Advertisement

Changes in Economic Geography Theory and the Dynamics of Technological Change

  • Riccardo Crescenzi
Reference work entry

Abstract

This chapter looks at the recent developments in economic geography theory and sets out to shed light on its contribution to the understanding of the dynamics of technological change. The replacement of the linear model with more sophisticated conceptualizations of the process of innovation has made it possible to account for persistent disparities in innovative performance across space and has motivated researchers to incorporate the role of space and places in the analysis of innovation processes. From the physical-metrical approach of geography as distance to the emphasis on specialization and diversification patterns (geography as economic place), institutional-relational factors, nonspatial proximities, and “integrated” frameworks, economic geography theory has substantially evolved in terms of its contribution to the understanding of technological dynamics with significant implications for the rationale, design, and implementation of innovation policies.

Keywords

Innovation Process Knowledge Spillover Geographical Proximity Innovation Policy Knowledge Flow 
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.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank Alexander Jaax for his excellent research assistance. Financial support by ESPON 2013-KIT Project is gratefully acknowledged. The author is also grateful to Andrés Rodríguez-Pose and Manfred Fisher for comments on earlier drafts of this chapter. The author remains solely responsible for any errors contained in this chapter.

References

  1. Asheim BT, Boschma R, Cooke P (2011) Constructing regional advantage: platform policies based on related variety and differentiated knowledge bases. Reg Stud 45(7):893–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Autant-Bernard C, LeSage JP (2011) Quantifying knowledge spillovers using spatial econometric models. J Reg Sci 51(3):471–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Barca F (2009) An agenda for a reformed cohesion policy. European Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  4. Beaudry C, Schiffauerova A (2009) Who’s right, Marshall or Jacobs? The localization versus urbanization debate. Res Policy 38(2):318–337CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boschma RA (2005) Proximity and innovation: a critical assessment. Reg Stud 39(1):61–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Boschma RA, Eriksson R, Lindgren U (2009) How does labour mobility affect the performance of plants? The importance of relatedness and geographical proximity. J Econ Geography 9(2):169–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Breschi S, Lenzi C (2012) Net city: how co-invention networks shape inventive productivity in US cities. Working Paper, Università L. BocconiGoogle Scholar
  8. Breschi S, Lissoni F (2005) Cross-firm inventors and social networks: localised knowledge spillovers revisited. Ann Econ Stat 79/80:1–29Google Scholar
  9. CAF (2010) Desarrollo local: hacia un nuevo protagonismo de las ciudades y regiones. Corporación Andina de Fomento, CaracasGoogle Scholar
  10. Crescenzi R, Rodriguez-Pose A (2011) Innovation and regional growth in the European union. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg/New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Crescenzi R, Rodriguez-Pose A, Storper M (2007) The territorial dynamics of innovation: a Europe-United States comparative analysis. J Econ Geography 7(6):673–709CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. D’Este P, Guy F, Iammarino S (2012) Shaping the formation of university-industry research collaborations: what type of proximity does really matter? J Econ Geograph (in press) doi:10.1093/jeg/lbs010Google Scholar
  13. De Groot HLF, Poot J, Smit MJ (2009) Agglomeration externalities, innovation and regional growth: theoretical perspectives and meta-analysis. In: Capello R, Nijkamp P (eds) Handbook of regional growth and development theories. Edward Elgar, Northampton, pp 256–281Google Scholar
  14. Döring T, Schnellenbach J (2006) What do we know about geographical knowledge spillovers and regional growth?: a survey of the literature. Reg Stud 40(3):375–395CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Duranton G, Puga D (2001) Nursery cities: urban diversity, process innovation, and the life cycle of products. Am Econ Rev 91(5):1454–1477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Edquist C (1997) Introduction. In: Edquist C (ed) Systems of innovation: technologies, institutions, and organizations. Pinter, London, pp 1–35Google Scholar
  17. Godin B (2006) The history of the linear model of innovation: the historical construction of an analytical framework. Sci Technol Human Values 31(6):639–667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Iammarino S (2005) An evolutionary integrated view of regional systems of innovation: concepts, measures and historical perspectives. Euro Plan Stud 13(4):497–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Leamer EE, Storper M (2001) The economic geography of the Internet age. J Int Bus Stud 32(4):641–665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Maggioni MA, Nosvelli M, Uberti TE (2007) Space versus networks in the geography of innovation: a European analysis. Papers Reg Sci 86(3):471–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Malecki EJ (2010) Everywhere? The geography of knowledge. J Reg Sci 50(1):493–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Malerba F (2006) Sectoral systems: how and why innovation differs across sectors. In: Nelson R, Mowery DC, Fagerberg J (eds) The Oxford handbook of innovation. Oxford University Press, Oxford/New York, pp 380–406Google Scholar
  23. Markusen A (2003) Fuzzy concepts, scanty evidence, policy distance: the case for rigour and policy relevance in critical regional studies. Reg Stud 36(6/7):701–717CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Marrocu E, Paci R, Usai S (2013) Proximity, networking and knowledge production in Europe: what lessons for innovation policy? Technological Forecasting and Social Change (in press)Google Scholar
  25. OECD (2009) How regions grow. OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  26. Ponds R, van Oort F, Frenken K (2010) Innovation, spillovers and university-industry collaboration: an extended knowledge production function approach. J Econ Geography 10(2):231–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Rodríguez-Pose A, Crescenzi R (2008) Mountains in a flat world: why proximity still matters for the location of economic activity. Cam J Reg Econ Soc 1(3):371–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ruttan VW (ed) (2001) Technology, growth, and development. An induced innovation perspective. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  29. Storper M, Venables AJ (2004) Buzz: face-to-face contact and the urban economy. J Econ Geography 4(4):351–370Google Scholar
  30. Trippl M, Maier G (2011) Knowledge spillover agents and regional development. In: Nijkamp P, Siedschlag I (eds) Innovation, growth and competitiveness. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg/New York, pp 91–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Uyarra E (2010) What is evolutionary about “regional systems of innovation”? Implications for regional policy. J Evol Econ 20(1):115–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. World Bank (2009) World development report reshaping economic geography. World Bank, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.London School of EconomicsLondonUK

Personalised recommendations