IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/eim/papers/n200203.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Knowledge Spillovers and Economic Growth; an analysis using data of Dutch regions in the period 1987-1995

Author

Listed:
  • Henry Nieuwenhuijsen
  • André van Stel

Abstract

The importance of knowledge spillovers for achieving innovation and economic growth is widely recognised. It is not straightforward which type of spillovers is most effective: intra-sectoral spillovers or inter-sectoral spillovers. We investigated this controversy using a model of regional growth. The model also deals with the impact of local competition on innovation and growth. The model is estimated using sectoral data for 40 Dutch regions. We found that local competition is important particularly for economic growth in industry sectors (manufacturing and construction), while diversity, a proxy for inter-sectoral spillovers, is important particularly for growth in service sectors. We found no effect for specialisation (a proxy for intra-sectoral spillovers).

Suggested Citation

  • Henry Nieuwenhuijsen & André van Stel, 2002. "Knowledge Spillovers and Economic Growth; an analysis using data of Dutch regions in the period 1987-1995," Scales Research Reports N200203, EIM Business and Policy Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:eim:papers:n200203
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.entrepreneurship-sme.eu/pdf-ez/N200203.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Egbert Wever & Erik Stam, 1999. "Clusters of High Technology SMEs: The Dutch Case," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 33(4), pages 391-400.
    2. Aghion, Philippe & Howitt, Peter, 1992. "A Model of Growth through Creative Destruction," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(2), pages 323-351, March.
    3. David B. Audretsch & A. Roy Thurik, 2000. "Capitalism and democracy in the 21st Century: from the managed to the entrepreneurial economy," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 17-34.
    4. Bernard Fingleton, 2003. "Externalities, Economic Geography, And Spatial Econometrics: Conceptual And Modeling Developments," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 26(2), pages 197-207, April.
    5. Luc Anselin, 2003. "Spatial Externalities, Spatial Multipliers, And Spatial Econometrics," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 26(2), pages 153-166, April.
    6. K. J. Arrow, 1971. "The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: F. H. Hahn (ed.), Readings in the Theory of Growth, chapter 11, pages 131-149, Palgrave Macmillan.
    7. Henderson, J. Vernon, 1986. "Efficiency of resource usage and city size," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(1), pages 47-70, January.
    8. Paul Makun & D. Macpherson, 1997. "Externally-assisted Product Innovation in the Manufacturing Sector: The Role of Location, Inhouse R&D and Outside Technical Support," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(7), pages 659-668.
    9. Jan Oosterhaven & Gerard Eding & Dirk Stelder, 2001. "Clusters, Linkages and Interregional Spillovers: Methodology and Policy Implications for the Two Dutch Mainports and the Rural North," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(9), pages 809-822.
    10. Aghion, Philippe & Harris, Christopher & Vickers, John, 1997. "Competition and growth with step-by-step innovation: An example," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 41(3-5), pages 771-782, April.
    11. Lucas, Robert Jr., 1988. "On the mechanics of economic development," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 3-42, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. André van Stel & Henry Nieuwenhuijsen, 2002. "Knowledge Spillovers and Economic Growth," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 02-051/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    2. Mark Sanders, 2007. "Scientific Paradigms, Entrepreneurial Opportunities and Cycles in Economic Growth," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 28(4), pages 339-354, April.
    3. van de Klundert, T.C.M.J. & Smulders, J.A., 1991. "Reconstructing growth theory : A survey," Other publications TiSEM 19355c51-17eb-4d5d-aa66-b, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    4. Carine Nourry, 2012. "Dasgupta, D.: Modern growth theory," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 105(1), pages 97-100, January.
    5. Benjamin Montmartin & Nadine Massard, 2015. "Is Financial Support For Private R&D Always Justified? A Discussion Based On The Literature On Growth," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 479-505, July.
    6. Wilson, E.J. & Chaudhri, D.P., 2000. "Endogeneity, Knowledge and Dynamics of Long Run Capitalist Economic Growth," Economics Working Papers wp00-03, School of Economics, University of Wollongong, NSW, Australia.
    7. MORI Tomoya & SAKAGUCHI Shosei, 2018. "Collaborative Knowledge Creation: Evidence from Japanese patent data," Discussion papers 18068, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    8. Aghion, Philippe & Akcigit, Ufuk & Howitt, Peter, 2014. "What Do We Learn From Schumpeterian Growth Theory?," Handbook of Economic Growth, in: Philippe Aghion & Steven Durlauf (ed.), Handbook of Economic Growth, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 515-563, Elsevier.
    9. Pop Silaghi, Monica Ioana & Alexa, Diana & Jude, Cristina & Litan, Cristian, 2014. "Do business and public sector research and development expenditures contribute to economic growth in Central and Eastern European Countries? A dynamic panel estimation," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 108-119.
    10. Jun, Bogang & Kim, Tai-Yoo, 2015. "A neo-Schumpeterian perspective on the analytical macroeconomic framework: The expanded reproduction system," Hohenheim Discussion Papers in Business, Economics and Social Sciences 11-2015, University of Hohenheim, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences.
    11. Soete, Luc & Verspagen, Bart & ter Weel, Bas, 2010. "Systems of Innovation," Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, in: Bronwyn H. Hall & Nathan Rosenberg (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Innovation, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1159-1180, Elsevier.
    12. Dakpogan, Arnaud & Smit, Eon, 2018. "The effect of electricity losses on GDP in Benin," MPRA Paper 89545, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/4cufqrm9749dbol0m0bsfeopka is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Jeon, Heesang, 2015. "Knowledge and Contemporary Capitalism in Light of Marx's Value Theory," Thesis Commons g5njk, Center for Open Science.
    15. Magnus Henrekson, 2005. "Entrepreneurship: a weak link in the welfare state?," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 14(3), pages 437-467, June.
    16. Peter Howitt, 2007. "Innovation, Competition and Growth: A Schumpeterian Perspective on Canada’s Economy," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 246, February.
    17. Mark Sanders, 2005. "The Origin of Technical Change; Knowlege Generation, Oppertunities and Entrepreneurship," Papers on Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy 2005-11, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy Group.
    18. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:2:y:2002:i:1:p:1-15 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Zakaria Babutsidze & Maurizio Iacopetta, 2016. "Innovation, growth and financial markets," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 1-24, March.
    20. Backus, David K. & Kehoe, Patrick J. & Kehoe, Timothy J., 1992. "In search of scale effects in trade and growth," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 58(2), pages 377-409, December.
    21. Xavier Ragot, 2003. "Croissance et division du travail," Post-Print hal-03475968, HAL.
    22. Daria Onori, 2015. "Competition and Growth: Reinterpreting their Relationship," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 83(4), pages 398-422, July.

    More about this item

    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:eim:papers:n200203. 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: Webmaster EIM (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eimbpnl.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.