4.4 Article

How do inventor networks affect urban invention?

期刊

REGIONAL SCIENCE AND URBAN ECONOMICS
卷 71, 期 -, 页码 137-162

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.regsciurbeco.2018.05.002

关键词

Invention; Cities; Network centrality; Co-invention network; Patent data

资金

  1. Agence Nationale de la Recherche [ANR-06-JCJC-0076]
  2. Aquitaine Region (AAP program) [20101402006]
  3. Fulbright commission
  4. Bordeaux IdEx [ANR-10-IDEX-03-02]
  5. Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR) [ANR-06-JCJC-0076] Funding Source: Agence Nationale de la Recherche (ANR)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Social networks are expected to matter for invention in cities, but empirical evidence is still puzzling. In this paper, we provide new results on urban patenting covering more than twenty years of European patents invented by nearly one hundred thousand inventors located in France. Elaborating on the recent economic literatures on peer effects and on games in social networks, we assume that the productivity of an inventor's efforts is positively affected by the efforts of his or her partners and negatively by the number of these partners' connections. In this framework, inventors' equilibrium outcomes are proportional to the square of their network centrality, which encompasses, as special cases, several well-known forms of centrality (Degree, Katz-Bonacich, Page-Rank). Our empirical results show that urban inventors benefit from their collaboration network. Their production increases when they collaborate with more central agents and when they have more collaborations. Our estimations suggest that inventors' productivity grows sublinearly with the efforts of direct partners, and that they incur no negative externality from them having many partners. Overall, we estimate that a one standard deviation increase in local inventors' centrality raises future urban patenting by 13%. We also find that geographically close relations are up to two third more beneficial to inventors than distant ones.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据