter Wal ALJ, Boschma RA (2008) Co-evolution of firms, industries and networks in space. Reg Stud (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  52. Trajtenberg M (1990) A penny for your quotes: patent citations and the value of innovations. RAND J Econ 21: 172–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Uzzi B (1996) The sources and consequences of embeddedness for the economic performance of organizations: the network effect. Am Soc Rev 61: 674–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Van der Valk T (2007) Technology dynamics, networks dynamics and partnering: the case of the Dutch dedicated life sciences firms, Netherlands geographical studies, no. 360. Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, UtrechtGoogle Scholar
  55. Verspagen B, Duysters G (2004) The small worlds of strategic technology alliances. Technovation 24: 563–571CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Zaheer A, Bell GG (2005) Benefiting from network position: firm capabilities, structural holes, and performance. Strateg Manage J 26: 809–825CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Economic GeographyUtrecht UniversityUtrechtThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations