Agglomeration and regional growth policy: externalities versus comparative advantages

Pessoa, Argentino

doi:10.1007/s00168-014-0625-1

Cited by 23 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 86 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The concept of clusters was developed by economic geographers and economists to understand local industrial agglomeration and specialization and for policy-makers to design appropriate interventions (Cruz & Teixeira, 2010;Delgado, Porter, & Stern, 2014). Previous research examined the relationships between industrial clustering and corporate growth (Duschl, Scholl, Brenner, Luxen, & Raschke, 2015), and clusters and regional growth policies (Pessoa, 2014), and the dynamics of cluster evolution (Boschma & Fornahl, 2011). Increasingly, scholars and policymakers have begun to recognise the value of multi-industry clusters (Aranguren, Maza-Aramburu, Parrilli, Vendrell-Herrero, & Wilson, 2014;Boix, Hervás-Oliver, & Miguel-Molina, 2015; Dei Ottati, 2018).…”

Section: Government Policies and Multi-industry Clustersmentioning

confidence: 99%

The emergence of collaborative partnerships between knowledge-intensive business service (KIBS) and product companies: the case of Bremen, Germany

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Regional science research is silent on how collaborative partnerships between KIBS and product companies emerge. Our paper addresses this theoretical gap by examining the role played by KIBS firms and by their interactions with product companies. We propose a typology of territorial servitization-namely knowledge gap, regulation gap, and capacity gap-wherein KIBS firms respectively play the pivotal roles of knowledge brokers, intermediators, and integrators in driving collaborative partnerships. By conducting qualitative case studies, this paper explores the mechanisms by which product companies located in a high-tech multiindustry cluster in Bremen, Germany, collaborate with KIBS firms in fostering regional competitiveness.

show abstract

Section: Government Policies and Multi-industry Clustersmentioning

confidence: 99%

The emergence of collaborative partnerships between knowledge-intensive business service (KIBS) and product companies: the case of Bremen, Germany

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Positive, negative and insignificant impacts of three types of externalities were found in those studies. 2 Recent examples of such studies include de Groot and de Vor (2010) and Pessoa (2014). However, up to now there is very limited literature on Ukrainian enterprises that is based on firm-level data to study determinants of productivity.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Agglomeration externalities, competition and productivity: empirical evidence from firms located in Ukraine

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper studies role of agglomeration externalities and market structure in determination of total factor productivity (TFP) of Ukrainian firms, having controlled for individual firm characteristics. We use micro-level data for manufacturing and service sectors in years 2005 and 2013. Our empirical results confirm the importance of various agglomeration externalities as well as competition in determination of TFP of Ukrainian firms. In addition, we find the statistically significant link between the total factor productivity, intangible assets, capital intensity, firm size, ownership status and firm internationalization (exports and imports). JEL Classification

show abstract

“…Synthetizing different contributions, Duranton and Puga (2004) and Puga (2010) identify three main micro-foundations: (i) sharing of facilities, and gains from individual specialization and variety, and risk sharing, through labor pooling; (ii) higher probability of a matching, with higher quality; and (iii) learning, related to knowledge generation, diffusion, and accumulation. These externalities are static when they explain the cross-sectional distribution of economic activity, and are dynamic when related to productivity growth and knowledge spillovers (De Groot et al, 2009;Pessoa, 2014). According to Rosenthal and Strange (2004) they may be related to the city size (urbanization economies, associated to Jacobian economies) or to the size of the own economic sector (localization economies, linked to Marshallian economies).…”

Section: Principles Of Agglomeration Economiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Industrial scope of agglomeration economies in Brazil

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The tendency towards urbanization in the emerging world accompanied by the constant pursuit for higher productivity prompts an urge for studies aiming at understanding agglomeration economies. In the context of Brazil, a country with extremely high regional disparities, exploring this issue is important not only for private stakeholders, but also for public policy practitioners. In the framework of static agglomeration effects, we investigate the industrial scope of agglomeration economies in Brazil. On the basis of identified registration data covering the whole formal labor market in three distinct years (2004, 2008 and 2012), we estimate separate models for the logarithm of the hourly individual wage for five broad economic sectors (S1-Manufacturing low-tech, S2-Manufacturing medium-tech, S3-Manufacturing high-tech, S4-Services less-knowledge, and S5-Services high-knowledge). Different estimation strategies are considered in a two-stage mode: with and without individual fixed effects in the first stage, and with and without instrumental variables for population density in the second stage. The main results indicate that there is not a unique optimal local industrial mix to foster productivity in different technological sectors. Comparing possible theoretical approaches (MAR, Jacobs, Porter) related to combinations of diversity, specialization and competition, we find that for S5 only diversity is significant (and positive), suggesting that a Jacobs' perspective is rather adequate. For S1, S2 and S4, the MAR framework seems more adequate to explain the underlying patterns. In the case of S3, there are elements from both Marshall's and Jacobs' perspectives. These results seem to be robust to different specifications and estimation strategies. Finally, the urbanization economies coefficient appears to be positive and significant for all sectors, ranging from 0.0511 to 0.0940 in different specifications, under the simplest estimation (OLS in the first and the second stages). Ordering these effects between the sectors from the highest to the lowest, we find the following sequence: S3, S1, S5, S4 and S2. This can be considered as evidence that high-tech and low-tech manufacturing sectors benefit more from the urban or metropolitan scale in Brazil, followed by services associated with higher knowledge intensity.

show abstract

Agglomeration and regional growth policy: externalities versus comparative advantages

Cited by 23 publications

References 86 publications

The emergence of collaborative partnerships between knowledge-intensive business service (KIBS) and product companies: the case of Bremen, Germany

The emergence of collaborative partnerships between knowledge-intensive business service (KIBS) and product companies: the case of Bremen, Germany

Agglomeration externalities, competition and productivity: empirical evidence from firms located in Ukraine

Industrial scope of agglomeration economies in Brazil

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About