IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/23036.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Reversed Citations and the Localization of Knowledge Spillovers

Author

Listed:
  • Ashish Arora
  • Sharon Belenzon
  • Honggi Lee

Abstract

Spillover of knowledge is considered to be an important cause of agglomeration of inventive activity. Many studies argue that knowledge spillovers are localized based on the observation that patents tend to cite nearby patents disproportionately. Specifically, patent citations are interpreted as mapping the transmission of knowledge from the cited invention to the citing invention. The localization of patent citations is therefore taken as evidence that such knowledge transmission is also localized. Localization of knowledge transmission, however, may not be the only reason for why patent citations are localized. Using a set of citations that are unlikely to be associated with knowledge transmission from the cited to the citing invention, we present evidence that challenges the view that localization of citations is driven by localized knowledge transmission. Though localized knowledge transmission may well exist, it is unlikely to be captured by patent citations

Suggested Citation

  • Ashish Arora & Sharon Belenzon & Honggi Lee, 2017. "Reversed Citations and the Localization of Knowledge Spillovers," NBER Working Papers 23036, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:23036
    Note: PR
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w23036.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Juan Alcácer & Michelle Gittelman, 2006. "Patent Citations as a Measure of Knowledge Flows: The Influence of Examiner Citations," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 88(4), pages 774-779, November.
    2. Jerry R. Green & Suzanne Scotchmer, 1995. "On the Division of Profit in Sequential Innovation," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 26(1), pages 20-33, Spring.
    3. Michael Porter, 2003. "The Economic Performance of Regions," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 37(6-7), pages 549-578.
    4. Yasusada Murata & Ryo Nakajima & Ryosuke Okamoto & Ryuichi Tamura, 2014. "Localized Knowledge Spillovers and Patent Citations: A Distance-Based Approach," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 96(5), pages 967-985, December.
    5. Adam B. Jaffe & Manuel Trajtenberg & Rebecca Henderson, 1993. "Geographic Localization of Knowledge Spillovers as Evidenced by Patent Citations," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 108(3), pages 577-598.
    6. G. M.P. Swann, 2009. "The Economics of Innovation," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 13211.
    7. Sharon Belenzon & Mark Schankerman, 2013. "Spreading the Word: Geography, Policy, and Knowledge Spillovers," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(3), pages 884-903, July.
    8. Rosenthal, Stuart S. & Strange, William C., 2001. "The Determinants of Agglomeration," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 191-229, September.
    9. Delgado, Mercedes & Porter, Michael E. & Stern, Scott, 2014. "Clusters, convergence, and economic performance," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(10), pages 1785-1799.
    10. Reitzig, Markus & Henkel, Joachim & Heath, Christopher, 2007. "On sharks, trolls, and their patent prey--Unrealistic damage awards and firms' strategies of "being infringed"," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 134-154, February.
    11. Paul Almeida & Bruce Kogut, 1999. "Localization of Knowledge and the Mobility of Engineers in Regional Networks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 45(7), pages 905-917, July.
    12. Agrawal, Ajay & Cockburn, Iain & Galasso, Alberto & Oettl, Alexander, 2014. "Why are some regions more innovative than others? The role of small firms in the presence of large labs," Journal of Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 149-165.
    13. Peter Thompson & Melanie Fox-Kean, 2005. "Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: A Reassessment: Reply," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 465-466, March.
    14. Audretsch, David B, 1998. "Agglomeration and the Location of Innovative Activity," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 14(2), pages 18-29, Summer.
    15. Peter Thompson & Melanie Fox-Kean, 2005. "Patent Citations and the Geography of Knowledge Spillovers: A Reassessment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(1), pages 450-460, March.
    16. Julie Callaert & Maikel Pellens & Bart Looy, 2014. "Sources of inspiration? Making sense of scientific references in patents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 98(3), pages 1617-1629, March.
    17. Stefan Wagner & Karin Hoisl & Grid Thoma, 2014. "Overcoming localization of knowledge — the role of professional service firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(11), pages 1671-1688, November.
    18. J. Myles Shaver & Fredrick Flyer, 2000. "Agglomeration economies, firm heterogeneity, and foreign direct investment in the United States," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(12), pages 1175-1193, December.
    19. Aaron K. Chatterji, 2009. "Spawned with a silver spoon? Entrepreneurial performance and innovation in the medical device industry," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(2), pages 185-206, February.
    20. Audretsch, David B & Feldman, Maryann P, 1996. "R&D Spillovers and the Geography of Innovation and Production," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 86(3), pages 630-640, June.
    21. Juan Alcácer & Wilbur Chung, 2007. "Location Strategies and Knowledge Spillovers," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 53(5), pages 760-776, May.
    22. James Bessen & Eric Maskin, 2009. "Sequential innovation, patents, and imitation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(4), pages 611-635, December.
    23. Anton, James J & Yao, Dennis A, 1995. "Start-ups, Spin-offs, and Internal Projects," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 11(2), pages 362-378, October.
    24. Swann, G. M. Peter & Prevezer, Martha & Stout, David (ed.), 1998. "The Dynamics of Industrial Clustering: International Comparisons in Computing and Biotechnology," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198289593.
    25. Ted O'Donoghue & Suzanne Scotchmer & Jacques‐François Thisse, 1998. "Patent Breadth, Patent Life, and the Pace of Technological Progress," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 7(1), pages 1-32, March.
    26. Michael Roach & Wesley M. Cohen, 2013. "Lens or Prism? Patent Citations as a Measure of Knowledge Flows from Public Research," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(2), pages 504-525, October.
    27. Emmanuel Duguet & Megan MacGarvie, 2005. "How well do patent citations measure flows of technology? Evidence from French innovation surveys," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(5), pages 375-393.
    28. John Laitner & Dmitriy Stolyarov, 2013. "Derivative Ideas And The Value Of Intangible Assets," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 54(1), pages 59-95, February.
    29. Sharon Belenzon & Mark Schankerman, 2010. "Spreading the Word: Geography, Policy and Knowledge Spillovers," CEP Discussion Papers dp1005, Centre for Economic Performance, LSE.
    30. Juan Alcácer & Minyuan Zhao, 2012. "Local R&D Strategies and Multilocation Firms: The Role of Internal Linkages," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(4), pages 734-753, April.
    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. Valentina Di Iasio & Ernest Miguelez, 2022. "The ties that bind and transform: knowledge remittances, relatedness and the direction of technical change [Brain drain or brain bank? The impact of skilled emigration on poor-country innovation]," Journal of Economic Geography, Oxford University Press, vol. 22(2), pages 423-448.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Sijie Feng, 2020. "The proximity of ideas: An analysis of patent text using machine learning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-19, July.
    5. Kevin A. Bryan & Heidi L. Williams, 2021. "Innovation: Market Failures and Public Policies," NBER Working Papers 29173, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    6. Kyle R. Myers & Lauren Lanahan, 2022. "Estimating Spillovers from Publicly Funded R&D: Evidence from the US Department of Energy," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(7), pages 2393-2423, July.
    7. KANG Byeongwoo & MOTOHASHI Kazuyuki, 2020. "Local Industry Influence on Commercialization of University Research by University Startups," Discussion papers 20086, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).
    8. Miguelez, Ernest & Noumedem Temgoua, Claudia, 2020. "Inventor migration and knowledge flows: A two-way communication channel?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(9).
    9. Marino, Alba & Mudambi, Ram & Perri, Alessandra & Scalera, Vittoria G., 2020. "Ties that bind: Ethnic inventors in multinational enterprises’ knowledge integration and exploitation," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(9).
    10. Hao Zhou & Jie Lin, 2023. "Impacts of codified knowledge index on the allocation of overseas inventors by emerging countries: evidence from PCT patent activities in China," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(2), pages 877-899, February.
    11. Christiane Hellmanzik & Lukas Kuld, 2021. "No place like home: geography and culture in the dissemination of economic research articles," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 61(1), pages 201-229, July.
    12. Ashtor, Jonathan H., 2022. "Modeling patent clarity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(2).
    13. Christopher R. Esposito, 2020. "The Emergence of Knowledge Production in New Places," Papers in Evolutionary Economic Geography (PEEG) 2046, Utrecht University, Department of Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Group Economic Geography, revised Sep 2020.
    14. Isabel Cavalli & Charlie Joyez, 2021. "The Dynamics of French Universities in Patent Collaboration Networks," GREDEG Working Papers 2021-38, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    15. Lee, Honggi, 2023. "The heterogeneous effects of patent scope on licensing propensity," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(3).

    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. William R. Kerr & Frederic Robert-Nicoud, 2020. "Tech Clusters," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 34(3), pages 50-76, Summer.
    2. Carlino, Gerald & Kerr, William R., 2015. "Agglomeration and Innovation," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 349-404, Elsevier.
    3. Jasjit Singh & Matt Marx, 2013. "Geographic Constraints on Knowledge Spillovers: Political Borders vs. Spatial Proximity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(9), pages 2056-2078, September.
    4. Adam B. Jaffe & Gaétan de Rassenfosse, 2017. "Patent citation data in social science research: Overview and best practices," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(6), pages 1360-1374, June.
    5. repec:bof:bofrdp:urn:nbn:fi:bof-201512111472 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. repec:zbw:bofrdp:urn:nbn:fi:bof-201512111472 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Carlino, Gerald & Kerr, William R., 2015. "Agglomeration and Innovation," Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, in: Gilles Duranton & J. V. Henderson & William C. Strange (ed.), Handbook of Regional and Urban Economics, edition 1, volume 5, chapter 0, pages 349-404, Elsevier.
    8. repec:zbw:bofrdp:2015_027 is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Pontus Braunerhjelm & Ding Ding & Per Thulin, 2018. "The knowledge spillover theory of intrapreneurship," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 1-30, June.
    10. Sijie Feng, 2020. "The proximity of ideas: An analysis of patent text using machine learning," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(7), pages 1-19, July.
    11. Keith Head & Yao Amber Li & Asier Minondo, 2019. "Geography, Ties, and Knowledge Flows: Evidence from Citations in Mathematics," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 101(4), pages 713-727, October.
    12. Lööf, Hans & Perez, Luis & Baum, Christopher F, 2018. "Directed Technical Change in Clean Energy: Evidence from the Solar Industry," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 470, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    13. Joel Blit, 2017. "Learning remotely: R&D satellites, intra‐firm linkages, and knowledge sourcing," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 757-781, December.
    14. Forman, Chris & van Zeebroeck, Nicolas, 2019. "Digital technology adoption and knowledge flows within firms: Can the Internet overcome geographic and technological distance?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(8), pages 1-1.
    15. Hyuk-Soo Kwon & Jihong Lee & Sokbae Lee & Ryungha Oh, 2022. "Knowledge spillovers and patent citations: trends in geographic localization, 1976–2015," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(3), pages 123-147, April.
    16. Aaron Chatterji & Edward Glaeser & William Kerr, 2014. "Clusters of Entrepreneurship and Innovation," Innovation Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 14(1), pages 129-166.
    17. Shivaram V. Devarakonda & Brian T. McCann & Jeffrey J. Reuer, 2018. "Marshallian Forces and Governance Externalities: Location Effects on Contractual Safeguards in Research and Development Alliances," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(6), pages 1112-1129, December.
    18. Nivedita Mukherji & Jonathan Silberman, 2021. "Knowledge flows between universities and industry: the impact of distance, technological compatibility, and the ability to diffuse knowledge," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 46(1), pages 223-257, February.
    19. William R. Kerr & Scott Duke Kominers, 2015. "Agglomerative Forces and Cluster Shapes," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 97(4), pages 877-899, October.
    20. Castillo, Victoria & Figal-Garone, Lucas & Maffioli, Alessandro & Rojo, Sofia & Stucchi, Rodolfo, 2016. "The Effects of Knowledge Spillovers through Labor Mobility," MPRA Paper 69141, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    21. Stefan Wagner & Karin Hoisl & Grid Thoma, 2014. "Overcoming localization of knowledge — the role of professional service firms," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 35(11), pages 1671-1688, November.
    22. Leonie Koch & Martin Simmler, 2020. "How Important are Local Knowledge Spillovers of Public R&D and What Drives Them?," EconPol Working Paper 42, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich.
    23. Ajay Agrawal & Iain Cockburn & Carlos Rosell, 2010. "Not Invented Here? Innovation in Company Towns," NBER Chapters, in: Cities and Entrepreneurship, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • O32 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Management of Technological Innovation and R&D
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital

    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:nbr:nberwo:23036. 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/nberrus.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.