Knowledge networks and industrial structure for regional innovation: An analysis of patents collaborations in Italy

Abstract

The aim of the research is to investigate whether the structure of knowledge networks and the variety of the local industrial structure are important for regional innovation and if the interplay between these two forces has an additional effect on local innovativeness. The research analyses co‐patenting collaborations at firm level in the Italian provinces in three five‐year intervals in the period 2001–2016. Results show that the structure of knowledge networks and agglomeration economies of inventors boost local inventive capacity. It also highlights how these forces have an increasing impact on innovation as the variety of the area increases.

Collaboration networks, geography and innovation: Local and national embeddedness

“…Previous research using patent data have focused on two different types of collaboration networks, depending on the nodes they consider: networks of inventors (Fleming et al, 2007; van der Wouden, & Rigby, 2019) and networks of applicants or innovators (Breschi & Lissoni, 2009; Cantner & Graf, 2006; Graf & Hening, 2009; Innocenti et al, 2019; Singh, 2005). We follow the second perspective and trace our networks as follows: Nodes: the innovators or applicants who register the patent and hold the right to use it.…”

“…Economic geography emphasizes advantages of spatial proximity and clustering as a key determinant of knowledge creation (Jaffe, Trajtenberg, & Henderson, 1993), while economic sociology rather stresses the role of collaborative activities and the resulting structure or network of collaborations (Ahuja, 2000; Allen, 1983; Saxenian, 1994). Since inventors and organizations are naturally embedded in both social and geographical spaces, the interplay of these two perspectives has more recently received attention (e.g., Breschi & Lissoni, 2009; Coffano, Foray, & Pezzoni, 2017; Innocenti, Capone, & Lazzeretti, 2019; Lobo & Strumsky, 2008; Strumsky & Thill, 2013; Whittington, Owen‐Smith, & Powell, 2009).…”

Proximity across the distant worlds of university–industry collaborations

“…Social proximity provides a solid basis for trust (Fitjar et al, 2016;Innocenti, Capone, & Lazzeretti, 2020), which works as a safeguard against opportunistic behaviour and, thus, facilitates communication and knowledge sharing.…”

“…Social proximity captures the social relations mainly emanating from prior ties, repeated interactions, friendship or kinship between the individuals involved in the collaboration (Boschma, 2005). Social proximity provides a solid basis for trust (Fitjar et al, 2016; Innocenti, Capone, & Lazzeretti, 2020), which works as a safeguard against opportunistic behaviour and, thus, facilitates communication and knowledge sharing.…”

Measuring Knowledge-capital Stock and Its Relationship with Economic Growth in the Mexican States

“…Meanwhile, Jensen (2008) demonstrates the emergence of a knowledge society within the chemical and electrical industries, and Fritsch and Slavtchev (2010) compare the specialization of high-innovation industries between regions. Notably, the gradual progress of industries towards dynamic knowledge intensity has necessitated measurement of knowledge in service of increased competitiveness, with Westeren (2008) concluding that knowledge has become not only a strategic device for firm competitiveness but also critical for regional innovation and patent production (Innocenti et al, 2020).…”