Suchergebnisse

Science parks play a growing role in knowledge-based economies by accommodating high-tech firms and providing an environment that fosters location-dependent knowledge spillovers and promote R&D investments by firms. Yet, not much is known about the economic conditions under which such entities may form in equilibrium without government interventions. This paper develops a spatial equilibrium model with a competitive final sector and a monopolistically competitive intermediate sector, which allows us to determine necessary and sufficient conditions for a science park to emerge as an equilibrium outcome. We show that strongly localized knowledge spillovers, skilled labor abundance, and low commuting costs are key drivers for a science park to form. Not only is the productivity of the final sector higher when intermediate firms cluster, but a science park hosts more intermediate firms, more researchers and more production workers, and yields greater worker welfare, compared to a counterfactual flat city. With continual improvements in infrastructure and communication technology that lowers coordination costs, science parks will eventually be fragmented.

Science parks play a growing role in knowledge-based economies by accommodating high-tech firms and providing an environment that fosters location-dependent knowledge spillovers and promote R&D investments by firms. Yet, not much is known about the economic conditions under which such entities may form in equilibrium without government interventions. This paper develops a spatial equilibrium model with a competitive final sector and a monopolistically competitive intermediate sector, which allows us to determine necessary and sufficient conditions for a science park to emerge as an equilibrium outcome. We show that strongly localized knowledge spillovers, skilled labor abundance, and low commuting costs are key drivers for a science park to form. Not only is the productivity of the final sector higher when intermediate firms cluster, but a science park hosts more intermediate firms, more researchers and more production workers, and yields greater worker welfare, compared to a counterfactual flat city. With continual improvements in infrastructure and communication technology that lowers coordination costs, science parks will eventually be fragmented.

This paper studies the relationship between two decisions shaping the organizational configuration of a firm: whether to make the upstream resources more general and deployable to more markets (versus keeping them tailored to a few markets) and whether to trade with downstream firms as an upstream supplier of intermediate products and services (versus directly entering downstream markets). Although the literature has looked at these two decisions separately, we argue that they depend on each other. This has the important implication that they can generate organizational complementarities, inducing firms to implement them jointly. We are motivated in particular by the observation that an increasing number of firms invest in general upstream resources and exploit them as upstream suppliers of intermediate services or products—a strategy that we refer to as specialization in generality. Interestingly, prior literature has mostly highlighted the use of general upstream resources to enter new downstream markets. We identify the supply and demand conditions under which specialization in generality is instead more likely to emerge: lack of prior downstream assets on the supply side and a roughly equal distribution of buyers across intermediate markets (a "broad" demand) on the demand side. We test our predictions using a sample of firms in the U.S. laser industry between 1993 and 2001. A regulatory shock that increases the value of trading relative to downstream entry provides the setting for a quasi-natural experiment, which corroborates our theoretical predictions.

AbstractChinese firms can partly circumvent their financial constraints by choosing divisible production technologies in the form of clusters.

The book presents a comprehensive analysis of the process of high-tech firms clustering from a theoretical and empirical perspective. The theoretical analysis shows the effects of geographical and agglomeration factors on firms' location decisions and demonstrates that critical mass and carrying capacity are crucial phenomena in the "life cycle" of the cluster. The empirical analysis, based on an original database of four OECD countries, measures the effects of scale versus agglomeration economies and of inter-industrie synergy versus inter-cluster competition on the growth path of the cluster. The analysis points to some policy implications on high-tech cluster development and science parks' planning and supervision

Tech clusters play a growing role in knowledge-based economies by accommodating high-tech firms and providing an environment that fosters location-dependent knowledge spillovers and promote R&D investments by .rms. Yet, not much is known about the economic conditions under which such entities may form in equilibrium without government interventions. This paper develops a spatial equilibrium model with a competitive final sector and a monopolistically competitive intermediate sector, which allows us to determine necessary and sufficient conditions for a tech cluster to emerge as an equilibrium outcome. We show that strongly localized knowledge spillovers, skilled labor abundance, and low commuting costs are key drivers for a tech cluster to form. Not only is the productivity of the final sector higher when intermediate firms cluster, but a tech cluster hosts more intermediate firms and more R&D and production activities, and yields greater worker welfare, compared to what a dispersed pattern would generate. With continual improvements in infrastructure and communication technology that lowers coordination costs, tech clusters will eventually be fragmented.