Regional R&D Decentralization and Breakthrough Inventions: A Tale of Two Mechanisms

References

• AgrawalA. K., and I.Cockburn. 2003. “The Anchor Tenant Hypothesis: Exploring the Role of Large, Local, R&D-intensive Firms in Regional Innovation Systems.” International Journal of Industrial Organization21 (9): 1227–1253. 10.1016/S0167-7187(03)00081-X.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AgrawalA. K., I.Cockburn, and C.Rosell. 2010. “Not Invented Here? Innovation in Company Towns.” Journal of Urban Economics67 (1): 78–89. 10.1016/j.jue.2009.10.004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AgrawalA., I.Cockbun, A.Galasso, and A.Oettl. 2014. “Why Are Some Regions More Innovative Than Others? The Role of Small Firms in the Presence of Large Labs.” Journal of Urban Economics81: 149–165.
   Google Scholar
• AhujaG., and C. M.Lampert. 2001. “Entrepreneurship in the Large Corporation: A Longitudinal Study of How Established Firms Create Breakthrough Innovations.” Strategic Management Journal22 (6–7): 521–543.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AiC. R., and E. C.Norton. 2003. “Interaction Terms in Logit and Probit Models.” Economics Letters80 (1): 123–129. 10.1016/S0165-1765(03)00032-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AlmeidaP., and B.Kogut. 1999. “Localization of Knowledge and the Mobility of Engineers in Regional Networks.” Management Science45 (7): 905–917. 10.1287/mnsc.45.7.905.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• AmoreM. D., C.Schneider, and A.Zaldokas. 2012. “Banking deregulation and corporate innovation.” http://druid8.sit.aau.dk/acc_papers/akohp7fbasrd5qkar5iamjpj97qg.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• AroraA., V. S.Arunachalam, J.Asundi, and R.Fernandes. 2001. “The Indian Software Services Industry.” Research Policy30 (8): 1267–1287. 10.1016/S0048-7333(00)00148-7.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ArrowK. J.1983. “Innovation in Large and Small Firms.” In Entrepreneurship, edited by J.Ronen, 15–28. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• BaldwinC. Y., and K. B.Clark. 2000. Design Rules, Volume 1, The Power of Modularity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• BergerA. N., N. H.Miller, M. A.Petersen, R. G.Rajan, and J. C.Stein. 2005. “Does Function Follow Organizational Form? Evidence from the Lending Practices of Large and Small Banks.” Journal of Financial Economics76 (2): 237–269. 10.1016/j.jfineco.2004.06.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BessenJ.2009. “Matching Patent Data to Compustat Firms.” www.nber.org/∼jBESSEN/matchdoc.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• BirdR. C., and J. D.Knopf. 2014. “The Impact of Local Knowledge on Banking.” Working paper http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id = 1633354.
   Google Scholar
• BlackS. E., and P. E.Strahan. 2002. “Entrepreneurship and Bank Credit Availability.” The Journal Of Finance57 (6): 2807–2833. 10.1111/1540-6261.00513.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BreschiS., and F.Lissoni. 2009. “Mobility of Skilled Workers and Co-invention Networks: An Anatomy of Localized Knowledge Flows.” Journal of Economic Geography9 (4): 439–468. 10.1093/jeg/lbp008.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• BreschiS., and F.Malerba. 2001. “The Geography of Innovation and Economic Clustering: Some Introductory Notes.” Industrial and Corporate Change10 (4): 817–833. 10.1093/icc/10.4.817.
   Google Scholar
• CabralL.2003. “R&D Competition When Firms Choose Variance.” Journal of Economics and Management Strategy12: 139–150.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CarlinoG., S.Chatterjee, and R.Hunt. 2007. “Urban Density and the Rate of Invention.” Journal of Urban Economics61 (3): 389–419. 10.1016/j.jue.2006.08.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• CastaldiC., K.Frenken, and L.Bart. 2015. “Related Variety, Unrelated Variety and Technological breakthroughs: An Analysis of US State-Level Patenting.” Regional Studies41 (5): 685–697.
   Google Scholar
• CharaS., A.Oettl, and A.Subramanian. forthcoming. “Banking Deregulation and Innovation.” Journal of Financial Economics.
   Google Scholar
• CohenW., and F.Malerba. 2001. “Is the Tendency to Variation a Chief Cause of Progress?” Industrial and Corporate Change10 (3): 587–608. 10.1093/icc/10.3.587.
   Google Scholar
• ContiR., A.Gambardella, and M.Mariani. 2014. “Learning to be Edison? Organizations, Inventors and Breaktrough Inventions, Organization Science.” Organization Science25 (3): 833–849.
   Google Scholar
• EjermoO.2005. “Technological Diversity and Jacobs' Externality Hypothesis Revisited.” Growth and Change36 (2): 167–195. 10.1111/j.1468-2257.2005.00273.x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FlemingL.2001. “Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search.” Management Science47 (1): 117–132. 10.1287/mnsc.47.1.117.10671.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FloridaR.2002. The Rise of the Creative Class. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• FrenkenK., L. R.Izquierdo, and P.Zeppini. 2012. “Branching Innovation, Recombinant Innovation, and Endogenous Technological Transitions.” Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions4: 25–35. 10.1016/j.eist.2012.06.001.
   Google Scholar
• FrenkenK., F.Van Oort, and T.Verburg. 2007. “Related Variety, Unrelated Variety and Regional Economic Growth.” Regional Studies41 (5): 685–697. 10.1080/00343400601120296.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GambardellaA., D.Harhoff, and B.Verspagen. 2008. “The Value of European Patents.” European Management Review5 (2): 69–84. 10.1057/emr.2008.10.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GarmaiseM.2011. “Ties That Truly Bind: Noncompetition Agreements, Executive Compensation, and Firm Investment.” Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization27 (2): 376–425. 10.1093/jleo/ewp033.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• GlaeserE. L., and A.Saiz. 2003. “The Rise of the Skilled City.” NBER Working Paper 10191, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, December.
   Google Scholar
• GreeneW.2002. The Bias of the Fixed Effects Estimator in Nonlinear Models. Manuscript, Department of Economics, Stern School of Business, New York University. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id = 1292651##.
   Google Scholar
• HallB. H., A. B.Jaffe, and M.Trajtenberg. 2001. “The NBER Patent Citations Data File: Lessons, Insights and Methodological Tools.” NBER working paper 8498. http://www.nber.org/papers/w8498.
   Google Scholar
• HallB. H., A. B.Jaffe, and M.Trajtenber. 2005. “Market Value and Patent Citations.” Rand Journal of Economics36 (1): 16–38.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HanssenF. A.2004. “Is There a Politically Optimal Level of Judicial Independence?” American Economic Review94 (3): 712–729. 10.1257/0002828041464470.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HarhoffD., F.Narin, F. M.Scherer, and K.Vopel. 1999. “Citation Frequency and the Value of Patented Innovations.” Review of Economics and Statistics81 (3): 511–515. 10.1162/003465399558265.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• JacobsJ. 1969. The Economy of Cities. New York: Random House.
   Google Scholar
• JewkesJ., D.Sawers S, and R.Stillerman. 1958. The Sources of Innovation. London: Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• KangM., and J. M.Shepherd. 2011. “The Partisan Price of Justice: An Empirical Analysis of Campaign Contributions and Judicial Decisions.” New York University Law Review86: 69–130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KerrW. R., and R.Nanda. 2009. “Democratizing Entry: Banking Deregulations, Financing Constraints, and Entrepreneurship.” Journal of Financial Economics94 (1): 124–149. 10.1016/j.jfineco.2008.12.003.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KlermanD., and P.Mahoney. 2005. “The Value of Judicial Independence: Evidence from Eighteenth Century England.” American Law and Economics Review7 (1): 1–27. 10.1093/aler/ahi005.
   Google Scholar
• KortumS., and J.Lerner. 2000. “Assessing the Contribution of Venture Capital to Innovation.” The RAND Journal of Economics31 (4): 674–692. 10.2307/2696354.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• KrosznerR. S., and P. E.Strahan. 1999. “What Drives Deregulation? Economics and Politics of the Relaxation of Bank Branching Restrictions.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics114 (4): 1437–1467. 10.1162/003355399556223.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LaiR., A.D'Amour, A.Yu, Y.Sun, V.Torvik, and L.Fleming. 2011. Disambiguation and Co-authorship Networks of the US Patent Inventor Database. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Institute for Quantitative Social Science., 2138.
   Google Scholar
• LeiponenA., and C.Helfat. 2009. “Innovation Objectives, Knowledge Sources, and the Benefits of Breadth.” Strategic Management Journal31 (2): 224–236.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LimK.2004. “The Relationship Between Research and Innovation in the Semiconductor and Pharmaceutical Industries (1981–1997).” Research Policy33 (2): 287–321. 10.1016/j.respol.2003.08.001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MoultonB. R.1990. “An Illustration of a Pitfall in Estimating the Effects of Aggregate Variables on Micro Units.” The Review of Economics and Statistics72 (2): 334–338. 10.2307/2109724.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NelsonR. R.1961. “Uncertainty, Learning, and the Economics of Parallel Research and Development Efforts.” The Review of Economics and Statistics43 (4): 351–364. 10.2307/1927475.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PapkeL. E., and J. MWooldridge. 2008. “Panel Data Methods for Fractional Response Variables with an Application to Test Pass Rates.” Journal of Econometrics145 (1–2): 121–133.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• PorterM. E.1998. “Clusters and the New Economics of Competition.” Harvard Business Review76 (6): 77–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• RosenthalS. S., and W. C.Strange. 2003. “Geography, Industrial Organization, and Agglomeration.” Review of Economics and Statistics85 (2): 377–393. 10.1162/003465303765299882.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SamilaS., and O.Sorenson. 2010. “Venture Capital as a Catalyst to Commercialization.” Research Policy39 (10): 1348–1360. 10.1016/j.respol.2010.08.006.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SaxenianA.1994. Regional Advantage: Culture and Competition in Silicon Valley and Route 128. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• SaxenianA., and J.Hsu. 2001. “The Silicon Valley-Hsinchu Connection: Technical Communities and Industrial Upgrading.” Industrial and Corporate Change10 (4): 893–920. 10.1093/icc/10.4.893.
   Google Scholar
• SchumpeterJ. A.1942. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Harper.
   Google Scholar
• SimmieJ., J.Sennett, P.Wood, and D.Hart. 2002. “Innovation in Europe: A Tale of Networks, Knowledge and Trade in Five Cities.” Regional Studies36 (1): 47–64. 10.1080/00343400120099852.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SinghJ., and L.Fleming. 2010. “Lone Inventors as Sources of Breakthroughs: Myth or Reality?” Management Science56 (1): 41–56. 10.1287/mnsc.1090.1072.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SinghJ., and M.Marx. 2013. “Geographic Constraints on Knowledge Diffusion: Political Borders vs. Spatial Proximity.” Management Science59 (9): 2056–2078.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• SolowR. M. (1956). “A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth.” Quarterly Journal of Economics70 (1): 65–94.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• StaigerD., and J. H.Stock. 1997. “Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments.” Econometrica65 (3): 557–586. 10.2307/2171753.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ThompsonP., and M.Fox-Kean. 2005. “Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: A Reassessment.” American Economic Review95 (1): 450–460. 10.1257/0002828053828509.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van den BerghJ. C. J. M.2008. “Optimal Diversity: Increasing Returnsversus Recombinant Innovation.” Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization68 (3–4): 565–580.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• ZeppiniP., and J. C. J. M.Van den Bergh. 2011. “Competing Recombinant Technologies for Environmental Innovation: Extending Arthur's Model of Lock-in.” Industry & Innovation18 (3): 317–334. 10.1080/13662716.2011.561031.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar