Microgeography and the Direction of Inventive Activity

References

• Adams J, Clemmons R, Black C, Stephan P (2005) Scientific teams and institutional collaborations: Evidence from U.S. universities. Res. Policy 34:259–285.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agrawal A, Cockburn I, McHale J (2006) Gone but not forgotten: Labor flows, knowledge spillovers and enduring social capital. J. Econom. Geography 6(5):571–591.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Agrawal A, Catalini C, Goldfarb A, Luo H (2016) Slack time and innovation. Rotman School of Management Working Paper 2599004, University of Toronto, Toronto.Google Scholar
• Allen TJ (1977) Managing the Flow of Technology (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA).Google Scholar
• Azoulay P, Zivin JSG, Sampat BN (2011) The diffusion of scientific knowledge across time and space: Evidence from professional transitions for the superstars of medicine. Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
• Belenzon S, Schankerman M (2013) Spreading the word: Geography, policy, and knowledge spillovers. Rev. Econom. Statist. 95(3):884–903.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Boudreau KJ, Brady T, Ganguli I, Gaule P, Guinan E, Hollenberg A, Lakhani KR (2017) A field experiment on search costs and the formation of scientific collaborations. Rev. Econom. Statist. 99(4):565–576.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Breschi S, Lissoni F (2004) Knowledge networks from patent data: Methodological issues and research targets. Moed HF, Glänzel W, Schmoch U, eds. Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research: The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S&T Systems (Springer, Berlin), 613–643.Google Scholar
• Chai S (2014) Temporary colocation and collaborative discovery. Working paper, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Cowgill B, Wolfers J, Zitzewitz E (2009) Using prediction markets to track information flows: Evidence from Google. Das S, Ostrovsky M, Pennock D, Szymanksi B, eds. Auctions, Market Mechanisms and Their Applications, Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering, Vol. 14 (Springer, Berlin).Crossref, Google Scholar
• Crescenzi R, Filippetti A, Iammarino S (2017) Academic inventors: Collaboration and proximity with industry. J. Tech. Transfer 42(4):730–762.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Crescenzi R, Nathan M, Rodríguez-Pose A (2016) Do inventors talk to strangers? Proximity and collaborative knowledge creation. Res. Policy 45(1):177–194.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Dizikes P (2011) The office next door. MIT Tech. Rev. (October 25), https://www.technologyreview.com/s/425881/the-office-next-door.Google Scholar
• Fayard A-L, Weeks J (2007) Photocopiers and water-coolers: The affordances of informal interaction. Organ. Stud. 28(5):605–634.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fleming L, Sorenson O (2004) Science as a map in technological search. Strategic Management J. 25(8–9):909–928.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Fleming L, King I Charles, Juda AI (2007) Small worlds and regional innovation. Organ. Sci. 18(6):938–954.Link, Google Scholar
• Freeman R, Ganguli I, Murciano-Goroff R (2015) Why and wherefore of increased scientific collaboration. Jaffe AB, Jones BF, eds. The Changing Frontier: Rethinking Science and Innovation Policy (University of Chicago Press, Chicago), 17–48.Google Scholar
• Ham JC, Weinberg BA (2016) Novelty, knowledge spillovers and innovation: Evidence from Nobel laureates. ZBW GLO Discussion Paper 30, Global Labor Organization.Google Scholar
• Jaffe A, Trajtenberg M, Henderson R (1993) Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quart. J. Econom. 108(3):577–598.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jeppesen LB, Lakhani KR (2010) Marginality and problem-solving effectiveness in broadcast search. Organ. Sci. 21(5):1016–1033.Link, Google Scholar
• Jones BF, Uzzi B, Wuchty S (2008) Multi-university research teams: Shifting impact, geography and social stratification in science. Science 322(5905):1259–1262.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kabo F, Hwang Y, Levenstein M, Owen-Smith J (2015) Shared paths to the lab a sociospatial network analysis of collaboration. Environ. Behav. 47(1):57–84.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kabo FW, Cotton-Nessler N, Hwang Y, Levenstein MC, Owen-Smith J (2014) Proximity effects on the dynamics and outcomes of scientific collaborations. Res. Policy 43(9):1469–1485.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Katz J (1994) Geographical proximity and scientific collaboration. Scientometrics 31(1):31–43.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Liu C (2013) Brokerage by design: Formal structure, geography, and crosscutting ties. Working paper, Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, Ontario.Google Scholar
• Lucas REJ (1988) On the mechanics of economic development. J. Monetary Econom. 22(1):3–42.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mairesse J, Turner L (2005) Measurement and explanation of the intensity of co-publication in science: An analysis at the laboratory level. NBER Working Paper 11172, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Marshall A (1890) Principles of Economics (Macmillan, London).Google Scholar
• Monge PR, Rothman LW, Eisenberg EM, Miller KI, Kirste KK (1985) The dynamics of organizational proximity. Management Sci. 31(9):1129–1141.Link, Google Scholar
• Nichols A (2003) VINCENTY: Stata module to calculate distances on the Earth’s surface. Statistical Software Components, Boston College.Google Scholar
• Nielsen C (2016) How Microsoft used an office move to boost collaboration. Harvard Bus. Rev. (October 11), https://hbr.org/2016/10/how-microsoft-used-an-office-move-to-boost-collaboration.Google Scholar
• Olson GM, Olson JS (2000) Distance matters. Human–Computer Interaction 15(2):139–178.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Romer PM (1990) Endogenous technological change. J. Political Econom. 98(5):71–102.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Singh J (2005) Collaborative networks as determinants of knowledge diffusion patterns. Management Sci. 51(5):756–770.Link, Google Scholar
• Singh J, Fleming L (2010) Lone inventors as sources of breakthroughs: Myth or reality? Management Sci. 56(1):41–56.Link, Google Scholar
• Sorenson O, Rivkin JW, Fleming L (2006) Complexity, networks and knowledge flow. Res. Policy 35(7):994–1017.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Stuart T, Liu C (2010) Boundary spanning in a for-profit research lab: An exploration of the interface between commerce and academe. Working paper, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
• Thompson P (2006) Patent citations and the geography of knowledge spillovers: Evidence from inventor- and examiner-added citations. Rev. Econom. Statist. 88(2):383–388.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thompson P, Fox-Kean M (2005) Patent citations and the geography of knowledge spillovers: A reassessment. Amer. Econom. Rev. 95(1):450–460.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Van den Bulte C, Moenaert RK (1998) The effects of R&D team co-location on communication patterns among R&D, marketing, and manufacturing. Management Sci. 44(11, part 2):S1–S18.Link, Google Scholar
• Weitzman ML (1998) Recombinant growth. Quart. J. Econom. 113(2):331–360.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Wuchty S, Jones B, Uzzi B (2007) The increasing dominance of teams in production of knowledge. Science 316(5827):1036–1039.Crossref, Google Scholar