Industrial Concentration and Regional Growth: Evidence from the Prefectures

Who's right, Marshall or Jacobs? The localization versus urbanization debate

“…He provides some evidence that specialisation of a region in an array of stronger traded clusters boosts regional performance. Paci and Usai (2005) cast doubts on the use of employment growth as a proxy of productivity changes, because for instance, the local capital stock is not constant over time (Dekle, 2002). There should therefore be a distinction between the agglomeration externalities that affect economic growth and productivity growth.…”

Productivity Growth in the Old and New Europe: The Role of Agglomeration Externalities

“…Its use is often hindered by missing data for the computation of capital stocks, especially at the industrial level. In fact, we are aware of only three previous works (Dekle 2002, Cingano and Schivardi 2004) which have used a measure of TFP specific to both sectors and regions in order to investigate local industry externalities. The former two studies, however, focus on regions in just one country (Japanese prefectures in Dekle and Italian local labour systems in Cingano and Schivardi) and use predetermined input elasticities for the computation of TFP.…”

Agglomeration economies, spatial dependence and local industry growth

“…However, the choice of productivity measures often implies some inconvenience in terms of data availability. In particular, Dekle (2002) and De Lucio et al (2002) have to move to a more aggregated geographical level (i.e., administrative regions) where the effects of local externalities are difficult to assess. On the contrary, Henderson (2003) and Cingano and Schivardi (2004) are able to keep a very disaggregated spatial level of analysis at the cost of relying on samples of plant data for the calculation of the productivity measures which bring about serious problems of selection bias.…”