Advertisement

Productivity and the Density of Local Clusters

  • Rui Baptista
Part of the Advances in Spatial Science book series (ADVSPATIAL)

Abstract

Several streams of theoretical literature, including regional and urban economics, economic geography and economic growth, explain the geographic concentration of economic activity as the result of increasing returns to scale in production. In one strand of literature, agglomeration results from demand linkages between firms, which are created by the interaction of fixed production costs and transport costs (see, for instance, Krugman 1991). In other, earlier strand of literature, agglomeration economies arise from positive spillovers between firms that share the same locality (Henderson 1974, Lucas 1988). This second stream suggests that if there are spillovers in the accumulation of human capital, a worker will be more productive the greater the agglomeration of educated workers with which he/she shares a given location.

Keywords

Human Capital Labor Productivity Total Factor Productivity American Economic Review Knowledge Spillover 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abdel-Rahman HM (1988) Product differentiation, monopolistic competition and city size. Regional Science and Urban Economics 18: 69–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Audretsch DB, Feldman M P (1996) Knowledge spillovers and the geography of innovation and production. American Economic Review 86: 630–640Google Scholar
  3. Baptista R (1998) Clusters, innovation and growth: a survey of the literature. In: Swann GMP, Prevezer M, Stout D (eds) The Dynamics of Industrial Clustering: International Comparisons in Computers and Biotechnology. Oxford University Press, Oxford:13–51Google Scholar
  4. Baptista R (2000) Do innovations diffuse faster within geographical clusters? International Journal of Industrial Organisation 18: 515–535CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baptista R, Swann GMP (1998) Do firms in clusters innovate more? Research Policy 27: 527–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Becker G, Murphy K (1992) The division of labor, co-ordination costs and knowledge. Quarterly Journal of Economics 106: 407–444Google Scholar
  7. Beeson PE, Eberts (1989) Identifying productivity and amenity effects in interurban wage differentials. Review of Economics and Statistics 71: 443–452Google Scholar
  8. Black D, Henderson JV (1999) A theory of urban Growth. Journal of Political Economy 107: 252–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Breusch T, Pagan A (1980) The LM test and its application to model specification in Econometrics. Review of Economic Studies 47: 239–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carlino GA, Voith R (1992) Accounting for differences in aggregate state productivity. Regional Science and Urban Economics 22: 597–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Ciccone A, Hall RE (1996) Productivity and the density of economic activity. American Economic Review 86: 55–70Google Scholar
  12. Dixit A, Stiglitz JE (1977) Monopolistic competition and optimum product diversity. American Economic Review 67: 297–308Google Scholar
  13. Dumais G, Ellison G, Glaeser E (1997) Geographic concentration as a dynamic process. NBER Working Paper #6270Google Scholar
  14. Eaton J, Eckstein Z (1997) Cities and growth: theory and evidence from France and Japan. Regional Science and Urban Economics 27: 443–474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Evans AW (1985) Urban Economics: an Introduction. Basil Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  16. Feldman MP (2000) Location and innovation: the new economic geography of innovation, spillovers, and agglomeration. In: Clark G, Feldman M, Gertler M (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography. Oxford University Press, New York: 373–394Google Scholar
  17. Feldman MP (1994) The Geography of Innovation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  18. Fujita M (1988) A monopolistic competition model of spatial agglomeration: differentiated product approach. Regional Science and Urban Economics 18: 87–124CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Glaeser EL, Kallal HD, Scheinkman J, Shleifer A (1992) Growth in Cities. Journal of Political Economy 100: 1126–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hanson GH (2000) Firms, workers and the geographic concentration of economic activity. In: Clark G, Feldman M, Gertler M (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Economic Geography. Oxford University Press, New York: 477–496Google Scholar
  21. Hanson GH (1998) Market potential, increasing returns and geographical concentration. NBER Working Paper #6429.Google Scholar
  22. Henderson JV (1974) The sizes and types of cities. American Economic Review 64: 55–70Google Scholar
  23. Henderson JV (1986) Efficiency of resource usage and city size. Journal of Urban Economics 19:. 47–70Google Scholar
  24. Hines JR (1996) Altered states: taxes and the location of foreign direct investment in America. American Economic Review 86: 1076–1094Google Scholar
  25. Hoover EM (1937) Spatial price discrimination. Review of Economic Studies 4: 182–191CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hotelling H (1929) Stability in competition. Economic Journal 39: 41–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Isard W (1956) Location and Space-Economy. The M. I. T. Press, Cambridge MAGoogle Scholar
  28. Keeble D, Owens PL, Thompson C (1982) Regional accessibility and economic potential in the European Community. Regional Studies 16: 419–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Krugman P (1991) Increasing returns and economic geography. Journal of Political Economy 99: 483–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lewis WA (1955) The Theory of Economic Growth. Allen and Unwin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  31. Lucas RE Jr (1988) On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics 22: 3–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lundvall BA (1988) Innovation as an interactive process: from user-producer interaction to the national system of innovation. In: Dosi G, Freeman C, Nelson R, Silverberg G, Soete L (eds) Technical Change and Economic Theory. Pinter Publishers, London: 349–369Google Scholar
  33. Marshall A (1920) Principles of Economics. Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  34. Mills ES (1967) An aggregative model of resource allocation in a metropolitan area. American Economic Review 57: 197–210Google Scholar
  35. Moomaw RL (1981) Productivity and city size: a critique of the evidence. Quarterly Journal of Economics 96: 675–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Moomaw RL (1985) Firm location and city size: reduced productivity advantages as a factor in the decline of manufacturing in urban areas. Journal of Urban Economics 17: 73–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Peri G (1998) Human capital externalities in US cities. University of California. Mimeo Porter M ( 1990 ) The Competitive Advantage of Nations. Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  38. Rauch JE (1993) Productivity gains from geographic concentration of human capital: evi-dence from the cities. Journal of Urban Economics 34: 380–400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Rivera-Batiz FL (1988) Increasing returns, monopolistic competition and agglomeration economies in consumption and production. Regional Science and Urban Economics 18: 125–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Romer P (1986) Increasing returns and long-run growth. Journal of Political Economy 94: 1002–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Rosen S (1974) Hedonic prices and implicit markets: product differentiation in pure competition. Journal of Political Economy 90: 1257–1278Google Scholar
  42. Saxenian A (1994) Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  43. Segal D (1976) Are there returns to scale in city size? Review of Economics and Statistics 58: 339–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Productivity and the Density of Local Clusters 181Google Scholar
  45. Shefer D (1973) Localisation economies in SMSA’s: a production function analysis. Journal of Regional Science 13: 55–64Google Scholar
  46. Spence AM (1976) Product selection, fixed costs and monopolistic competition. Review of Economic Studies 43: 217–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Sveikauskas LA (1975) The productivity of cities. Quarterly Journal of Economics 89: 393413Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rui Baptista
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Catholic University of PortugalPortoPortugal
  2. 2.School of Policy and Environmental AffairsIndiana UniversityBloomingtonUSA

Personalised recommendations