2002
DOI: 10.1016/s0014-2921(00)00099-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Agglomeration effects in Europe

Abstract: The paper estimates agglomeration e!ects for France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the UK. Estimation takes into account endogeneity of the spatial distribution of employment and spatial "xed e!ects. Empirical results suggest that agglomeration e!ects in these European countries are only slightly smaller than agglomeration e!ects in the US: the estimated elasticity of (average) labor productivity with respect to employment density is 4.5 percent compared to 5 percent in the US.2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All right… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

42
475
6
13

Year Published

2005
2005
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
3

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 752 publications
(536 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
42
475
6
13
Order By: Relevance
“…The market price of the regional industrial value added represents regional advancement in the industrial share (K) Chow (1993Chow ( , 2010, which is further determined by the regional market size (MSz) measured through the regional gross domestic product, intraregional trade costs (IntraTC) as the cost borne for the transportation of passenger and freight volume, interregional trade costs (InterTC) as the flow of foreign direct investment and comparative advantage (CAd) as the average ratio of productivity per unit of labor in each region, (Ciccone 2002;Zhang and Zhang 2003;McCann and Shefer 2003). Each variable is averaged for the annual outcome of each region, which helps us to check all the regions in a single platform and find the regional comparative advantage over others:…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The market price of the regional industrial value added represents regional advancement in the industrial share (K) Chow (1993Chow ( , 2010, which is further determined by the regional market size (MSz) measured through the regional gross domestic product, intraregional trade costs (IntraTC) as the cost borne for the transportation of passenger and freight volume, interregional trade costs (InterTC) as the flow of foreign direct investment and comparative advantage (CAd) as the average ratio of productivity per unit of labor in each region, (Ciccone 2002;Zhang and Zhang 2003;McCann and Shefer 2003). Each variable is averaged for the annual outcome of each region, which helps us to check all the regions in a single platform and find the regional comparative advantage over others:…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The increasingly frequent inter-enterprise exchange and technical cooperation promotes knowledge spillover. Ciccone (2002) points out that the cross-industry knowledge spillover effect is often the main stimulant of major innovations [15]. This explains why the technological innovation efficiency of this stage increases significantly.…”
Section: Results Of the Panel Threshold Regressionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The evidence is not conclusive with respect to size (Rosenthal and Strange, 2004) although it does seem to be so in relative terms. Ciccone and Hall (1996), Ciccone (2002) and Fingleton (2003) find a positive effect of the density of employment on productivity.…”
Section: An Application To the Ebro Valleymentioning
confidence: 89%