IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/egu/wpaper/2408.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Inventing modern invention: the professionalization of technological progress in the US

Author

Listed:
  • Matte Hartog
  • Andres Gomez-Lievano
  • Ricardo Hausmann
  • Frank Neffke

Abstract

Between the mid-19th and mid-20th century, the US transformed from an agri- cultural economy to the frontier in science, technology and industry. We study how the US transitioned from traditional craftsmanship-based to today’s science-based innovation. To do so, we digitize half a million pages of patent yearbooks that describe inventors, organizations and technologies on over 1.6M patent and add demo- graphic information from US census records and information on corporate research activities from large-scale repeated surveys on industrial research labs. Starting in 1920, the 19th-century craftsmanship-based invention was, within just 20 years, overtaken by a rapidly emerging new system based on teamwork and a new specialist class of inventors, engineers. This new system relied on a social innovation: industrial research labs. These labs supported high-skill teamwork, replacing the collaborations within families with professional ties in firms and industrial research labs. This shift had wide-ranging consequences. It not only altered the division of labor in invention, but also reshaped the geography of innovation, reestablishing large cities as epicenters of technological progress and introduced new barriers to patenting for women and foreign-born inventors that have persisted into the 21st century.

Suggested Citation

  • Matte Hartog & Andres Gomez-Lievano & Ricardo Hausmann & Frank Neffke, 2024. "Inventing modern invention: the professionalization of technological progress in the US," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2408, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Apr 2024.
  • Handle: RePEc:egu:wpaper:2408
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://econ.geo.uu.nl/peeg/peeg2408.pdf
    File Function: Version April 2024
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Andrea Patacconi & Jungkyu Suh, 2020. "The Changing Structure of American Innovation: Some Cautionary Remarks for Economic Growth," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 20(1), pages 39-93.
    2. Nicholas Bloom & Charles I. Jones & John Van Reenen & Michael Webb, 2020. "Are Ideas Getting Harder to Find?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(4), pages 1104-1144, April.
    3. Lingfei Wu & Dashun Wang & James A. Evans, 2019. "Large teams develop and small teams disrupt science and technology," Nature, Nature, vol. 566(7744), pages 378-382, February.
    4. Gary S. Becker & Kevin M. Murphy, 1994. "The Division of Labor, Coordination Costs, and Knowledge," NBER Chapters, in: Human Capital: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis with Special Reference to Education, Third Edition, pages 299-322, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. Alje van Dam & Andres Gomez‐Lievano & Frank Neffke & Koen Frenken, 2023. "An information‐theoretic approach to the analysis of location and colocation patterns," Journal of Regional Science, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 63(1), pages 173-213, January.
    6. Neffke, Frank M.H. & Otto, Anne & Weyh, Antje, 2017. "Inter-industry labor flows," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 275-292.
    7. Rachata Muneepeerakul & José Lobo & Shade T Shutters & Andrés Goméz-Liévano & Murad R Qubbaj, 2013. "Urban Economies and Occupation Space: Can They Get “There” from “Here”?," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(9), pages 1-8, September.
    8. Ufuk Akcigit & John Grigsby & Tom Nicholas, 2017. "Immigration and the Rise of American Ingenuity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 327-331, May.
    9. Winter, Sidney G., 1984. "Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 5(3-4), pages 287-320.
    10. Alex Bell & Raj Chetty & Xavier Jaravel & Neviana Petkova & John Van Reenen, 2019. "Who Becomes an Inventor in America? The Importance of Exposure to Innovation," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 134(2), pages 647-713.
    11. Robert J. Gordon, 2016. "Perspectives on The Rise and Fall of American Growth," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 72-76, May.
    12. Rebecca Henderson & Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg, 1998. "Universities As A Source Of Commercial Technology: A Detailed Analysis Of University Patenting, 1965-1988," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 80(1), pages 119-127, February.
    13. Li, Yang & Neffke, Frank M.H., 2024. "Evaluating the principle of relatedness: Estimation, drivers and implications for policy," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(3).
    14. Lenoir, Timothy, 1998. "Revolution from Above: The Role of the State in Creating the German Research System, 1810-1910," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(2), pages 22-27, May.
    15. Verhoeven, Dennis & Bakker, Jurriën & Veugelers, Reinhilde, 2016. "Measuring technological novelty with patent-based indicators," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(3), pages 707-723.
    16. Hanlon, W. Walker, 2022. "The Rise of the Engineer: Inventing the Professional Inventor During the Industrial Revolution," CEPR Discussion Papers 17013, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    17. Pezzoni, Michele & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Visentin, Fabiana, 2022. "How fast is this novel technology going to be a hit? Antecedents predicting follow-on inventions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    18. Esposito, Christopher R., 2023. "The geography of breakthrough invention in the United States over the 20th century," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(7).
    19. Strumsky, Deborah & Lobo, José, 2015. "Identifying the sources of technological novelty in the process of invention," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(8), pages 1445-1461.
    20. Breschi, Stefano & Malerba, Franco & Orsenigo, Luigi, 2000. "Technological Regimes and Schumpeterian Patterns of Innovation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 110(463), pages 388-410, April.
    21. Kenneth L. Sokoloff & Naomi R. Lamoreaux, 2001. "Market Trade in Patents and the Rise of a Class of Specialized Inventors in the 19th-Century United States," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(2), pages 39-44, May.
    22. William R. Kerr, 2013. "U.S. High-Skilled Immigration, Innovation, and Entrepreneurship: Empirical Approaches and Evidence," NBER Working Papers 19377, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    23. Clancy, Matthew S., 2018. "Inventing by combining pre-existing technologies: Patent evidence on learning and fishing out," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 47(1), pages 252-265.
    24. Paul Almeida & Anupama Phene & Sali Li, 2015. "The Influence of Ethnic Community Knowledge on Indian Inventor Innovativeness," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(1), pages 198-217, February.
    25. Matthew B. Ross & Britta M. Glennon & Raviv Murciano-Goroff & Enrico G. Berkes & Bruce A. Weinberg & Julia I. Lane, 2022. "Women are credited less in science than men," Nature, Nature, vol. 608(7921), pages 135-145, August.
    26. Jeffrey L. Furman & Megan MacGarvie, 2007. "Academic Science and the Birth of Industrial Research Laboratories in the U.S. Pharmaceutical Industry," NBER Chapters, in: Academic Science and Entrepreneurship: Dual Engines of Growth, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    27. Yang Li & Frank Neffke, 2022. "Relatedness in regional development: in search of the right specification," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2208, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Apr 2022.
    28. Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Konstantin Kosenko & Jungkyu Suh & Yishay Yafeh, 2021. "The Rise of Scientific Research in Corporate America," NBER Working Papers 29260, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    29. Righi, Cesare & Simcoe, Timothy, 2019. "Patent examiner specialization," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 137-148.
    30. Pakes, Ariel & Griliches, Zvi, 1980. "Patents and R&D at the firm level: A first report," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 377-381.
    31. Francesco Lissoni & Ernest Miguelez, 2024. "Migration and Innovation: Learning from Patent and Inventor Data," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 38(1), pages 27-54, Winter.
    32. Lee Fleming, 2001. "Recombinant Uncertainty in Technological Search," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(1), pages 117-132, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Frank Neffke & Angelica Sbardella & Ulrich Schetter & Andrea Tacchella, 2024. "Economic Complexity Analysis," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2430, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Oct 2024.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Deyu Li & Floor Alkemade & Koen Frenken & Gaston Heimeriks, 2023. "Catching up in clean energy technologies: a patent analysis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 693-715, April.
    2. Ugo Rizzo & Valerio Sterzi, 2022. "Characterising science-industry patent collaborations: knowledge base, impact and economic value," Working Papers hal-03896633, HAL.
    3. Dongqing Lyu & Kaile Gong & Xuanmin Ruan & Ying Cheng & Jiang Li, 2021. "Does research collaboration influence the “disruption” of articles? Evidence from neurosciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(1), pages 287-303, January.
    4. Ugo Rizzo & Nicolò Barbieri & Laura Ramaciotti & Demian Iannantuono, 2020. "The division of labour between academia and industry for the generation of radical inventions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 393-413, April.
    5. Veugelers, Reinhilde & Pezzoni, Michele, 2019. "How fast is this novel technology going to be a hit?," CEPR Discussion Papers 13447, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Sajad Ashouri & Anne-Laure Mention & Kosmas X. Smyrnios, 2021. "Anticipation and analysis of industry convergence using patent-level indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(7), pages 5727-5758, July.
    7. Pezzoni, Michele & Veugelers, Reinhilde & Visentin, Fabiana, 2022. "How fast is this novel technology going to be a hit? Antecedents predicting follow-on inventions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(3).
    8. P. G. J. Persoon & R. N. A. Bekkers & F. Alkemade, 2020. "How cumulative is technological knowledge?," Papers 2012.00095, arXiv.org, revised May 2021.
    9. William Arant & Dirk Fornahl & Nils Grashof & Kolja Hesse & Cathrin Söllner, 2019. "University-industry collaborations—The key to radical innovations? [Universität-Industrie-Kooperationen – Der Schlüssel zu radikalen Innovationen?]," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 39(2), pages 119-141, October.
    10. Nils Grashof & Holger Graf, 2023. "Universities that matter for regional knowledge base renewal - the role of multilevel embeddedness," Jena Economics Research Papers 2023-009, Friedrich-Schiller-University Jena.
    11. Nils Grashof & Alexander Kopka, 2023. "Artificial intelligence and radical innovation: an opportunity for all companies?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 61(2), pages 771-797, August.
    12. Michele Pezzoni & Reinhilde Veugelers & Fabiana Visentin, 2018. "Is This Novel Technology Going to be a Hit? Antecedents Predicting Technological Novelty Diffusion," GREDEG Working Papers 2018-22, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    13. Kathryn Rudie Harrigan & Maria Chiara Guardo & Bo Cowgill, 2017. "Multiplicative-innovation synergies: tests in technological acquisitions," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 42(5), pages 1212-1233, October.
    14. Singh, Anuraag & Triulzi, Giorgio & Magee, Christopher L., 2021. "Technological improvement rate predictions for all technologies: Use of patent data and an extended domain description," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(9).
    15. Stefano Bianchini & Moritz Müller & Pierre Pelletier, 2022. "Artificial intelligence in science: An emerging general method of invention," Post-Print hal-03958025, HAL.
    16. Jiang, Cuiqing & Zhou, Yiru & Chen, Bo, 2023. "Mining semantic features in patent text for financial distress prediction," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).
    17. Dirk Fornahl & Nils Grashof & Alexander Kopka, 2021. "Do not neglect the periphery?! - the emergence and diffusion of radical innovations," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2102, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.
    18. José Lobo & Deborah Strumsky, 2019. "Sources of inventive novelty: two patent classification schemas, same story," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 120(1), pages 19-37, July.
    19. Jonathan H. Ashtor, 2019. "Investigating Cohort Similarity as an Ex Ante Alternative to Patent Forward Citations," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 16(4), pages 848-880, December.
    20. Choi, Jin-Uk & Lee, Chang-Yang, 2022. "The differential effects of basic research on firm R&D productivity: The conditioning role of technological diversification," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:egu:wpaper:2408. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/deguunl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.