Impact of Employment Agglomeration on Patented Innovation in U.S. Manufacturing Industries from 1986 to 2008


  • Abdullah M. Khan Claflin University



Agglomeration, globalization, innovation, manufacturing, patent.


This paper examines impact of employment agglomeration in fifteen U.S. manufacturing industries on their innovation activities measured by patent count. A count data model is employed in regressing patent count on employment agglomeration measures, measure of scale, and some control variables. Measures of employment agglomeration and market concentration are found to have negative impacts on innovation in U.S. manufacturing industries. Two agglomeration proxies -Gini index and Ellison-Glaeser index have a negative influence on U.S. patented innovation for the study period. This result implies that the external benefit of spatial agglomeration of similar firms has waned down. The impact of market concentration is also found to be a negative factor for innovation. This result implies that firms with larger plant size are less innovative than those with smaller plant size. Impact of ‘share of workers with post graduate degrees’ on innovation was found to be a positive but statistically not significant factor for innovation. The ‘goods pooling’ determinant displayed negative influence on innovation. These results are mostly consistent across fifteen manufacturing subsectors. Rising energy cost is found to be one of the most significant deterrents of innovation whereas, ethnic diversity is found to be a significant facilitator of it. Results of this research lend support in favor of regional economic development policies that promote coagglomeration of various interdependent and complementary industries and small scale industries, and supports ethnic diversity to spur innovation in U.S. manufacturing industries. 

Author Biography

Abdullah M. Khan, Claflin University

Assistant professor, School of Business


Arrow, K. J. (1962). The Economic Implications of Learning by Doing. The Review of Economic Studies, 29(3), 155-173.

Arthur, W. B. (2011). The Second Economy. McKinsey Quarterly (4), 90-99.

Audretsch, D.B.,& Feldman, M. P. (1996). R&D spillovers & the geography of innovation and production. The American Economic Review, 86(3), 630-640.

Beaudry, C., & Breschi, S. (2003). Are Firms In Clusters Really More Innovative? Economic Innovation and New Technology, 12(4), 325-342.

Bertinelli, L., & J. Decrop. (2005). Geographical agglomeration: Ellison and Glaeser Index applied to the case of Belgian manufacturing industry. Regional Studies 39(5), 567–583.

Cameron, C., & Trivedi, P. (1998). Regression Analysis of Count Data. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Cairncross, F. (1997). The Death of Distance. Boston: Harvard Business Review Press.

de Groot, H. L. F., J. Poot, & M. J. Smit. (2007). Agglomeration, Innovation, and Regional Development: Theoretical Perspectives and Meta-Analysis. Tinbergen Institute Discussion paper no. 07-079/3, Amsterdam.

Duranton, G. & D. Puga. (2000). Diversity and specialization in cities: why, where, and when does it matter? Urban Studies 37(3): 533-555.

Drukker, D.M. (2007). My raw count data contains evidence of both overdispersion and excess zeros.”STATA FAQ, available at ).

Ellison, G., & Glaeser, E. (1997). Geographic concentration in U.S. manufacturing industries: a dartboard approach. Journal of Political Economy 105(5): 889-927.

Feldman, M. P., & Audretsch, D.B. (1999). Innovation in cities: Science-based diversity, specialization and localized competition. European Economic Review 43(2): 409-429.

Glaeser, E.L, H.D. Kallal, Sheinkman, J.A., & Schleifer, A. (1992). Growth in Cities. Journal of Political

Economy 100(6): 1126-1152.

Greunz, L. (2004). Industrial structure and innovation-evidence from European regions. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 14: 563-592.

Hausman, J.B., Hall, H., & Griliches, Z. (1984). Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship. Econometrica 52(4): 909-938.

Harrison, A., & McMillan, M. (2011). Offshoring Jobs? Multinationalsand U.S. Manufacturing Employment. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 93(3), 857-875.

Henderson, V., Kuncoro, A., & Turner, M. (1995). Industrial Development in Cities, Journal of Political

Economy. 103, 1067-1090

Hunt, J. & M. Gauthier-Loiselle. (2008). How much Does Immigration Boost Innovation? NBER

Working Paper 14312. Cambridge, Mass., NBER.

Jacobs, J. (1969). The economy of cities. New York: Vintage.

Jaffe, A.B. (1989). Real effects of academic research. American Economic Review, 79: 757-970.

Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg M., & R. Henderson. (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economic, 108: 577-598.

Jaffe, A. B., Trajtenberg M., & Michael S. Fogarty. (2000). Knowledge Spillovers and Patent

Citations: Evidence from a Survey of Inventors. American Economic Review, 90(2): 215-218.

Kerr, W. R., & Kominers, S. D. (2010). Agglomeration Forces and Cluster Shapes. National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER).

Kerr, W. (2008a). The Agglomeration of US Ethnic Inventors. HBS Working Paper 09-003. Boston,

MA, Harvard Business School.

Kerr, W. (2008b). Ethnic Scientific Communities and International Technology Diffusion. Review of

Economics and Statistics, 90(3), 518-537.

Kerr, W. (2009). Breakthrough Innovations and Migrating Clusters of Innovation. NBER Working

Paper 15443. Cambridge, MA,

Khan, A. M., & Rider, M. (2011). The Impact of Globalization on Agglomeration: The Case of U.S. Manufacturing Employment from 1988 to 2003. AYSPS Research Paper Series. Atlanta, Georgia: Georgia State University.

Kletzer, L. G. (2005). Globalization and job loss, from manufacturing to services. Economic Perspectives (A Publication of Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago), 2nd quarter.

Marshall, A. (1890). Principles of Economics: An Introductory Volume, Macmillan, London.

Nathan, M. Ethnic inventors, diversity and innovation in the UK. Paper presented at the 9th IZA

Annual Migration Meeting, Bonn 3-4 May, 2012.

Nathan, M., & Overman, H. (2013). Agglomeration, clusters, and industrial policy. Oxford Review of Economic Policy 29(2), 383-404.

Parrotta, P., Pozzoli, D. & Pytlikova, M. (2011). The Nexus Between Labor Diversity andFirm's Innovation. London, United Kingdom: Norface Migration.

Pradhan, J. P. (2013). The Geography of Patenting in India: Patterns and Determinants. Munich Personal RePEc Archive: Center for Studies in Economics and Planning, Central University of Gujarat.

Romer, P. M. (1986). Increasing returns and long run growth. Journal of PoliticalEconomy, 94:1002–1037.

Rosenthal, S. S., & Strange, W. (2001). The determinants of agglomeration. Journal of Urban Economics, 50:191–229.

Rosenthal, S. S., & Strange, W. Eds. (2004). Evidence on the nature and sources of agglomeration economies. Handbook of Urban and Regional Economics New York: Elsevier.

Schmookler, J. (1962). Economic Sources of Inventive Activity. The Journal of Economic History, 22(1), 1-20.

Schmookler, J., & Brownlee, O. (1962). Determinants of Inventive Activity. Paper presented at the Seventy Fourth Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association, Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, USA.

Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Tr. Reveres Opie. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Schumpeter, J. A. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. New York: Harper and Brothers.

Schumpeter, J. A. (1947). The Creative Response in Economic History, Journal of Economic History 7(2), 149-159.

Schumpeter, J. A. (1951). Economic Theory and Entrepreneurial History, in R. V. Clemence, ed., Essays on Economic Topics of Joseph Schumpeter. Port Washington, NY: Kennikat Press.

Sharma, S. (2007). Financial Development and Innovation in Small Firms. Policy Research Working Paper: World Bank.

Strange, W. C. (2009). Viewpoint: Agglomeration Research in the Age of disaggregation. The Canadian Journal of Economics, 42(1), 1-27.

Tambe, P., & Hitt, L. M. (2014). Job Hopping, Information Technology Spillovers, and Productivity Growth. Management Science, 60(2), 338-355. doi: 10.2307/42919537